to think steralisation should be enforced

[claw3]

on anyone who abuses children?

Whatfresh - if you are going to quote me, i actually said we all know how unefficient SS CAN be

Amuminscot - Education, help and support before becoming pregnant. A compulsory course if you like for parents to be.

I was listening to Ian Duncan Smith this morning, he was talking of a case with a mother who had 3 children in care, 2 already adopted and was pregnant again.
How can it be right that people like that wreck havoc on their children and leave the state or others to pick up the pieces.

On the other hand in the 1950's my auntie got pregnant out of wedlock as a teenager. She was carted off and left to rot in a Magdalene Asylum. The nuns told her the baby died. Alot of Magdalene babies were put up for adoption in America. My auntie could have been left there but for my mother forging their mothers signature and getting my auntie out and over to England.

There has to be a middle way between the two extremes. Atm imo we have lurched way to far in letting or even encouraging people to act selfishly and without responsibility. Individually and societally we are suffering as a result.

The thing is EleanorRigby, of course it's not right for that person to keep having children and the state to pick up the pieces - but the alternatives suggested here are not right either.

if you give people human rights, you have to accept that some people will make bad choices. but withdrawing those choices doesn't help society as a whole, it just punishes lots of innocent people. You can try and support people to make better choices, but that's all you can do.

Christianity is quite hot on this - why does God allow bad things to happen if he is all powerful and he loves us? because he gave us FREE WILL.

claw - but how do you make it compulsory? People who plan their pregnancy enough to take a course beforehand are probably not those who need to be deterred. You will always have people getting pregnant without having taken the course / got a permit.

I do think there should be a lot more education about pregnancy and childcare long before people are old enough to start having sex, but the curriculum is full as it is, and there's enough controversy about teaching them any sex education at all.

Amuminscot - You cant apply for child benefit without the permit, stating you had completed the course.

Those who had difficulty on the course, could then get extended help etc.

When my mum gave birth to me, she was in hospital for a week, she was shown how to bath and feed a baby etc. Now days you are out of hospital in 6 hours.

Free will is between a person and their God.

Society has always had to have rules backed by the force of the state.

People are more likely behave in selfish, irresponsible ways if they are given the ability and/or are encouraged to do so.

Quite frankly I am fed up about the hand wringing bleating on about the rights of people who are laughing up their sleeves at well meaning naive types who havnt an ffing clue.

Rights have to be balanced with responsibilities.

Waynetta Slob doesnt look so funny anymore.

and this will be funded how? through higher taxes? you can bet most people would resent that....

i think that whatever system the state tried to implement, there would be loopholes, flaws and some families would slip through the gaps

lula - i dont pretend to have all the answers, all i know is the system we have at the moment is failing.

ah, so the only people who will be allowed to abuse their children are those who can afford to do without child benefit? or do only poorer people abuse their children?

and how will it help prevent abuse by stepparents?

besides, look at China, where people who accidentally get pregnant and already have a child are compelled to have abortions - and sometimes really late, because they don't get discovered until very late in the pregnancy. We call that barbaric, and yet we're discussing forcible sterilisation?

Cut welfare
My mum and dad came over from Ireland in the late 50's.
They raised their four kids with no help from the state until child allowance was phased in the late 70's.
All of us work, pay our taxes and have never been in trouble with the law.
If they could do it people could do it now.

There was a scheme in America were single mothers who had the financial incentive to have kids cut. It went something like welfare was cut to 1/2 for a 2nd "accident" and totally cut for 3rd and subsequent children.

And did it work, ER? America has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancy in the developed world, doesn't it?

I think any antisocial behaviour should result in a termination of benefits if people are state supported, people need a consequence for their actions otherwise they don't have any sense of personal responsibility.

Whatfresh - I assume you are happy with things the way they are then?

What would you suggest we do?

ha ha don't fund social services that's a joke, there were something like 200 overpaid middle managers in Harringey. It's total misappropriation of funding, more money just means more people creating more systems that are ineffective.

and their child being taken away isn't a consequence? you know, some of these mums may be having more children because they're distraught at losing one and trying to fill a void? or because they're forced into sex by a violent partner? so let's force them into poverty as well, why not.

did you see the case in the Times of the woman who turned up at the hospital in labour, dirty and exhausted. gave birth to a baby, and asked the midwives to have it adopted as her partner wouldn't let her take it home. then she asked, when they were checking her over, if she would be able to have sex that night. When they said no, she said 'well I'll have to' and left.

do you think removing that woman's only source of income is going to help her? or is it going to make her even more dependent on her violent, abusive partner?

none of us have all the answers , but i think it is importnat to discuss things, and offer counter arguments and debate.

1 in 3 people work for the state now, it's not the people on the frontline that get the money it's the useless bureaucrats that take the money and then deliver appalling services.

lula - definately, wise words

One middle manager over a course of their career equates to £2M. There are far better ways to spend that money.

am i happy that Baby P died? of course not. it's a deep tragedy. but I don't think forcible sterilisation or violent punishment helps either the victims or the offenders, or, crucially, prevents crimes of this nature. do you think someone as damaged as Baby P's stepfather would have thought twice about what he was doing if the punishment was castration? I don't. He didn't do it because he weighed up the consequences and decided he could get away with it, just as when capital punishment was around it didn't prevent murders.

as for the social service system - it's the classic justice dilemma - you can either have a justice system that catches every single criminal, but where some innocent people will also go to prison, or you can have one where no innocent person will be unjustly punished, but some guilty people will walk free. I don't think it's possible to find a perfect answer.

At the moment the system is weighted towards keeping children with their families, because of the deep trauma caused by removing them. Children in care generally have outcomes not much better than if they'd stayed in a difficult home life, so it's a real frying pan and fire situation.

It's a bit twisted though because where there hasn't been any abuse or history of abuse they can take the child away from the mother at birth which IS barbaric.