If you could pass one law, just one, what would it be?(39 Posts)
And it must be fairly specific, so can't just be that everyone must be nice to everyone.
Please state, law , purpose, possible complications/details as necessary.
Mine: any person who had sex and became a parent would be financially liable for 50 % of money to raise that person until they were independent.
Purpose: hopefully, people would not have unprotected sex but would think about the outcomes of their actions, and one parent couldn't bugger off and make the other live in penury whilst they dodged the CSA.
Details: DNA tests would be necessary, some parents would need benefits to help them pay, women would have to have private counseling before a termination to prevent coercion. The child would be considered independent at age 18 or when leaving school. I cases of rape, the rapist would be liable for 100% of costs to raise child. Absolutely no link between the duty to pay and any rights to see the child.
What law would you pass?
Sexual offences trials to be inquisitorial rather than adversial.
Because , in effect, the current laws require the victim to convince a jury that they did not consent, rather than the defendant explaining how they thought they gained it. And juries seem to be shit at consent stuff when it comes to sex.
It would overturn our whole system of justice.
Before enacting that law, i would rather the whole populace were educated in the concepts of consent and enthusiastic participation, then perhaps it wouldn't be necessary, given that juries would then have a clue and the CPS would have more faith in bringing cases to trial.
Abortion on demand (with counselling/medical advice to ensure informed consent) until birth
Purpose: fairly obvious. So no one has to be pregnant if they don't want to be.
Complications: No one would ever pass this law.
A law that will give women absolute and complete control over their bodies.
No woman can ever be denied an abortion or any form of birth control. There will be no clause in my law to excuse doctors on the basis of religious/moral/personal beliefs. If a woman asks for an abortion or birth control they have to give it to her. There will also be no clause for spousal consent or right to in formation. Her body, her business, her choice.
A pregnant woman will be fully in control of her healthcare decisions and nobody can override her choices. She has control over how and where she gives birth- whether it's in the middle or a forest or in a high tech obstetric ward. Her decision is final- if wants a home birth, she gets one. If she wants an elective cesarean, she gets one. If she wants an epidural, they cannot deny her. This will extend to even small things like who can or cannot be in the room when she is being examined or giving birth.
NO MEANS NO. This needs to be understood by HCPs as much as by rapists and abusers. When a woman refuses to consent to a form or treatment, you cannot force it on her anyway. Similarly, when she requests treatment you have to agree to her demand unless it steps completely out of the bounds of safety.
The current model gives far too many rights to doctors and very little rights to women. I would want to strip doctors of the rights they have and give women the autonomy that they deserve. A medical degree should not give anyone the power to make decisions for a woman's body and health or to override her preferences in matters which affect her person.
I would also want to pass a law that would make it compulsory for governments to provide free childcare to all working women. No woman should have to give up her career and dreams because she is now a mother.
I would pass a law that being an MP was like jury service or national service - we all had to serve in parliament for a period of, say, 4 years of our life, whether we wanted to or not.
It would get ride of self serving politicians.
Get rid of policies pandering to prejudice in order to win votes
Ensure and equal and representative house
Anyone that wants to be a politician seems to be the worst person to actually be one, so this would solve it.
No more expensive elections. Job done.
All work places to offer term time only jobs, flexible hours and home home working if possible.
All work places to offer holiday jobs for students and mentoring for youngsters who find entering the work place difficult.
It is ridiculous that part of the workforce work insane hours while others are unemployed or want longer hours, but lack of flexibility their hands.
Ties their hands.
Also OK I know I'm not allowed 2, but it's strongly related.
Sort out the benefits system so it isn't a barrier to work.
DF with depression wanted to slowly increase her hours. The 15hr rule made this almost impossible.
Lads next door do lots of temporary stuff and signing on and of benefits is the most ridiculous rigmarole, heaven knows who much the admin costs!
Law: make all physical chastisement of children illegal
Purpose: to give children the same protection as everyone else against being physically assaulted and intimidated
Zero tolerance - no smacking, hitting, yanking, shoving, putting soap in mouths etc. Same legal penalties as assault against other vulnerable groups eg the elderly and disabled.
Difficult to enforce, yes, but sends the right message and is long overdue imo.
Make non-payment of child maintenance a criminal offence.
National curriculum to.include first aid for all children above the age of say 12.
I agree with loads of these. I think we need an MNer as an MP.
From my previous post: "Marriage laws, for the most part, are state matters in the US; currently nine states and the District of Columbia allow gay marriage."
As of today, it will be 12 states.
I would pass a law that being an MP was like jury service or national service - we all had to serve in parliament for a period of, say, 4 years of our life, whether we wanted to or not
I can't see it would work-I would loathe it and so wouldn't make much effort-in the same way that I would hate National Service and not put much into it. Jury service is OK because I know very few people who have been called, I haven't, and it is short. A month of being an MP would be OK -but hardly useful.
Join the discussion
Please login first.