(Closed) Government regulating family size..

posted 10 years ago in Babies
Post # 32
Member
239 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: May 2011

View original reply
@Ms Mini: I have to say, I would tend to agree with you. Maybe it’s not a popular opinion, but the way I see it… When I go to adopt a dog or a cat, I have to go through an interview process. When you go to adopt a child, there’s an interview process. Why is it different just because you’re able to have a kid without the middleman? Shouldn’t those kids be protected in the same way?

Maybe some of you call it fascism, but an educational program for new mothers would be so beneficial. I’ve seen too many parents who can’t (or don’t) take care of their kids, or just pop out another one for the baby bonus cheque, or because they aren’t educated enough to use birth control. Why wouldn’t you save those kids the pain and heartache, even psychological damage that would be caused during the years before child care services took them out of a bad situation? At least if you educate the parents before they take that kid home, they might think twice about what it will take to raise him or her, and either try to better their life situation or give the child up for adoption.

Post # 33
Member
156 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: June 2011

I don’t agree with regulating family size across the board; however, I do think that if an individual is on government assistance, then they should not be able to have more children (along the lines of mandatory birth control for those on government assistance).  I just think that while there are many people using assistance for the right reasons (lay-offs, hard times, etc.), too many people abuse the system and aren’t responsible for themselves.

Post # 34
Member
10283 posts
Sugar Beekeeper
  • Wedding: October 2011

View original reply
@stranger1: Absolutely agree. I was actually going to post the exact same thing but then saw you already did. 

I know a family (that is very close to me so yes, I DO know all of the details) that received public assistance after their first child was born. This family could hardly support themselves before the kid came along. They receive every form of aid that they are eligible for and imo, they take advantage of the system. They now have 3 children and their financial situation has not gotten any better yet they receive more and more government assistance. 

I don’t think this is fair to the tax payers. We work hard for our money yet portions of it ends up going to an irresponsible family who takes advantage of the system. If you’re receiving government assistance because of something unavoidable (layoff, illness, etc) then I have no problem with that since that’s what it’s there for when you continue to pop out kid after kid yet have no means of supporting them but still expect more handouts, there’s an issue. 

Thankfully I’ve never been in a situation where I (or growing up, my parents) had to ask for help but I can guarantee that if I/they did, there would have not been any more kids happening until our financial situation was better. To me thats common sense but there are a lot of people out there who see no problem with taking advantage. 

Post # 35
Member
1806 posts
Buzzing bee

While I realize there are people out there abusing the system, I’m all about less government in general. I don’t like ‘big brother’ stepping in and telling me what I can and can’t do all the time, ESPECIALLY when it comes to my own body.

Post # 36
Member
565 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2011

No, I absolutely do not believe in government regulation over how many kids a person can have!

I am the oldest of 7 and absolutely love all of my siblings. Then again my dad owns his own business ,makes 6 figures a year and my step mom is a nurse, they receive no help in any way , shape, or form. No child raises another, in fact either my father or stepmom is with them at home at all times. All of them (that are old enough)  have extracurricular activities and all of them get indivualized attention. I can’t imagine the gov. intervening and telling anyone that they can only have 2 or 3 children.

Now, I do agree, it’s very sad when people that can not take care of themselves continue to reproduce. But it is not always the case, I believe that  a poor parent is not always a bad parent! And I also agree, it REALLY sucks that us taxpayers have to pay for other parent’s laziness in the form of Medicaid, food stamps, etc. But would you rather these children starve, have no healthcare, or be homeless? It is a sad situation, but it’s the least we can do in hopes that these children will grow to be contributors to society in the future.

Post # 37
Member
565 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2011

double post, oops.

Post # 38
Member
7769 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: July 2010

I see both sides of the argument.  How would that rule be inforced?  Sometimes it seems that decent people would be regulated, and the people that all ready take advantage of the system would find a way to have children anyway. 

Post # 39
Member
7769 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: July 2010

I am curious as to what people would think about enforcing a regulation for what age you can have children.  I just wonder what others think about that.  To me that would seem less intrusive and still constructive.

Post # 40
Member
3756 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: September 2011

I hate the idea of government regulating family sizes… it absolutely ridiculous. However there are a lot of people I wish were just naturally infertile or something…

Post # 41
Member
10360 posts
Sugar Beekeeper
  • Wedding: September 2010

I think the world is overpopulated and that the situation is getting worse by the day. While I don’t think goverment regulation of family size is the most positive way to handle controlling that, it would be an effective means of making sure we as a species live within our means (but only if it were global policy, of course). I also think that people living in regions of the world that can’t sustain human life is a horrible idea and shouldn’t be done….but the political boundaries that exist make undoing that impossible.

