sterlizing drug addicts

[DwainRooney]

Should people who cannot look after their childen be sterilized?

The cutbacks are affecting everyone and why should we throw money at people who will eventually have their children put into care at great expense to the taxpayers

If you cannot look after your children you should not have them

you're right girlylala, well said

It didn't say so in the article I read, but I presume they are only offering this to men?

Well as it goes I agree with it. I say this as the daughter of two heroin addicts who had a life of hell then long term care. What about my fucking rights. My life has not been worth all the suffering and neither has that of all my dead step dads and my 5 brothers and sisters. We all wish my mum had been sterilised. And my drug addict siblings should be too. Their kids ended up in care too. And we were all born addicted to drugs.

This social worker blogger winstonsmith33.blogspot.com/ has some interesting views on this subject.

He looks after children in care homes and if I remember rightly, he says the care system is so shite and fucks up children so badly, anyone (male or female) who has one child taken into care should have compulsory reversible sterilisation. As there is no effective and reliably reversible form of sterilisation for men, he says feckless teenage dads whose children end up in care should have compulsory vasectomies, until they get their act together enough to have an attempt at reversal.

After reading his blog for a while, I'm forced to agree with him.

"booooooooooyhoo

this again?

That can be said about lots of posts on
MN"

and your point being? this is a public forum i can comment i feel i want to.

booooooooooyhoo

I didnt say you could not comment. I was saying the range of topics are limited and keep coming round

Mein Fuhrer - welcome to Mumsnet

It's sick and plain wrong. They are not cats getting spayed, they are human beings!

They are human beings who can barely look after themselves and the need for drugs overrides all instincts, survival and maternal. It is mostly people who work with the kids and addicts themselves who agree with it. Think of it from another point of view . Please.

Where does it end though Sonia77? Who makes the decision as to what is acceptable or not, who gets to have children and who doesn't?

Should we extend this rule to other socially unacceptable parents?.....the obese, the older parent, the disabled, those with a learning disability? It is Nazi madness.

agree with scurry. where do you draw the line?

"It is mostly people who work with the kids and addicts themselves who agree with it." I have worked with addicts for 20 years and their children and I don't. Until there are enough rehab and detox beds and supportive services for all addicts who want help, that should be the focus, not spaying people like stray dogs.

What about the rights of the children born to drug addicts ? They have to have opiate substitutes at birth to stop them experiencing painful withdrawl and possible fitting.
Then after alot of social services and health visiting monitoring they are neglected and their needs minimised to the parents needs for drugs. Eventually after some time when a judge finally decides that they are at serious risk from neglectful parenting they are placed in care.
This can take up to 4yrs or very early if the mother forgets to feed the baby cos shes up to her eyeballs on crack.
Dont agree with sterilising but have watched too many kids on my caseload as Hv who have really suffered due to parental drug addiction.
Whose rights do we prioritise? Drug addict parent or child?

Many of these addicts have already had children. And had them taken off them. It is therefore a viable option at that stage in their lives. They may want to spare themselves the pain and that of their poor children from going through it all again. Ive been there. Ive seen it ALL. It is not about the money but about choices and control, of which they have very little. The addiction has control of their body etc but this is one that the women can make to spare any more pain. An addict having a child is not a joyous occasion ! Pregnancy is something feared for the most part. I cant argue as eloquently as you lot but I know that side of life and it is not a place for any baby. Ill bow out of this now as I doubt any one of you would consider my view for one second about what is truly like.

but tsc, who gets to decide when you have enough sense? do you have to go before a panel and present your case for your right to have children? what would you have to do to prove yourself? mandatory drug test? what about alcohol and smoking? what about your shopping list? would it be scrutinised to make sure you buy healthy food? criminal record? speeding points? education?

Good post jaffacake2. I agree with you.

woo hooo.

I do see your point of view sonia77

And the money is given for long term contraception as well, eg coil/implant.

The lady behind the scheme happens to think that the rights of the baby/child not to be born addicted to drugs and possibly disabled by them, outweighs the rights of the addict to have child after child after child taken into care.

Sterilise the sperminator and other people like him who keep procreating then leave, without having any intention of supporting their children. Wham bam thank you mam, then go onto the next stupid woman.

tsc do you think people who have no family support don't make good parents?

Please don't bow out sonia77...don't assume that people are not willing to hear your side. You must also not assume that your situation is the only valid view either.

dont most parents struggle at some point? does struggle mean they shouldn't be a parent? if they have a great job can afford flexible childcare, maybe a live-in nanny would that alter your opinion?