Do you think the state has a right to infringe upon parental rights, and if yes, to what degree?

Question

I couldn't believe this story when I heard it- some judge removed a 9 year old child from the home-cause her parents named her something outlandish like lula does the hula in hawaii.

he assumed anyone who would name their child this was unstable. I have gone to school with kids with crazy names like Stone,Rock,Saturday,California, and thought this was absolutely ridiculous!

I am all for child safety, but this seems downright fascist to me. what are your thoughts?

Answer 1

.  Yes the state has a right to infringe.  I think it should not be very extensive.

Answer 2

I think the state should be able to intervene in certain cases, however, it is not always great that the state intervenes. there is currently a group of parents,former social workers suing dhs,cause the state has taken kids away and put the children in unsafe conditions. one girl actually died of starvation,and had maggots in her wounds.

also, I know of a child whose head was scarred at by that internal monitor that attaches to babies head,during the birthing process. and years later the kid shows up in an emergency room, for a broken arm. kid is taken away -parents accused of making cigarette burns on his scalp. it took a year for that mom to get documented proof from the hospital- that they caused the scarring. meanwhile mom lost her kid to the system.

I think it should be difficult for the state to just remove kids from the home and more efforts should be made to have children kept in the family.

Answer 3

Well they didn't name the baby "Urethra Latrine," so they weren't as mean as they might have been.

Answer 4

Without any other evidence, merely giving a child a weird name should not be a reason to remove a child from its parents.

EDIT - the case in New Zealand - the child was not removed.  The child came to the attention of the court in a custody battle and wanted her name changed.  She was so embarrassed that she never told her friends what it was and went by "K".  She was temporarily made a ward of the court so that the judge would have the power to change her name.

I still think he went too far.  Children have been embarassed by stupid parents for centuries.

Answer 5

Of course the state has the right to infringe on parental rights. Children, as minors, have to rely on their parents for caretaking, etc. If the parents fail them, like by regularly beating the c**p out of them and neglecting them, the state should and must step in to advocate for the child. Otherwise, the child would have no one to speak for him/her.

What you're asking, though, is to what extent the state can "infringe," and you base this question on a couple of false beliefs. First, the "state" did NOT remove the child - like another poster said, the state simply changed the child's name. Second, the child had ASKED the court to change her name - the state did not step in on its own.

Check your facts before you start bashing the government. Sometimes, it's a GREAT thing that the state takes a child away from his/her parents.

Answer 6

Yes, the state has and should always have the right to overrule the parents when the child's physical, mental and emotional well being is threatened by the parents.  

Answer 7

yes that is stupid. but you know what there are alot of things people go to court for and they sometimes get through which is weird. I think that the state should stop it but hey its money and someone is stuid and therefore they can do it soemtimes i am not sure why this was permiteed.

Answer 8

the libs can raise children better than you if they let them live.

Answer 9

He did not remove the child.  He allowed the child to change her name.