A question on limiting number of available children?

Question

In a foster care meeting I attended tonight, a man asked that if anyone, male or female, had 2 pregnancies that ended up either never supporting nor seeing the child, or aborting it, or giving the child up for adoption, that the person shows lack of caring, and that they should be steralized. It's not my point of view, but I told him I'd ask here and see what the general public thought. Do you think after 2 unwanted pregnancies that resulted in these items that a person ought to be steralized?

Answer 1

Depends if people have children and grow up to be criminals or break the law should we get them fixed to?

Their is a fine line to reasonable actions and complete psychopathy....

That suggestion is not reasonable.... so then it must be insane...

Fixing people against their will like an animal??

Man if I was disgusted before with people... that question takes the cake..

Answer 2

what gives someone the right to tell any body what the can do to they body (right or wrong )

Answer 3

no i do not. everyone has their own beliefs and you should not put your beliefs on others weather it is wrong or right. ask this man if he is a christian. then tell him if he is that its not his place to judge and god states that and he will be damned to h**l when he stands in front of god and he is judged.

Answer 4

Sly beat me to it! Eugenics is a DISGUSTING concept and has resulted in a MESS everywhere it has been attempted.

The "father" (excuse the pun) of this "concept " was Francis Galton - ironiclally a distant relative of Charles Darwin. Mr. Galton believed that people should be bred in the same manner as livestock and pets in order to produce the most "desirable product". ****shivers****

This is the kind of thinking that is at the core of the Ku Klux Klan and the n**i Party, and has targeted minorities, religions, the disabled and the poor in SEVERAL countries over the years. It is the basis of "ethnic cleansing" like what is happening in Darfur.

It is FOUL, INHUMAN and INSULTING to MOTHER NATURE!

IMO, it is the WORST possible case of "God Complex" and should be considered a mental illness.

Eugenics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/...

http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/e...

http://www.rotten.com/library/medicine/e...

http://www.eugenics-watch.com/

Ethinic Cleansing & Genocide:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_clea...

http://www.munfw.org/archive/50th/4th1.h...

Answer 5

a sizable number of unintended pregnancies were due to failed contraception. or unavailability of contraception.

so should these people be sterilized?  simple solutions to complex issues always trouble me.  just like the "gas tax holiday."

my solution:  improve s*x education, make emergency contraception available without all the ideological mumble-jumble, cover contraception on insurance plans (especially those that cover erectile dysfunction drugs), and maybe unwanted pregnancies will reduce.  it worked in europe.

thanks for sharing... hope we gave you some ammunition to take back to that clown.

Answer 6

I think this religious nut should be put out of his misery or sterilized himself. I don't want people that think like him around myself never mind children.  

I'm assuming he's being disqualified to foster. You should report him so that no child gets caught up in his demented life.

Answer 7

The bio mom of the little one we adopted has had 9 children by the time she was 27 and due to some of the serious personal issues she has she has lost all of the children to adoption.  I strongly suspect that she will be pregnant again very soon if she is not already.  If ever there was a candidate for sterilization.....

But do I think it should be done under these or even the circumstances you speak of, absolutely not.  In the civilized world that we live in it is generally accepted that people have the right to live their lives as they see fit, within the scope of our laws and the laws of common decency.  That also means that people also have the right to make poor and/or irresponsible choices.  As a society we need to have mechanisms in place to support these people and those that they may bring into the world.  Thats the price that we pay, as a society.

If we start with forced sterilization then where does it stop?  

-  Will we have mandatory euthanasia once certain illnesses are diagnosed so that we, as a society, save money on health care?  

-  Will we have to enter our names into a pool for limited number of yearly baby licenses, the same way hunters enter a lottery for a deer tag, so that we keep population increases to a manageable level?  

-  Will we have a mandatory age limit so that we don't have too many old people sucking money from an already strained social security system?  

No, none of those are acceptable.  Fact of the matter is, if we want our people to have their rights and freedoms then we will have to live the the results from bad choices.

P.S.  I just had to come back to this answer when it dawned on me that, at least up here in Canada, the Govt and various social service agencies are still paying out claims for forced sterilization of the mentally handicapped from the 50's and earlier.  Part of the arguments used in the court cases for compensation was that the Govts behavior towards these people was no different then some of the forced sterilizations performed in n**i Germany.  It was wrong in war, it was wrong after the war and it would still be wrong now.  (and yes, I know it wasn't your idea.  It was just a question tossed out for consideration and comment)

Answer 8

Tell him that it has been tried.  Hitler tried it in Germany with the Jews, the Gypsy and other "undesirables".  It wasn't until he went over the top with it that his eugenics program drew notice.  Until then, it was quite a popular idea with many people and I am sure that your "friend" would be among them if he were alive then. Actually, Eugenics is a notion that began in the United States, and until the 1970's was still in effect in many states.  I know several women who were forcibly sterilized in North Carolina due to a second unwed pregnancy.  There may still be laws on the books allowing it, even tho it is no longer social policy, although with guys like this, it may become popular again.  

Women who became pregnant outside of wedlock were considered "social and moral deviants" no matter how they became pregnant, and they were the ones who carried the baby and the burden.  The fathers got a slap on the back and a "boys will be boys!"  

It appears that there is a push to return to the bad old day, and this guy is clearly one of the flag-bearers.  He could volunteer to be among the first, and I think if it were me, I would strongly suggest that.  Nature or nurture, no one will be safe if his genes are passed along!!!

Sandy Young

Senior Mother 1967

Answer 9

Well first of all as awsome as it would be to steralize a FEW CERTIAN PEOPLE that absolutely outa be , You can't do it against anyones free will.

So it's NEVER ganna be an option. ever.

buuut , It really depends on the person.

I mean , If they're like a prostitute and get abortions over and over , h**l yeah.

but other then that i don't think so ...

Answer 10

I know this may sound crazy but To ME aborting and have a child taken by CPS , and giving a child up are completly different.  If a person is using protection of anykind and it fails I think they have the right to choose an abortion or to give the child up. They were not trying to get pregnant ( I know they had s*x but asking people not to have s*x unless they want kids is crazy)  Now if someone has a child taken from CPS on say more than three occasions (three different children) and they keep having kids yes yes i believe that they should not be allowed to have more kids.    My foster son's first mom has 11 kids none in her custody and has  long standing history with CPS.  7 of kids have been adopted and so will my foster son more than likley to us.  He will NEVER  know his siblings  because they are  God knows where. That is not fair to him in anyway shape or form.

This is not just true of women.  I think men that father several kids and don't support them need a vasectomy.    I know of one case where a guy had 13 kids by 12 women and paid no support to any of them.  He should of been and needs to be stopped