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

[Diznygrl]

I get that it sucks when people who shouldn't be parents end up being parents, but NO. OMG, NO. I know it's already been said, but does the word "dystopia" mean anything to you? That is a road that we do NOT want to go down.

 

[LSUmiss]

My wife works in a level 2 autistic class. It makes me sad. Those parents can barely care for themselves and they have multiple special needs kids.

One mother has three severely autistic kids and is pregnant.

Another has been homeopathicly treating lice in their kid for 4 weeks.

None of the parents come to any of the school meetings dedicated to discussing their child’s individual education plans.

They should not be parents.

While I agree they should not be parents, what if we did make it required to get a license/permit & counseling to have a child? What would be the proposed consequences of someone who violated the rule & got pregnant? Who would monitor this & pay to enforce it? What would happen to the child?Would they go into an already inundated foster care system? Who would pay for that??

 

[mummabear]

the option is out there for parents that actually care to go

Sadly, in most cases, those are the parents we need to be worried about.

I liked what a PP suggested making attending those classes a requirement of recieveing certain benefits.

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

I don’t think so. It is a subject that could become polictal or have a religious discussion that might be relevant-but at face value is neither of those things.
In the Harry and Meghan thread there has been allowed a lot of discussion about the religious service and sermon, the preacher himself despite the ban on religious discussion.

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

I don’t think joking is the right word. I do understand the sentiment of the OP while agreeing that it would be a)impractical and b) horrifing for governments to have hay level of control.

BUT it is frustrating having seen friends go through hoops hoping to get a child through adoption while your brothers baby mama, a drug addict ex-stripper ex-inmate is having her 5th child to the 4th baby daddy before she is 35....

 

[Ben E N]

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.

But the idea of it is so absurd that it never even comes across as being possible. It's like saying "should we send all the ugly people to Mars?" Obviously not, but beyond that, it doesn't matter because people couldn't do it even if they wanted to.
If there were actual logistics involved in the question, such as killing the child of unregistered parents, then I could understand the uproar. This, however, just felt like fun venting that people took way too far.

 

[mousefan73]

Ideally yes. Realistically, politically, religiously, ethnically a no.

 

[buzzrelly]

In theory, yes. As a NICU nurse, I've see a LOT of crappy parents and sent babies home to them just knowing how hard their life will be. The one good part about them having a baby in the NICU for any length of time, is that we have mandatory education pieces that the parents need to do before discharge, and we can spend more time with them trying to teach them to be better parents, but in the end, their baby will go home with them and they can do as they please.

 

[PollyannaMom]

...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"?...

Among people I know (really small sample, I realize!) I can sort of see a difference, but it's mostly that the ones who had to work harder are a little more indulgent of their kids. That can work toward "success" because they're providing a lot of attention and opportunities, or against it if they go so far as to "spoil" their kids. (And of course, I don't mean this is an absolute, or that other people I know don't pay attention to their kids.)

 

[mom2rtk]

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)

While undergoing fertility treatment I read a book called "The Long Awaited Stork" that explored the impact of the fertility treatment experience on parenting itself. It's been a long time (25 plus years) so I don't recall the details, but it's definitely an interesting topic.

One of my best friends was one I made while we were both going through infertility. So we both shared the experience. Mine was resolved medically and hers through adoption. Neither of us is a particularly indulgent parent, but we were both definitely very purposeful parents, in different ways.

I'd say people are far more impacted by their own experiences growing up and by the kids they got than by the infertility experience. But it's still there, and does still play a big role. Some will be over protective, some will be more purposeful. I don't feel like the impact was over for me at all when the stick turned blue, or even when the first baby arrived. It was definitely present in the parenting process. It still is.

 

[kamik86]

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)

Honestly I don't think the result would be much different for those that needed to go through treatments vs those that had settled in a bit had half way decent income and chose to become parents.

That is because fertility treatments to me mean two things are definitely true
1) the couple definitely wanted to have a baby. You don't accidently get pregnant if you need fertility treatments
2) Fertility treatments are expensive and inconvenient. So the couple must have at least some disposable income and have jobs that they are able to take time off from occasionally (since you have to go to the office within x time in your cycle when it happens so pretty last minute notice not something you could request off in advance) without fear of losing their job or not having enough money from taking a day off.


