1y ago

When Foster Parents Don’t Want to Give Back the Baby

www.propublica.org When Foster Parents Don’t Want to Give Back the Baby

In many states, adoption lawyers are pushing a new legal strategy that forces biological parents to compete for custody of their children.

Politics @beehaw.org

tintory @lemm.ee

1y ago

When Foster Parents Don’t Want to Give Back the Baby

www.propublica.org /article/foster-care-intervention-adoption-colorado

32 15

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

54 comments

I don’t see it that way at all. I am 100% ok with children being sent to a foster home at birth if drugs are found in their system. Or removing kids from homes for any sort of reason that keeps the parents from being able to care for their kids. I’m not against the family court system or removing children from the home. The system is broken but it’s not useless. And parents usually have recourse to be reunited with their children if later found to be fit parents.
What I’m not OK with is the government saying who is and who isn’t allowed to reproduce and backing it up with forced sterilization or abortion because I don’t trust the government to use that power equally or responsibly. I’m also not ok with children being removed with no path to reunification with the parents. That kind of power along with an unscrupulous government is what leads to genocide.
- forced sterilization or abortion
  It would be huge fines / jail for both DNA donors and the child would be removed from the home. Contraceptives would be free to the public. The fourteenth amendment protects against the threat of force sterilization or abortion. I get you think it would be missed, but in reality it would make coupling more difficult with women choosing quality mates with higher education and well paying careers. It would change the culture for the better. The worst part about it is that you would be under a contract to raise the child. That doesn't mean marriage though, just that two DNA donors must agree to support that child until adulthood.
  
  It’s clear you’ve put a lot of thought into this system, I appreciate that. How do we reconcile the fact that contraceptives aren’t 100% effective and an individual can become pregnant through no fault of their despite using protection. I don’t think you can make consensual sex between two people individuals subject to fines. Nor do I think it’s fair to take the child from the parent in this kind of scenario either.
  
  The simple answer is there will always be a waiver process.
  Let me walk you through the proposed process.
  A couple apply for a parental license. The license allows for two children by both DNA donors.
  A background check for criminal activity and a drug and blood test is done to check for contamination and health. The blood test is saved to confirm upon birth that the submitted DNA matches the license.
  Upon approval the couple are allocated a license for two children. A financial statement on the license requires support until adulthood by both DNA donors.
  If a accidental pregnancy occurs you would have until the delivery date to secure a license or waiver.
  If a license is not granted there would be a legal appeal process to grant the license and to ensure the denial is Consitutional.
  If a child is born without a license, that child will be turned over to foster care until a license is granted. A review would be held if the DNA donors acted wrecklessly and if the intent would require a fine or jail time (rape for example).
  
  Lol what in the Malthus is this.
  
  The future of parenthood.
  
  What about adoptive parents? What about single parents? egg and sperm donors? Do people who lose their jobs lose their families? As if employers need more power over workers. What about people who want more than 2 children?
  By the way you know the population replacement rate in developed nations is 2.1 children per woman right? How can you plan POSSIBLY maintain a population? Do we just have less and less people until we're extinct?
  This is quite possibly the dumbest idea I've ever run into. You put so much effort and yet so little thought into this hare brained idea I'm frankly flabbergasted.
  If you're like a kid or something then good thought experiment. Maybe take some time to learn a bit more about the world around you when you come up with ideas.
  Ask yourself why your idea ISN'T already implemented?
  Is it only possible due to a modern development?
  Is there some fundamental aspect of human nature that's preventing your idea from having already been implemented?
  Who makes the policy decisions?
  Is there a way to implement your idea without putting too much power in the hands of too few?
  Is your implementation overly sensitive to corruption?
  How will you deal with people who disagree?
  How will you deal with people who break the rules?
  Is the punishment/control more damaging to society than the problem you're trying to fix?
  How will you deal with people who don't fit into your framework of who constitutes a suitable family?
  If you gave the general idea to someone else for implementation can you trust that they will implement it fairly and according to your vision or do you personally have to be in charge for this to work in a fair manner?
  Do you think your idea of fair is more valid than someone else's?
  These types of questions will help you flesh out good ideas and avoid the common pitfalls to bad ones.
  
  It isn't why, it is when.

54 comments