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

I don't think the argument is that they cannot make the decision....a drug addict does whatever is necessary to get the next batch of drugs.

It is immoral that fertility is being decided by the state. The problem is who gets to decide and what circumstances make fertility unreasonable?

Hear hear Marylou242

ok, so what about the people who actually take up the offer? shall we look down on them? are they too vulnerable to make the 'right' decision/ an informed decision?

does anyone thing they will genuinely feel they have done something responsible or do they just want the money?

you need to read an interview with the woman who set this up.

Her ethical basis is that no person can justify the poisoning and physical destruction of the unborn child that a drug or alcohol addicted woman causes. This is the foundation of this horrific 'offer'.

There are women who get pregnant again and again and again and again. Their babies suffer terribly, unimaginably.

If a woman gave heroin or alcohol to a baby she'd be put in prison. If a woman poisons her child in utero - that's fine is it?

Some of these women have countless children. Who speaks up for them?

this womans project made much more sense in the US though...due to the lack of free health care vailable to these women.

But its not the state deciding, its the person agreeing to the sterilisation. Its available now on the nhs, so are they determining who is sterilised? no they are offering a service!

I am with the OP on this, I do believe some people should not be allowed to breed

I think if I take heroin at 9 months pregnant and kill or damage my unborn child that's fine. If I give my one day old child heroin and kill or damage my child I go to prison.

Is there no ethical inconsistency there? There must be.

None of it is tidy or easy but no one should be allowed to damage a baby more than once! It's beyond criminal. However unwitting it is unacceptable.

And who are the some people RunawayPumpkin? If we allow this to happen, who next?

Some people with learning difficulties harm their children. Shall we start offering them money to be sterilised. After all it would be best all round, no?

Some people who suffer depression harm or neglect their children. Should we offer them money to be sterilised?

Some people with AIDS and HIV pass it on to their children. Shall we sterilise them?

What about the disabled? The poor? The homeless? Smokers? Drink drivers? People who enjoy blue cheese? People who follow the wrong religion?

It's the start of a very slippery slope imo. And I question this womans motives. She has no interest in helping addicts. She wants to eliminate them. Pure and simple. They don't fit with her version of a 'good' society.

DooinMeCleanin

That is the best "agasint" arguement there has been in this thread

She simply does not want female alcohol and drug addicts to harm child upon child upon child. They suffer terribly. She should know, she's adopted more than one.

Who speaks for the children these women destroy?

Clearly no one.

SS in the UK and CPS in the US. Also in the US you can get arrested and jailed for using Heroin during pregnancy in certain states.

The sterilising unit is that way take a right at the gas showers , what an awful op , does it matter what financial situation the addict is in would you sterilise a rich person with a drug habit someone who could afford a nanny if they ever became a parent ? What if someone has dc and becomes an addict are the children then taken away? Where would it stop? Would you sterilise people who are stupid? Who might pass on a genetic disease?

What do you think these addicts do with their health in pregnancy grant? Or the money that is supposed to feed their children.

As an australian journalist pointed out, if they will sell their fertility for 200 , what would they sell their own children for?