I wish people would voluntarily stop having more than 2 children. The world would be a much better place for it.

Post # 42
Member
570 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: January 2009

After having one of my 5th graders (she was 10 at the time) have to stay out of class because she had to get an abortion, possibly because of the prostitution ring her mother had put her in (which I know about after being interviewd by the police), I wished we did something like mandatory IUDs for all girls starting at age 9, and they were only able to come out once parenting classes had been successfully accomplished.  Yes, I know that this is totally unreasonable and not safe and all of that, but it was just horrifying. 

It’s just……. After hearing about the abuse that happens at my school, after hearing a 1st grader (6 years old) talk about how he had to take care of his 1 year old brother because mom was passed out drunk, after finding 2nd graders with STDs, after having children who have to have special bathroom programs because of the degree to which they have been sexually assulted, after hearing stories from the mothers that they are having children because being pregnant is the only time that their husbands don’t beat them, I am kind of for some sort of regulation.  I have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER how this would be fairly and ethically implemented, but it just hurts my heart to see the needless suffering of these children.

Post # 43
Member
7052 posts
Busy Beekeeper
  • Wedding: July 2010

I am personally, not wanting ONE MORE OUNCE of government digging into my life, and do not want somebody telling me how many babies I can or cannot have.

But, there are some people sadly, in every culture and country, who simply either are not able to properly provide for their kids, yet keep having many children, and others who are unfit to ever become a parent (ie…Charlie Sheen, the crrazy, evil lady from MS who put her 3 yr old in the oven last week).

What I believe is needed are a few things: 1)   Sex ed folks.  Simple and plain.  For many who live in extremely empoverished situations, who are already parents, they might need some help in family planning and how to prevent unwanted pregnancies.  I know I didn’t have my little boy, until I could make sure we could simply afford a baby.  Nothing extravagant, just the basics.  You need a place to live, food, a bed, clothes, and love.  2) And for the drug addicted/insane individuals, maybe some shoring up of the already in existence government agencies to help IDENTIFY those parents who are simply unfit.    There have to be ways to identify better these individuals. My other bff used to work with DFACS and it broke her heart.  They didn’t follow up like she wanted them to do on certain cases, and some of the social workers there in her opinion, were simply not motivated to go above and beyond on their jobs.  My bff burned out and quit that job within 5 years b/c she felt she was not given enough support to do her job well so she could rescue kids in distress.

My bff was convinced if there was a “parent watch” like the neighborhood watch programs all over, that if others would simply call and know WHERE TO CALL if they saw a kid in crisis, that they could be helped better.  That was her idea and I love it.

I personally don’t need somebody to tell me how many kids I can have.  Or that I am too old.  Hell I am 41 years old, extremely stable, make a great living and so does my hubby, am an amazing mom and if we damn well want to have another baby, and I can physically, or if we wish to adopt, it is OUR RIGHT.  Nobody elses. 

I say shore up the already in place agencies, adopt maybe NEW ideas in helping existing problems,  and minimize government intrusion. I do not want to live in a “nanny state” where the government tells me what to do and when to do it, how much money or sucess I am allowed to have, and dictate every part of my life to me. 

 

Post # 44
Member
682 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: November 2011

this thread has turned into a social services thread. That was not the question. The idea of regulating family size is related to curbing population overgrowth. In this case alone-do you support government regulation of family size?

As to the social services issue-yes, of course people abuse it. But what is your solution for the remedy? Saying “it’s broken, but I don’t know how to fix it” isn’t a solution.

Post # 45
Member
620 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: September 2010

I think that everyone who receives any kind of free assistance for anything needs to submit to regular drug testing.  I have to be drug tested in order to get paid for going to work everyday.  They can be drug tested in order to get paid for doing nothing. 

Also, set a limit for the amount of time they can recieve government assistance.  During this time period, they need to show proof that they have been applying for jobs or something.  Anything to try to get by without needing assistance or needing less of it. 

Post # 46
Member
4766 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: November 1999

View original reply
@shedayz:

Definitely.  Despite all the negative things in China the 1 child policy was a sucess in curbin population growth.

The topic ‘Government regulating family size..’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors