Posts
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should...
This could be applied to many subjects; wearing t-shirts as dresses, injecting heroin, eating fast food everyday, having sex with everyone that gives you the slightest bit of attention... etc, etc. However, this week I am thinking about this in regards to parenting. Just because you can have kids doesn't mean you should. People seriously should need a license to have children. After seeing what I've seen in this field, I have stopped believing that having children should be a natural right. It should be a privilege for those who are willing to be effective and nurturing parents. There is a controversial new nonprofit concept that pays female drug addicts to get sterilized. Although this is a sad reality, it may be better for the world. It should be required for pregnant women and their partners to take a child development and parenting class at the very least. After all you need a license to have a dog, drive a car, and to possess a gun. If you are going to abuse your kids or neglect them... DON"T HAVE THEM! If you aren't sure whether you can take care of them... THEN DON"T!!! Don't get me wrong... I am fully aware that parenting is the hardest job in the world, but lets get it together people... I'm sick of cleaning up your mess.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
From a fellow child welfare social worker in Kansas, I could not have said it better myself. I have not yet heard of "paying drug addicted mothers to be sterilized" here in the Midwest, and suspect it may be some time before we do, but I know it is something we all talk about behind closed doors. Especially after we've gone out to the NICU and seen a baby having withdrawals from crack or watched an FAS child struggle through school. Very well said, Jessie.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. Nicely put.
ReplyDeleteAye! Aye!
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree with you more. Even before I graduated with this degree, I've held this view already. It's the worst mistake anyone could possibly make, really. It's worse than killing a person.
This is an interesting and controversial subject, but I'm going to play 'devil's advocate' for a moment. I agree that people should be more conscientious when they reproduce but do not feel comfortable saying that the decision should be made for someone depending upon weather or not they meet the rest of our standards. We choose as a society to 'rescue' children from what we determine to be substandard conditions. We also choose to provide assistance to people with children to allow them to provide for adequate food and shelter. We choose this because to most of us, the benefit of providing for these children outweighs the guilt of not doing so, and in saying that some should lose the right to reproduce at all you are eliminating a choice from them because you don't want to have to make your choice anymore. If I could sincerely look into the eyes of an abused or neglected child and tell them it would be a better world if their parent had not been allowed to have them at all, then I might feel comfortable with this notion. I've yet to see a case where I could do that, however.
ReplyDelete