As for the OP post. The thing is there is no real way to inforce this. I mean unless you are somehow finding a way to mandate hormonal treatments on the full population which is the only way you could stop people from having babies (heck how many people have we known that had kids on birth control I know several so even that isn't fully going to work) how could you even do this?

Mandating bc pills won't work. You want a kid anyway just don't take them. Claim they didn't work. What happens then?

Mandating shots? or implants? These are both pretty invasive to mange to mandate... I mean we can't even mandate vaccinations and we want to find a way to mandate birth control?

 

[mom2rtk]

Honestly I don't think the result would be much different for those that needed to go through treatments vs those that had settled in a bit had half way decent income and chose to become parents.

That is because fertility treatments to me mean two things are definitely true
1) the couple definitely wanted to have a baby. You don't accidently get pregnant if you need fertility treatments
2) Fertility treatments are expensive and inconvenient. So the couple must have at least some disposable income and have jobs that they are able to take time off from occasionally (since you have to go to the office within x time in your cycle when it happens so pretty last minute notice not something you could request off in advance) without fear of losing their job or not having enough money from taking a day off.


As for the OP post. The thing is there is no real way to inforce this. I mean unless you are somehow finding a way to mandate hormonal treatments on the full population which is the only way you could stop people from having babies (heck how many people have we known that had kids on birth control I know several so even that isn't fully going to work) how could you even do this?

Mandating bc pills won't work. You want a kid anyway just don't take them. Claim they didn't work. What happens then?

Mandating shots? or implants? These are both pretty invasive to mange to mandate... I mean we can't even mandate vaccinations and we want to find a way to mandate birth control?

Maybe the Chinese government could give us some advice?

 

[MiniMinnie]

There are definitely some people who shouldn't be parents. That being said I don't see how this would work at all. How would you stop two people from having sex? Would the Government start forcing women who get pregnant who don't have a permit to get abortions? This would not fly at all.

 

[marcyleecorgan]

... you've seen the movie Idiocracy right?

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

But the idea of it is so absurd that it never even comes across as being possible. It's like saying "should we send all the ugly people to Mars?" Obviously not, but beyond that, it doesn't matter because people couldn't do it even if they wanted to.
If there were actual logistics involved in the question, such as killing the child of unregistered parents, then I could understand the uproar. This, however, just felt like fun venting that people took way too far.

Absurd? yes. Possible? yes. While we aren't China that was one of my first thoughts that came to mind when talking about controlling who has children and who doesn't. It's also as I mentioned before straight out of a dystopian novel. People do incredibly horrible things to other people and the US has unfortunately been a part of some terrible things done to their own people (including controlling the type of people who are able to procreate including eugenics far before it was used by the Nazis) so yeah I wouldn't say it's appropriate to joke about it.

But glad you think it's fun. I don't mind discussing ways we can help out people by programs aimed to inform parents, by people reaching out in their community to help those in need. I do think it's crass to say it's fun to talk about it. YMMV

 

[FlightlessDuck]

If this was implemented, I'm sure it would never be used for evil, ever.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I don’t think joking is the right word. I do understand the sentiment of the OP while agreeing that it would be a)impractical and b) horrifing for governments to have hay level of control.

BUT it is frustrating having seen friends go through hoops hoping to get a child through adoption while your brothers baby mama, a drug addict ex-stripper ex-inmate is having her 5th child to the 4th baby daddy before she is 35....

A PP is the person who said they thought the OP was joking so if you have an issue with the word joking take it up with them.

 

[Cubbiecakes]

... you've seen the movie Idiocracy right?

You mean, "you've woken up this morning in America, right?" right?

 

[holden]

Though the system doesn't always work, some children are removed from homes where the parents are not parenting. I am glad that some kids get a second chance.

 

[Turn the Page]

... you've seen the movie Idiocracy right?

I haven't seen the entire movie but the clip of the first few minutes is hilarious....and scary because it's so true. I thought strongly about posting it on this thread.

 

[Owlpost23]

People,it's not going to happen.It's just a topic of discussion.

 

[manning]

NO! I don't want to see "1984"