Forum: Arts / Debates

Page:
Page 2 of 2: 1 2
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By Brittanymember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Fri Jan 22, 2010 12:25 PM
My opinion is the same as it was for the "Fat Tax" debate...even though it is two separate issues.

Too much government control. I don't want to live in a place where the government is controlling my life to that extent. No thanks.
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By Shortgirl75member has saluted, click to view salute photos
On Fri Jan 22, 2010 02:20 PM
I can totally see where people who are in the face of it daily, ie EMTs, police, social workers, etc get jaded.

I live in a state with one of the best welfare programs around- so we get lots of winners who love it because they don't have to lift a finger and get it all. BUT...I also know of an awesome women's shelter who has like a 90% success rate in getting women (and their children) out of abusive relationships, off welfare and into stable jobs and able to afford decent housing and care for their children. So they are out of the system, out of the cycle and onto being productive members of society. (Guess who I give donations too? Hmm?)

My heart goes out to these children. Because unless the cycle is broken, their odds of making it are slim. What needs to happen is an examination of WHAT is working and more funding put towards that rather then continuing giving handouts. There needs to be personal responsibility. How that should happen, no flipping idea.
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By Kekoamember has saluted, click to view salute photos
On Fri Jan 22, 2010 03:28 PM
Like many others, why not focus on reforming welfare? Kicking women and children off welfare for being lazy isn't going to do anything except give us more homeless people and more kids in foster care. There's obviously no perfect solution, but let's not suggest something too radical without considering the implications.

I absolutely would NOT want the government dictating who can and cannot have children. Who gets to determine what makes you a "good" parent, when perfectly good and loving parents get in trouble with CPS every day because they don't fit big brother's definition of "good"? Women get accused of child abuse for nursing toddlers/young children, despite it being perfectly natural and healthy. Families get their children taken away for having completely uneventful home births. Some families decline some or all vaccinations, some space them out. Some homeschool. Any or all of what I just listed could, and has been called child abuse. Where do we draw the line? The term "good parent" is incredibly subjective, and I don't trust the government to dictate to me what I can or cannot do, or what someone else can or cannot do.

If I got pregnant tomorrow, I'd be a broke 21 year old single college student when the baby was born. You know what? If taking government assistance was the only way to successfully get through school and take care of my child, you can rest assured that's what I'd do. I'd be stupid to claim that nobody abuses welfare, because large numbers of people do. Forcibly aborting, sterilizing or taking babies isn't the answer. How would this so-called "regulation" even work? How would you stop people from getting pregnant? What happens if someone like me, who is "not qualified" DOES get pregnant? We're not talking about puppies here.
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By MaxwellPremium member
On Fri Jan 22, 2010 04:37 PM
Well, the way I see it, we could either:

A. Allow the government to poke their big nose into our personal beesewax, totally violate basic reproductive rights by forcing abortions and sterilizations, punish women often for simply being poor/single, probably make zillions of mistakes over whether or not someone is "worthy", and make some kind of standard of parenting for everybody even though like^ said, there are many different ways to parent. Oh, and about psychological tests for parenting: I'm no psychology expert or anything, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that there are probably many otherwise completely mentally stable parents that abuse their kids, and some that aren't all there who treat them perfectly fine. I would argue that abuse has more to do with the fact that we often see kids as not deserving full human rights than the caregiver's mental condition, but that would take another huge block of text and is also not what we're debating.

Or

B. We could reform welfare, work to put an end to poverty and factors that affect it (racism, etc), work to end the things that contribute to drug/alcohol abuse (which, not to be repetitive, is usually poverty), make sure every woman has access to affordable healthcare, including prenatal and, if she needs it, psychological assistance and help with an alcohol/drug problem, make birth control more accesible and affordable so that those who don't plan to be pregnant have an easier time with it, and stop the general finger-shaking at parents who are poor/single/young/a little bit different/in an otherwise not perfect situation.

Whichever sounds better to you.

