To think they should never have been allowed more children ?

[JellieEllie]

This couple have lost 3 children to death in a period of 16 months.
The father has now separated from the children's mother and has gone on to have a further child with his new partner.

Why oh why are these types of irresponsible parents allowed to keep on breeding?
Should laws be put in place where parents who are the direct cause of a child's death be forcibly sterilised to prevent further incidents in the future ?

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parents-whose-baby-died-boozed-13209349

Why don't people think that forced sterilisation or contraception is an option?

It's eugenics, it's morally, legally and ethically unacceptable and it's open to abuse. Imagine being sterilised against your will, legally, because someone falsified evidence against you?

@MirriVan not that I'm aware but I expect somewhere along the family line there will be all of those things. (I don't really speak to any of my family so I've never delved into illnesses etc)
But I also chose to not have children and I never will. I've had an implant for the last 10 years and I will continue to keep one too.
I admire your reasons for choosing not to have children you sound very sensible and intelligent.

I agree @zzzzz

Why don't people think that forced sterilisation or contraception is an option?

Who gets to decide what the threshold is?

Finally, people are actually giving me reasons.
Thank you to everyone who has. Like I said a lot further up, sometimes people have opinions that are not necessarily correct. Just because I feel that my opinion is right doesn't make it right.
The reason I asked for people to explain is because I genuinely am interested in why my opinion could be seen as wrong.
I don't think I am disgusting, revolting, unfit to have children or downright idiotic as pp's have said.
I think the fact that I have seen and witnessed children being taken away from a a family that would have loved them (not their mother) I have had opinions of my own that haven't been set in stone.
To ask people what they think of it and why I they think I may be wrong isn't a reason to speak to me like I'm a piece of shit to be honest.
Personal experiences can change someone's opinion in a heartbeat especially where children are involved and I've had my reasons for feeling the way I feel.
But it's definitely something to think about now that I have been given facts.

And if you start sterilising people, you're infringing on their human rights and where do you draw the line with other similar people?

At people who allow their children to die through neglect or actually batter them to death?

@MirriVan no problem ☺️
I was brought up in care myself as a child from a very young age until I left school. I didn't have the greatest of childhoods to be honest and then I suffered with a long term eating disorder which I have only recently managed to overcome.
Obviously there has never ever been a point in my life where I have felt that a child was an option for me, hence the implant.
I do now have a wonderful step daughter and I do care for her immensely and love her with all my heart. But I wouldn't have my own. Don't get me wrong I have always dreamt of my own family etc but it's absolutely not something that has been a priority for me.
My partner also doesn't want any more children and I'm ok with that.
The reasons I chose not to have children is mainly because I wouldn't have brought them into a decent life with mine being the way it has been until recently.
So maybe you are absolutely correct in what you say, the reasons I feel the way I do about potentially taking away someone's right to children is slightly blackened by my lack of wanting them.
I don't feel the pull of motherhood as some women may. Thank you for that it kind of does actually ring true now that I'm thinking about it.

You can't force people to be sterilised without becoming like Nazi Germany.

Though it would be cheaper to incentivise a couple like this with, say £10k, in return for a vacetomy + fallopian tubes tied.

There are moral arguments either way but I feel that morally we have an obligation to avoid as many children suffering such a chaotic start to life as possible.

I hope at least SS are now keeping a very close eye on the remaining children, who should be removed from the parents if they continue not to cope.

My heart breaks for this terrible situation but I have the most concern for the innocent children who were left alone in a hotel room that night

My father is in the prison service - has been for years - and has seen generations of the same families pass through the system. He would 100% support sterilisation.

I myself believe that society's problems will never be solved unless we deal with the root causes.

There’s no clear evidence that these parents caused the deaths of their children due to abuse or neglect. Therefore, I’m not sure why you linked this family’s story in with your discussion.

But the right to have children isn't conferred by society/ a bunch of pearl clutching Daily Mail readers. There is an established process in place whereby babies at risk can be, and are, taken away from their parents. You can't forcibly sterilise someone ffs.

@zzzzz thanks for clearing that up. I am starting to see why people think those things about my opinion as other pp's have dissected it in a way that's made me think.

There’s no clear evidence that these parents caused the deaths of their children due to abuse or neglect

Really? So if I start a thread - AIBU to leave my baby in her car seat in the car, for, 15 hours, while me and DP get drunk - everyone would say yep that's fine.

A few weeks ago a poster started a thread asking if she was BU to go down the street to the shop, leaving baby in cot for five minutes, and every single response was basically her baby would definitely die in that time and OP didn't deserve children.

So if I start a thread - AIBU to leave my baby in her car seat in the car, for, 15 hours, while me and DP get drunk - everyone would say yep that's fine.

^This is what the couple in OPs link did. Even after they knew the baby was high risk of SIDs they still did this. They don’t deserve children.

Jellie I see where you are coming from, as we take away people's rights and liberties all the time when they have committed crimes. Including freedom (prison), can't live or work in certain areas (sex/violent offenders), lose drivers licence, and others. I agree that reproductive freedom is a right, but so is actual freedom - and no one has an issue when a violent offender is put in jail for life.

Of course in practice, it becomes difficult.

In some places, courts can enforce mandatory chemical castration for sex offenders. This is also depriving them of sexual/reproductive rights, but I can see why it's done.

I disagree with those who think reproduction is an inalienable right that should never be removed under any circumstances.

As a society, we place various restrictions on individual freedoms to protect wider freedoms. And if an individual violates those there are consequences where that individual loses rights.

I believe an individual has the right to freedom to live, work and associate with whom they choose. However, if they abuse that right, by murdering someone for instance, they lose those rights and are incarcerated in a prison. Of course, repressive regimes put people in prison too... just because they do doesn’t mean prison is wrong!

In my opinion, in particularly severe cases, I think it is reasonable for individuals to be forcibly sterilised (it’s just a different freedom being lost to those put in prison). Some would say this is barbaric... but I’d only advocate this if the alternative of letting someone continue to breed was likely to be even more appalling. The decision to do this would need to be made by a judge applying a carefully considered and balanced law in the matter. The alternative would be to continue to take children from abusive or incapable mothers at birth... which in my view is worse.

Just to be clear the idea of forced sterilisation disgusts and revolts not the holder of the opinion.

There are 3 options in extreme circumstances where a mother has shown herself to be highly abusive:

1. leave the child in her care, with the high probability that child will come to serious harm or death
2. remove that child, quite possibly brain-damaged due to mothers behaviour during pregnancy, at birth from the mother
3. sterilise the mother

In my opinion option 3 is the least barbaric.

“Really? So if I start a thread - AIBU to leave my baby in her car seat in the car, for, 15 hours, while me and DP get drunk - everyone would say yep that's fine.”

This is a really bizarre paragraph- do you really think and Internet forum of randoms is some kind of moral barometer of good
Parenting? Who cares what AIBU would say? we’re taking about a real, serious situation here not some frivolous AIBU

Barnaby why is option 3 the least barbaric? Option 2 is to remove the child at birth. Child is safe, likely adopted into a safe loving family. I don’t see why that’s a worse option than 3? (Im ignoring the brain damaged bit because you’ve obviously put it in for dramatic affect and it doesn’t bear any relation to the point)

Scummy parents in unhealthy children shocker!
There is always a part of society that will not conform and is maladjusted to life.

He would have been warned of the dangers of car seats for premies, it's one of the first things you get told before you leave when they're small babies. Both of mine were 5lb 9oz and 5lb 11oz respectively even though they weren't premature and I was told about car seats.

I think people detach themselves from the word 'forcibly'.

That would mean a protracted (and expensive for the state) legal fight. Then in most cases it will involve representatives of the state fighting and holding down a screaming, crying human being then trying to anesthetise them in a safe way without killing them in their terror and distress. Then cutting into them with a scalpel and removing their ability to reproduce.

Not easy to do and traumatic to be involved in for the victim and the 'staff'. And how many medics would agree to be involved in this process? None. And many other non-medics wouldn't want to be. So you'd have it performed by who? What kind of person would want a job where they hold down a distraught human being before performing unwanted surgery on them?