Should there be a Parenting Licence?

[Imafairy]

I've often thought, and it's been further ratified by:

this

and this

that people should be required to complete some sort of test before they are allowed to take care of poor defenceless little children.

It makes my blood boil when there are some many MNers who are trying desperately to have babies, to then read stories about people who obviously couldn't give a toss about their own kids.

(There is a big flaw in my plan in that I have no idea how on earth a parenting test / licence would be implemented, but humour me!)

Discuss.

I COMPLETELY AGREE

sorry not able to discuss, milks starting to come in, toddler like a whirlwind, afterpains excrutiating, need to eat....and pee, mind like a blob of jelly....

hope someone comes along that can hold a reasonable conversation

Ahhhhhhh, what a good thread.

This one may be juicy. It would solve a lot of problems, certainly. But far from the problems implementing it, what would be the criteria for earning it?

Everyone has a different idea about what sort of life it is ok to bring a child into.

What about drug addicts?
Ex drug addicts?
Smokers?
People who have gambling problems?
People who believe in smacking as a viable form of discipline?
People who don't believe in discipline?
People who cannot cook?
People who cannot read?
People with mental health problems?
People with previous mental health problems?
People who have a terminal disease?
People who may require continued support to be a parent?
People who were abused as children (known to be statistically more likely to abuse their own children)?

Where is the line?

How about something as simple as:

Will you love and care for this child, and bring it up in a loving, nuturing and caring environment?

Is that good enough if you are going to get off your face on heroin each day?

Everyone's idea of a loving and caring environment varies. To some people it means a strict routine and utter stability. To others this is cruel, and they think it should mean free access to the biscuit tin. Which other people would insist is cruel.

Most people that neglect their children would insist that they adore them.

I would, tentatively like to add, perhaps social workers (ok some of them) would benefit from some testing.

Yet again they are saying no-one will be held accountable for this travesty of sending that precious child back to those monsters.

What about if rather than having to use contraception to avoid having DC's people who want to have them should have to undergo counselling and then if they are considered fit they can have an injection that allows them to have children!

Agreed, and as I said in the OP I don't have any great idea for how such a thing would be introduced. It's just that these stories pop up all too frequently...

(that was in reply to Colditz)

I agree it is a total minefield and open to yet more curtailing of human rights. How about compulsory parenting classes both before and after the birth?

So... how would you feel if, because of some of your beliefs that you feel are perfectly valid, you were told "Sorry, you cannot have a parenting license/are not eligable to be a parent"?

I think the solution is compulsory parenting classes - I don't think knowing how to parent is necessarily instinctive; I was very young when I had my oldest and hadn't a clue what to do. He was never neglected but looking back now (he's nearly 20) I know that I am a much better parent to my 4 year old, because I've had experience, I have friends with kids which I didn't then, so I have support, advice etc. Obviously my parenting-classes plan doesn't deal with the abusers. What I'm trying to say is that a lot of bad parenting is just ignorance, coupled with having been parented badly yourself.

no its a daft idea we live in a free society

Isn't this in effect the current system, where social services can take your children away if they think they have good reason?

It is very difficult to sterilise someone without consent, so even if a licence system was introduced, how would it be enforced?

But, children can survive ignorance. Plenty of people here were smacked, and shouted at, and given utter crap to eat, and bottlefed on evap. While angry, they are here and alive, and healthy enough to have got to a point in their lives where they have internet access.

Doesn't stop the ones who put cigarettes out on their kids legs and break their ribs. They are the ones who need to be stopped ... so what's the criteria for deciding who is likely to do that?

No because the SS have to find you first. With the license, they would aleready 'know' you were ok.

Would worry me that checks on people would stop because they "have their licence, they must be ok"

But a licence issued to a mother of one with a nanny would also cover that mother of 4 with no support whatsoever. And in 5 years, they could be the same person, IYSWIM

Maybe with compulsory parenting classes there would be more opportunity to observe the interaction between parent and child and therefore at risk children would get on the radar earlier?

no

but think more monitoring of ALL kids would be good. (ALL kids need monitoring, even posh ones to catch the failing minority)

with respect for diversity witin this.

parenting classes for all a good thing

most of all-supportive atmosphere, not this constant mummy wars.

universal free childcare and home helps for new families also.

think a LOT of problems could be solved if parents had a decent break once in a while

and free chocolate for all

The only workable way would be to target potential parents with a very high risk of abuse - those who already have convictions for child cruelty. I can't see how you could use any other criteria - those who were abused are more likely to be abusers, but that doesn't apply to most who were abused. You'd be punishing the abused for something taht was beyong their control. An early conviction for, say, GBH, shouldn't disqualify someone because the idea of the penal system should be that it rehabilitates offenders. And doesn't compulsory sterilisation belong only in a Fascist state?

I think parentcraft classes that actually teach you how to be a Mum rather than just covering things like bfing would help. I now realise that as a mum I am expected to be able to make costumes for World Book week, cakes for the school fair, know the rules of rugby and be an expert on Thunderbirds!

I suspect that the amount of money it would cost to implement would be a total waste - better directed at more targeted social care.

The government would have to employ armies of people to check up on us all, and to process endlessly bureaucratic and paper intensive forms. Think of the CSA then multiply it by 10.

Most of it would be wasted, because the vast vast majority would be ok parents not needing to be checked.

It wouldn't stop the minority having kids, it would just introduce another layer of social services that they have contact with.

But who would be the ones deciding who would, and who wouldn?t be fit to be a parent? And how would you enforce this? You cannot force people to take contraception, that would be a total breach of human rights, plus what would happen if the contraceptive failed and someone without a licence fell pregnant? Would you force them to have a termination or to give that baby up for adoption?

Also I fear it may end up being something of a postcode lottery, based on who was issuing the licences in your particular area.

So ? in area A mr smith is a homophobe, so he believes that gays and lesbians are unfit parents. No licences for them then.

In area B Mr Jones is a racist, and he doesn?t believe that blacks and Indians should be allowed to ?breed?, so no licences for those then.

In area C Mr biggett is an ignorant man who doesn?t believe the disabled are capable of anything and therefore certainly doesn?t feel they would be fit parents. No licences for those then.

Stories such as the one reported yesterday are horrific, and absolutely some people are not fit to be parents, but I do think that on the whole most parents are doing the best for their children, and that cases such as yesterday?s are actually in the minority, they just appear to be so rife because of the vast media interest.

I actually feel quite strongly about this, because I certainly know there are people out there who believe that the disabled should be unable to have children, so if such a system were implemented, there is a very high chance IMO that I would not have been allowed to have children. And I personally think that I am a good parent, and no less fit than anyone else, and yet someone with authority might just be able to come along and suggest otherwise.

Bad idea IMO

No! I'm not in favour of curtailing the freedoms of all in order to 'catch out' the incapable or uncaring few.
Anyway, it wouldn't work and it would waste millions of pounds.
We need to invest in social services and healthcare provision, so the right support goes to the right people, and is delivered by staff who have adequate training and adequate empathy.