To say we should sterilise people with repeated child neglect or abuse cases?

[BeHardyGoldPeer]

If you’ve failed multiple children, shouldn’t society step in to prevent further harm?

Historically child abuse/neglect was also used as an excuse to forcefully remove children from native communities and institutionalise them. The "savages" had no idea how to raise children, so they got taken away to (ironically) be used and abused .

Yes, I've watched so many films about this, it's truly horrifying. I originally felt that I could conceive some incentivisation but thinking on all these historic cases I now realise that could be used in a completely unacceptable way.

Conclusion now is there just isn't a clean easy answer.

Yabu

Obviously they are all horrific, and repugnant to most. But the actions of individuals with complicated and often traumatic backgrounds committing acts of violence and neglect is quite different from state sanctioned violence and neglect. You wave the social contract goodbye when you allow a government to take these powers.

Obviously they are all horrific, and repugnant to most. But the actions of individuals with complicated and often traumatic backgrounds committing acts of violence and neglect is quite different from state sanctioned violence and neglect. You wave the social contract goodbye when you allow a government to take these powers.

This.

Jesus OP.

You are moving into Nazi territory.

Please read up on history before spouting crap on the internet.

Totally, 100% agree. I'd sign up for it tomorrow in fact.

There's people out there having kids that I wouldn't trust with my goldfish.

I'd sterilise her in a heartbeat.

it should be OFFERED. but if it's forced, that's Eugenics, and that's not something any civilised society should condone, ever.
was it right to chemically castrate Alan Turing? because at that time, being gay was considered just as bad, if not worse than child neglect and abuse.
it's not a road we should go down. the option should be offered to those that are willing to take it, and I'm sure some would, if they're the sorts to consider children an inconvenient side effect of sex.
but body autonomy is important, even if the person in question is without doubt a vile person.
might they deserve it? yes, probably.
does it make it okay as a society to do it? no.

unfortunately, it will have to rely on monitoring the ongoing situation, imprisoning the worst, etc. but society shouldn't sink so low just because they do.

Paedophiles that act on their urges will never change because it's children they're attracted to.

Offering medical help is like gay conversion therapy. It doesn't work, because its not a life choice. However, pedophiles CAN make the choice not to devastate innocent children's lives. But some are completely selfish and have no self control. Some enjoy it because they know they're ruining lives. It's not always just about the sexual satisfaction. We have to keep in mind that people can be so much worse and a million times more diabolical than decent folk could ever imagine.

Personally I think the ones who act on their disgusting urges should be put down. Or put them on an uninhabited island and they can rot together. These are the worst in society imo and I have zero time, patience or empathy for them. I honestly couldn't care less what painful, torturous things happen to them. They disgust me beyond words and don't deserve to breathe air.

A paedophile who knows what they are, but actively avoids situations to be near children and would never want to harm a child, could indeed be helped somewhat with therapy, but it'll be a lifelong commitment and they'll still be paedophiles. That cannot be changed. I still wouldn't trust this type either.

Sterilisation is not the solution for the worst kinds because they will still have the ability to abuse children if they chose to.

With regards to parental neglect and having multiple children removed from your care, then yes, I believe in sterilisation. Let's stop bringing children into a life of misery and pain.

Is this really eugenics though? Eugenics about trying to prevent some sort of inheritable trait being passed down. Sterilising a person with a track record of neglect and abuse is more about preventing harm.

Personally I think people should be offered like 20k to get sterilised if they have had children removed or abused a child (I’d love to see it for father’s too by the way, not just women) I would frankly be fine with forced sterilisation and not feel bad about it but it is unethical. Equally I think it’s ethically iffy to not intervene when you know that someone will create another human life who will live with suffering inflicted on them by their own parents.

I remember listening to an interview with a “virtuous” paedophile who claimed he had no desire to harm children (he may well believe this too). He still persisted in putting himself in situations where he would be around children because he just “loved” them so much.

I agree.

The rights of abusers do not outweigh the rights of innocent victims.

Make it clear, advertise it wide: if you abuse a child, we will sterilize you.

I'd rather be "unethical" than let a single child suffer.

And if the courts/social work/cafcass have got it wrong?
Fuck no

And maybe trump voters too.

I would support mandated long acting contraception in conjunction with ‘pause’ like programmes and possibly some financial incentive to keep on the contraception once the intensive intervention programme had finished.

We mandate long acting antipsychotics for severely mentally unwell people because of the impact on society and themselves of them not being medicated. I don’t see how this is any different.

Yes , because certain communities will be (and have been ) more affected than others. Not just that, but it will be more cost effective, rather than offering intervention and support, let them "fail" , remove one child , and then sterilise them and let them get on with it. Nevermind cases when they do get it wrong.

Preventing harm is a slippery slope , that can then extend to before anything even happens, and those "traits" you mention will make their way on the list.

As is child abuse/neglect !

I will repost what I wrote on a previous thread on this subject:

“Who would choose who is forcibly sterilised?
What would be the cut-off for sterilisation?
What if a hitleresque government came into power who exploited the legislation to sterilise disabled people?
Who would force those selected for sterilisation into a vehicle to take them to hospital?
Who would hold a screaming woman down while someone else forces an anaesthetic mask over her face?
If you’re in favour of forced sterilisation, this is what you have to consider.”

I would add to this: which doctors should be forced by the state to perform medical procedures on unwilling patients? This is what you are asking for if you think forced sterilisation is a good idea.

I suppose this depends on how one feels about forced sterilisations. I’m vehemently opposed. Good luck getting anyone with any professional ethics to do such dirty work so this seems like a moot but ugly point.

Completely agree, but you’l get flamed on MN for saying this. I would also chemically castrate all convicted rapists, etc.

But the corollary of that statement is that a civilised society allows child abuse because it is the parents right. I think a civilised society protects children from harm and that includes sterilisation of individuals who have proven themselves not fit to be parents.

There was a programme on radio four years ago where they’d offered a certain segment of women I think based on education an apartment in return for being sterilised . Think it was a south East Asian country.

op I would go further, certain crimes would preclude you from fathering or getting pregnant, playing Russian roulette with these kids lives just to give these people another chance is not right imo. And I know a lot of these parents were abused and neglected themselves but it’s not worth the risk.

No, I couldn't get behind that. However, I think we should be as keen to remain as involved with the future reproduction of abusive or non-protective fathers, as we are with abusive/non-protective mothers.