S.C. official: Sterilize bad parents

[GaryC 7]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061001/ap_on_...n_sterilization

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The suggestion is so extreme in its nature you have to wonder whether or not this person is serious. If they are, its good at least that she is only on a city council, and not in the Senate...

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A less crazy solution is to make parents criminally liable depending on the severity of the crime and the age of the children if it can be proven there is deliberate neglect on the part of the parents. I wouldn't suggest jail time but a hefty fine and some community service along with mandatory family counseling for the parents.

[homesick_american 1]

A less crazy solution is to make parents criminally liable depending on the severity of the crime and the age of the children if it can be proven there is deliberate neglect on the part of the parents. I wouldn't suggest jail time but a hefty fine and some community service along with mandatory family counseling for the parents.

That would be impossible to enforce fairly.

If someone's had 3-4 kids already and they're born addicted to drugs or become wards of the state or become a criminal nuisance, I don't see what's wrong with sterilizing the parents. I wouldn't support involuntary sterilization, though; that's a step too far. But if they volunteer, hey...maybe the state would save money in the long run.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A less crazy solution is to make parents criminally liable depending on the severity of the crime and the age of the children if it can be proven there is deliberate neglect on the part of the parents. I wouldn't suggest jail time but a hefty fine and some community service along with mandatory family counseling for the parents.

That would be impossible to enforce fairly.

If someone's had 3-4 kids already and they're born addicted to drugs or become wards of the state or become a criminal nuisance, I don't see what's wrong with sterilizing the parents. I wouldn't support involuntary sterilization, though; that's a step too far. But if they volunteer, hey...maybe the state would save money in the long run.

Actually, I'm pretty sure we already have such enforcement (parental liability in some states). It was an issue in LA with the problem of gangs. If in a court of law, the case could be made that the parents were knowingly and deliberately allowing, say their 14 son to be out all night gangbanging, then they should be held liable.

As for voluntary sterilization - what does that have to do with the law? "Mam, we want to sterilize you because your 3 kids are gangbangers, but only if you want to?"

[homesick_american 1]

Actually, I'm pretty sure we already have such enforcement (parental liability in some states). It was an issue in LA with the problem of gangs. If in a court of law, the case could be made that the parents were knowingly and deliberately allowing, say their 14 son to be out all night gangbanging, then they should be held liable.

Yeah. They're trying that here for truant kids and it's not working out. The fact that laws like that exist or that they are used does not mean they are used FAIRLY.

As for voluntary sterilization - what does that have to do with the law? "Mam, we want to sterilize you because your 3 kids are gangbangers, but only if you want to?"

Sure, because we'll pay them to have it done. Don't act surprised, some jurisdictions already pay drug addicts to get sterilized.

[kimlan 0]

Problem is, if you are going to hold a parent liable for a 14 to 18 year old kid, you can't have the child abuse laws hanging over the parents heads like you do now!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Problem is, if you are going to hold a parent liable for a 14 to 18 year old kid, you can't have the child abuse laws hanging over the parents heads like you do now!

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I follow you.

[homesick_american 1]

Problem is, if you are going to hold a parent liable for a 14 to 18 year old kid, you can't have the child abuse laws hanging over the parents heads like you do now!

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I follow you.

Glad I'm not the only one who missed that one.

[MHandMB 0]

I think, in some instances, it might not be a bad idea to offer compensation for sterilization for certain people.

My friend has a relative who has been pregnant 4 times. Every pregnancy, she was addicted to drugs. When she had her first baby, she was 16 or 17. For the child's safety, the girl's mom kept it and is raising it. The second baby was a late-term miscarriage. The third baby, she had but ended up accidentally killing it by sleeping on it one night when she was passed out on drugs. The fourth baby, she had, and the mom kept it, too. Now she's pregnant again. And of course, still on drugs.

The problem is, she's still in her early to mid 20's. Think of how many babies she can have if she keeps going.

[Mirorgate 0]

Problem is, if you are going to hold a parent liable for a 14 to 18 year old kid, you can't have the child abuse laws hanging over the parents heads like you do now!

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I follow you.

"Do what I want or I report you to Social Services".. something along those lines I believe.

And the US Mil already has the parent responsible for the childs behavior when they are in an overseas active duty station. The parent is there for the work representing the USA, the child is there as a priveledge, as well as the rest of the family. The child acts up.. the parent gets slapped with the penalty. From driving tickets, to arson charges. Probably more, but when I was there.. that was the range that I witnessed.

[GaryC 7]

Problem is, if you are going to hold a parent liable for a 14 to 18 year old kid, you can't have the child abuse laws hanging over the parents heads like you do now!

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I follow you.

"Do what I want or I report you to Social Services".. something along those lines I believe.

And the US Mil already has the parent responsible for the childs behavior when they are in an overseas active duty station. The parent is there for the work representing the USA, the child is there as a priveledge, as well as the rest of the family. The child acts up.. the parent gets slapped with the penalty. From driving tickets, to arson charges. Probably more, but when I was there.. that was the range that I witnessed.

I believe some states have that also. I seem to remember a news story where they hauled the parents in for something their minor child did. I don't know how far that goes though.

[mozplay 29]

I am almost tempted to agree with sterilization, but hard as I try, I can't. However, I do think that this is a crazy world, where our leaders require us to have pet licenses, but not child licenses. It's so easy to screw up a child's psyche, and unfortunately, holding parents responsible for negative actions will not make them better parents - just bigger autocrats.

I agree with the poster who suggested incentive programmes.. but of all kinds. It is a horrible state of affairs that grown men and women need to be afraid of school children. I do believe this needs to be treated as a national epidemic.

Offer incentives for voluntary sterilization of high risk mothers if that is what you want to do, sure.. but don't stop there. People need to be educated to be better parents - and that starts BEFORE birth, not after.

Mo

[Savanphil 3]

I think, in some instances, it might not be a bad idea to offer compensation for sterilization for certain people.

My friend has a relative who has been pregnant 4 times. Every pregnancy, she was addicted to drugs. When she had her first baby, she was 16 or 17. For the child's safety, the girl's mom kept it and is raising it. The second baby was a late-term miscarriage. The third baby, she had but ended up accidentally killing it by sleeping on it one night when she was passed out on drugs. The fourth baby, she had, and the mom kept it, too. Now she's pregnant again. And of course, still on drugs.

The problem is, she's still in her early to mid 20's. Think of how many babies she can have if she keeps going.

Oh Gosh, That's awful endangering those defenseless innocent lives.

Edited October 2, 2006 by Savanphil

[GaryC 7]

I think, in some instances, it might not be a bad idea to offer compensation for sterilization for certain people.

My friend has a relative who has been pregnant 4 times. Every pregnancy, she was addicted to drugs. When she had her first baby, she was 16 or 17. For the child's safety, the girl's mom kept it and is raising it. The second baby was a late-term miscarriage. The third baby, she had but ended up accidentally killing it by sleeping on it one night when she was passed out on drugs. The fourth baby, she had, and the mom kept it, too. Now she's pregnant again. And of course, still on drugs.

The problem is, she's still in her early to mid 20's. Think of how many babies she can have if she keeps going.

Oh Gosh, That's awful endangering those defenseless innocent lives.

It's all too common. My ex has a daughter that is like that. She had 4 kids. The first was ok. The second and third one had fetal alcohol syndrome and the forth one was born 3 months early addicted to crack and alcohol. She has none of the kids now since the state took them. It's hard to say it but someone like her should have her child bearing rights taken away. There are 4 very screwed up kids out there because of her. She shouldn't have the right to screw up more kids lives.