Should you have to get training and a permit to have a child?

[EveDallas]

I have read too many stories about kids being abused by their parents either physically or mentally. Too many kids are born into extreme poverty. Too many kids are born to parents who have serious medical and mental conditions that keep them from fully caring for themselves, let alone their child(ren).

Have we hit a point where we should require that prospective parent(s) receive counseling and training for what to expect before they have a child? Should a prospective parent receive financial counseling to understand the true cost of having a child?

Not everyone can adopt, there is criteria that must be met. Should the same criteria and more be applied to those who which to produce a child?

https://adoptionnetwork.com/requirements-to-adopt-a-child

• For domestic and international adoptions, the age of the prospective parents must be legal age, which is 21 years or older. There is also no age cutoff, meaning you can adopt as long as you are 21 or over. Typically for private and independent adoptions, the Birth Mother or parents select the adoptive home, which means their may be an age cut off if the mother so desires. Usually, 40 is the cutoff age, but it is subjective depending upon the preference of the Birth Parents. For international adoptions, age cutoffs depend upon the agency and country you are adopting from. In some counties, older parents are offered older children rather than infants and toddlers.
• Medical Health: Stable medical condition is necessary for prospective Adoptive Parents because it can determine whether or not adoption disruption is likely. If one or both of the parents have a history of a chronic illness or are currently experiencing a serious illness, a letter from their primary physician is needed stating that their physical stability, ability to parent, and expectation to live to a child’s majority (16 years old). Other issues, such as a history of substance abuse, may result in need for rehabilitation, and all other members of the household must prove that they are also physically stable.
• Emotional Health: Stable emotional health is incredibly important for prospective Adoptive Parents. If one or both parents have a current psychiatric illness, or if there is a history of such an illness, a professional statement vouching for their emotional stability is required. A doctor’s statement indicating stability and ability to parent is also needed if there is, or was, medication use. All additional household members must also be emotionally stable in order for the home to be considered safe for the adoptive child.
• Child Abuse History: Any household members over the age of 18 must undergo a child abuse clearance process for every U.S. state. If anything is found, it most likely will prevent adoption all together. For international adoption, the process is the same, but varies with each agency.
• Criminal History: A requirement of the adoption home study, both state and FBI clearances will be conducted for criminal history. If an arrest history is found, you will need to provide personal statements of the incident as well as dispositions. Rehabilitation will then be evaluated if needed. In some cases, certain criminal charges may prevent adoption all together.
• Marital History: Requirements vary for marriage history by adoption Agency and U.S. state, so it is best to check the specific requirements where you live. In some states, samesex partners, domestic partners, and singles may also be able to adopt.
• Financial Security: Though an income requirement is not usually specified, you will have to undergo an assessment to prove that you have the resources necessary to raise a child. The assessment will look over your income and assets, as well as proof of medical insurance.
• Home Environment: A home study will determine whether or not the home is a safe, secure place for a child to live. Requirements may vary depending upon each state’s own safety requirements and some countries may request proof of ownership of the home.
• Adoption and Parenting Education: Education: Some agencies will ask prospective parents to complete Adoptive Parent Education. This includes going over everything from the lifelong implications of adoption on the child and family, bonding and attachment, sharing adoption with the child and others, open or closed adoption, medical issues, academic issues, and emotional and developmental issues.

How on earth would you enforce any of this without straying into the territory of policing other peoples bodies?

 

[Colleen27]

There's literally no way to do this that wouldn't open up a massive mess of civil rights issues. At the bare minimum, any licensing process would necessarily discriminate based on income, age, disability and religion (at the fringes, like those who refuse modern medicine). And that's assuming those making the rules are always fact-based and well-meaning, things that I'm not sure could be taken for granted with that level of power.

As someone upthread said, there are a number of big societal issues that impact the well-being of children nationwide. Maybe we need to solve those rather than trying to decide who has and hasn't navigated around those issues well enough to have "earned" the ability to have children.

 

[Gamora]

No, that would be insane, like many others have pointed out. I believe in helping each other, not policing each other more.

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

I’m envisioning government issued chastity belts.

 

[Colleen27]

No. To make this work, you'd pretty much have to force medical birth control on girls as soon as they reached the age of puberty, then only remove it after all the criteria were met. I'm not OK with the government making that kind of personal decision about my health.

And the impacts would fall squarely on girls/women because there is no "forcing" birth control on boys/men. So you'd have the government dictating that all women of childbearing who lack a "parent permit" age take medications that cause side effects that range from the annoying to the serious, probably at their own expense, and regardless of their religious views on those medications.