Something like A sounds okay in theory, (and if you used less biased language than I did :D) but if we do that, I don't believe we're solving the problem. We would just be taking the easy way out, and thousands of people who would have been okay with a little help are going to suffer for it. Option B requires a little work on our part, but that's better than violating what I believe to be basic human rights.
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By SaNDiMas59member has saluted, click to view salute photos
On Fri Jan 22, 2010 05:28 PM
THis is ridiculous. Yes, it is a terrible shame when kids are abused or neglected. A tragedy. But people are always going to have sex, and often times that turns into a baby, and you can't (well, shouldn't) outlaw or put restrictions on something that our bodies are made to do.
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids? (karma: 1)
By pondflyPremium member
On Sun Jan 24, 2010 06:17 PM
Shortgirl has the general direction correct. The public safety personnel are somewhat calloused to the situation relating to children and parenting.
Here is how it goes for me- And it is just an opinion, so take it for what it's worth $0.

If you can take care of your children correctly, loving, nurturing, educational environment, have fun. If you fall on hard times and need some temporary government assistance, great that's what it is there for.

What irks me to no end are persons who feel it is their right to get pregnant at an early age (13+), use the children to gain extra income from the government and ignored children.
I can't tell you how many times I've taken children into protective custody due to abuse, so while I'm calloused, it's the job not the person. Tell me how many of you can keep their cool when pulling dead, infants and children out when it was due to stupidity.

I can't stand someone on welfare who argues about what they are buying with the clerk then get into a $50,000+ car and drive away. I work my rear to the bone (make a good income) in order to keep a roof over my head, 10 year old truck and continue to educate myself.
I have a 4 y/o nephew and a 6 m/o niece that I love to death, but there is no picture of kids for me. I don't have the constant patience for them and I feel that I can't give them the environment at this time that I would want for them and I feel that it is not fair to do something like that.

I work for the government and If you feel that they can get it right, just keep holding your breath and see what happens next.
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By oz_helenmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Jan 25, 2010 08:16 AM
In my opinion, the majority of this would be solved if people started forming communities again.

The norm these days is to "keep to yourself". You hear it all the time: "The family next door seemed nice enough, quiet, kept to themselves. I just can't believe that this was going on under our noses."
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By oz_helenmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Jan 25, 2010 09:43 PM
^That post was about ten times that length and somehow DDN ate it. :(

Helen
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By Cadbury_Eatermember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Tue Jan 26, 2010 05:53 AM
The government can't get kids out of their homes now that are being abused. They also make wrong calls about foster parents.

You really want to intrust the government with STERILIZING or DISALLOWING people to have kids?

Some issues are so complex you can't entrust an entity with the entire power over it.

Sometimes the government is trying to micromanage our lives. They shouldn't stick their noses into our internet access, having a fat tax or whether we're allowed to have kids.

However with that said, they are so many unfit parents in the world. I just don't think this is a viable solution. It also screams a massive ethics exclamation point.
re: Should People be Vetted bafore they have Kids?
By fairy_dustmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:07 AM
This reminds me of a school project I did in a high school history class where I had to interview a senior citizen from my province about their youth. The person I interviewed was the grandmother of a girl I knew in school (the grandmother had raised the granddaughter, she was also a seamstress who made my prom dress). Anyway, I filmed the interview and at one point, the grandmother told a story of how she fought off welfare and kept her children.

She had 4 young children (one of whom was disabled and couldn't walk), but was unmarried and unemployed at the time, so the welfare people were always trying to take her children away. One day, a man from welfare came, saw the disabled girl on the floor, picked her up and said "I'll just take her for a car ride..." but the mother knew what was really happening. She picked up a pan full of hot bacon grease (she had been cooking bacon and the pan was still on the stove), lifted it up, and yelled "You put 'er down or I'll let ya have it!" He put down the little girl and left. She repeated this every time people from welfare tried to take the children away. In the end, she kept and raised all 4 kids (and the granddaughter later on) and all turned out fine.

At the end of the video, I asked which changes she thinks are most useful in today's society. She said today's welfare - now the government helps people in need instead of taking their children away.

This woman died a few years ago, and my mother found the video in my old high school stuff. She had dvd copies made and gave them to the 4 daughters and 3 grandkids.
Page:
Page 2 of 2: 1 2

ReplySendWatch

Powered by XP Experience Server.
Copyright ©1999-2021 XP.COM, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
XL
LG
MD
SM
XS
XL
LG
MD
SM
XS