to think steralisation should be enforced

[claw3]

on anyone who abuses children?

why would that stop them abusing children?

It would only mean they would abuse other peoples children

It would stop them from being able to have MORE children

Not really sure how that would help

And WhatFreshHell hides another thread

ffs.

am not sure in a civilised society it is actually possible to advocate enforced sterilisation

and it certainly wouldn't help any children they might already have abused

fgs

and use google to help you spell check

YABU

You haven't really thought this through, have you?

And it's sterilisation btw.

yeah i do realise how steralisation works
its a ridiculous idea though

mildmannered - appears you are not so mildmannered, all ive seen you do is post YAWN and FFS

I know what you are getting at but it will never happen. I can't stand how some people can just pop out children who they never want and will never care for. Makes me so esp as many couples who would be brilliant parents can't have kids despite dearly wanting them.

ditto WhatFreshHell

I agree with this

I can understand where you're coming from OP.

Especially given recent cases in the news I think it's quite a natural gut reaction to think that the perpetrators shouldn't be allowed to have any more kids.

However, I don't think a civilised society forces people under general anaesthetic and performs an operation on them against their will.

There are powers there in the courts to take away newborn babies from parents who have previously committed abuse against other children. I think that's the only way to tackle it.

chemical sterilization?

off with their goolies

An awful lot of abuse is towards step children, so sterilisation would hardly help there.

Thank you for some civil replies, instead of pathetic spell check and ffs replies. I thought this was a discussion board, not a know it all board!!

Anyhow, surely abusing children, you should forefit your right to have more kids

I know this doesnt help the kids that have already been abused, but it would prevent them from harming any more

It is not worth debating because it is not ever going to happen.

I can understand why you feel hatred towards people who hurt children, I do too. If we were to live in the sort of society that enforced this you would also have to accept other harsh forms of punishments; the stoning of people who commit adultery, cutting hands off of thieves. Would you like to live by these draconian rules?

Many children are abused by people who are not biologically related to them anyway (step-parents) so I am not sure how your arguement would stop children being harmed anyway.

Why on earth are you putting s at the end of your sentences?

Clearly this won't happen in a civilised society. Where would it stop?

Of course these people should be locked up, that would stop them having more children surely?

The problem with draconian punishments is that it tends to lead to a higher rate of violence and abuse in any society that introduces them. This is why a lot of us don't want to see them introduced.

And no, being unable to conceive children will not prevent you from abusing the children of others. This is not how the world works.

Some rapists have chemical sterilization so why not child abusers? Different reasons but both need this. Once they get out of prison early at least they can't have their own children.