I came up with this after hearing about 5 year olds who steal food every day from the classroom. Why? Because they remember being hungry, hungrier then I have ever been in my life, until they were taken from their parents and put in foster care.

The abuse these children have endured is astonishing.

Wouldn't it be better to work to ensure no family has to go without food (or live on the streets, or do without childcare, or try to battle addiction without help) than to try to somehow prevent those children from being born in the first place?

 

[Pooh2]

A government that determines who is allowed to procreate and who is not is absolutely horrifying.

 

[jevs]

No, this is a terrible idea. Do something productive for these families you’re so concerned about.

That this idea has been posted on a Disney forum where posters spend a lot of money planning their regular Disney vacations blows my mind.

 

[Allison]

Absolutely not.

 

[Ben E N]

That this idea has been posted on a Disney forum where posters spend a lot of money planning their regular Disney vacations blows my mind.

To be faie, it was just a general question, and was posted on the 'anything goes' community board. Considering the amount of responses in just one day, it seems like it was appropriately put there.

 

[Shanna-like-Banana]

As a parent, I can partially understand the sentiment of this topic. This discussion has come around our family several times.

I don't truly think the OP is specifically saying a way to institute such perimeters, as this is just a hypothetical question.

Bbbuuuutt, I feel that it would serve some people gosh well to have some type of small responsibility test-trail before bringing a child into this world.

For example : a puppy, get a puppy, if you can take care of a puppy, train it, teach it X number of things, take it to the vet, keep your appointments, feed it, nurture it, potty train it, don't beat it, abuse it, starve it, leave it out in a ditch, etc, then maybe you are on the path of understanding what type of responsibility goes into taking care of something other than yourself. Again, this is just a hypothetical example, and no taking care of a person is NOT even close to the same level as a pet.

 

[smokeyblue]

To be faie, it was just a general question, and was posted on the 'anything goes' community board. Considering the amount of responses in just one day, it seems like it was appropriately put there.

The question is pretty subversive given the ban on discussion of politics and religion on this message board.

 

[low-key]

All you need is someone who wouldn't mind seeing you nakie

 

[Ben E N]

The question is pretty subversive given the ban on discussion of politics and religion on this message board.

I took it as more of a joke. The logistics of enforcing something like that is next to impossible to manage, and there is no way of it ever happening, obviously.

 

[jevs]

I took it as more of a joke. The logistics of enforcing something like that is next to impossible to manage, and there is no way of it ever happening, obviously.

Stick around, you’ll soon find that the CB is full of perfect parents (even those without children) And some of them will take the OP question/idea very seriously.

 

[Ben E N]

Stick around, you’ll soon find that the CB is full of perfect parents (even those without children) And some of them will take the OP question/idea very seriously.

Well, sorry if people are taking this so seriously, but I got a good laugh out of the whole idea, and especially people's responses. It all reminded me of this video:

 

[Skellingtonj]

No.

 

[kuhltiffany]

I think I get where the OP is coming from...

When pulling together ideas for my master's thesis, one I had was this: I wonder if people who have had to work hard to be parents (fertility treatments, adoption, etc.), are more "successful"? Hard topic to measure of course, but the idea that some parents make a definite conscious choice with lots of time and effort involved, vrs the got drunk in the hottub one night/felt pressured into it because it's what you're supposed to do after you get married, etc. types. One group chose a path after obvious thought, one group maybe not.

(Not to say that lots of people don't have kids on purpose, just curious as to what might be different in parenting outcomes)

 

[MrsJackSparrow4Life]

Even if that was something I would want (and it IS NOT) there is no way to enforce this. Even if the government were to force birth control on all of childbearing age there is still the possibility of an unplanned pregnancy. Condoms fail, birth control pills have to be taken just right or they don't work, even an IUD isn't full proof as my coworker had an IUD and still ended up pregnant. What would happen to the babies that came from one of these oops pregnancies.

We would be better off putting together more support programs to help people become better parents. Sex education, financial planning, parenting courses is what we need, not government control of our bodies.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I took it as more of a joke. The logistics of enforcing something like that is next to impossible to manage, and there is no way of it ever happening, obviously.

I'd say the subject matter isn't really made for joking (controlling individuals' reproductive and parental rights at a government level).

If the point simply was they hate to see children in need there are far more ways of conveying that even asking for advice on how to help their community would be far better than joking (if they were) on something like that.

 

[aprilgail]

No- but some of these people could sure use some serious training on raising children- when I was in the hospital having my daughter the kid across the hall and the baby daddy could not even change the babys diaper! And whomever is the parent of "lil tay" should be the first in line for parenting class!