Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Should Parenting be Licensed? A Very Tricky Question.

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
The government or any other organization should never decide if someone should be a parent or not.

While anything happening to a child is horrendous and terrific, you can't license all atrocities.

But what should be required is upon parenthood..classes, training, cpr, and all around child 101 and courses in responsibility and empathy.

Heck,my hospital didn't even teach us how to swaddle.

We had to learn everything on our own. And with people waiting longer and longer to have children, a lot of information is lost. After a few years it is hard to remember what it is like to have a baby.

Babies are the easy part, when I child gets mobile and vocal is when the real fun begins.

Here is a little friendly hint from me for the population:
everyone opens doors or assists a pregnant woman.

But the woman struggling with a child, especially more then one, or is having issues with carrier, is the one that needs doors opened and assistance.

I have had people do many sweet things for me. But one of the more memorable was when I was in a grocery store line and I had a sick fussy baby in my arms. I was trying to soothe and unload my cart. The woman behind me just started unloading my cart onto the belt without a word. I gave her the defeated oh so appreciative look. And she said: I am a mother too. i will always remember that act of kindness.




posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sundancer

For centuries people have raised children without the need for a licence, or an overweight social worker to tell them how to do it.

Time has PROVEN that child bearing and rearing comes natural for most people and animals. Most can do it without an overwhelming desire to beat or eat their offspring.



Animals pick mates for their breeding strength to ensure the success of future generations.

Some animals will not reproduce if food sources are scare that year.

Some animals have the ability to postpone births for more opportune times.

I doubt "nature" was ever about just pumping out babies because you can.

So much for human intelligence.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


So are you suggesting that because there are some children dying of abuse in the US that the rest of us 304,059,724 should have to answer to the government?

I say NO WAY!



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


LOL great points! I have to shake my head and wonder more often than not what happened that made humans so stupid.

Woo hoo for the animals!



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   
...if you want something to become FUBAR, let the government have control over it cuz they're professionals...



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
What kind of Crazy imbecile do you have to be to say the govt should have input on reproduction?

I suppose that the Rockerfellas and Obamas and Clintons and Blair's and Gore's etc, etc of the world have more insight on how should reproduce and can predict the outcome better than nature it's self right?

because you know... we failed to go from Monkeys to Mankind without these freaks involved right?

LOL everyone on ats is an expert in everything, you all know that trailer trash mom might not give birth to the next Einstein that get's us off this rock without some class or without dad around right?

Because the greatest minds that have Freed Humanity have had great fricken childhoods.... especially back in times when the life expectancy was 24 and you died at first need of a root canal...

Because a higher percentage on paper of criminals come from dysfunctional homes and poverty we should FORGET the MILLIONS of children who draw inspiration from such circumstance and go on to super excel

perhaps maybe we should read the percentages of children who go on to higher than average functionality from such circumstances...

but oh wait.... they only fund studies of children who end up in prison... they don't actually fund studies of super achievers, who overcome the odds...

Perhaps maybe some of you need to not just look at research but Who funds the research and what their actual agenda is is?

It would be nice I suppose

To allow a handful of us to have unlimited beach front property with endless miles of nature preserves surrounding them with all the benefits of modern technology yet only 1/5 of the people... and all those who BUILT that infra structure for them reduced by Eugenics to a handful of servants...

But I'd personally rather bring 10 kids to "their" beach and leave a giant poop right on their doorstep ring the door bell set it on fire and run...

But that's just me...

Because i'll be damned to hell if I watch an entire infrastructure built by generations of hard working people built to create a world of limitless possibilities just for a handful of us who "think" they are better, to kill everyone else off and keep it to themselves...

Parenting be licensed?

Over my dead body....

Like I want a world where these in breeds reproduce their one child at 51 with even MORE genetic disorders and insanity traits than the last 1,000 years of inbreeding between their families gave us in the first place lol



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sundancer
reply to post by Annee
 


LOL great points! I have to shake my head and wonder more often than not what happened that made humans so stupid.

Woo hoo for the animals!


I guess my ego isn't so big - that I think popping out more humans - with no intelligent plan is a good idea.

IMO - "its a natural thing" - - is archaic and irresponsible considering the condition of our planet.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


When you said locking kids in closets, it made me think of a particular memory I remember when I was about 6 years old. My mom was going out one night with a friend of hers. She brought me and my sister over her friends house. Me and my sister had to stay at the house alone, and my mothers friend actually put her twin girls in the closet. The twins were only about 6 months old.

It was ridiculous.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jess_Undefined Me and my sister had to stay at the house alone, and my mothers friend actually put her twin girls in the closet. The twins were only about 6 months old. It was ridiculous.


I must come from a different Social Class because every closet I have had are bigger and nicer than most people's apartments! Wall to wall carpeting, climate control, best lighting in the house, decorative French Doors, et cetera. As I child I lived in my closet. It was my Sanctuary within my Sanctuary, my Holiest of Holies. As an adult, how nice the walk-in closets happen to be is the deciding factor in a home purchase. My last home the closet measured 10'x50'. The secret door into the basement, and the hidden peep-holes into the living room were the cherry on top for me.


Even now, if I were to banish my 12 year old to a closet she'd have a blast role-playing Harry Potter. It wouldn't be a punishment for her but an opportunity to have fun.

So, I guess this goes to show that the shoe doesn't always fit the foot. What could be child abuse in some instances, could be not only acceptable, but parental behavior to be encouraged in other instances.

Which is precisely why Government shouldn't be the deciding factor of who can and who cannot procreate.

[edit on 9-8-2009 by fraterormus]



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by fraterormus
My last home the closet measured 10'x50'. The secret door into the basement, and the hidden peep-holes into the living room were the cherry on top for me.




Personally - I fail to understand what the size of the closet has to do with the intent of the parent.

I played in the attic - - it was my sanctuary - - but I was never locked in.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by kiwifoot
 




In the UK, and probably in the US and most countries, you need a license to drive a car, to own a dog, possess a gun, to fish etc, etc.

If we need a license, training and background checks for these, should we not need a license for the most important and difficult task a human can undertake - that of having a child?


We shouldnt need a license to "drive a car, to own a dog, possess a gun, to fish ". This is just some BS way so they can make some revenue by taxing us even more and keep their nose in our business.

They need to stay the heck out of our lives and worry about what they are doing because God knows the government has enough problems without worrying about whether I got a fishing license or something.

As far as parenting goes, we need to stay the heck out of each others business. If your neighbor is a bad parent its none of your business. Worry about your own kids and quit crying to daddy government everytime someone does something in a way you dont agree with.

[edit on 8/9/2009 by grapesofraft]



Wow, we can agree on something.

But I think there should be some sort of class, and if the mother is working she should be able to take paid time off work at the governments expense. A few months would be suffice.

People immediately scream, OH MY GAD NOT MY TAX DOLLARS!

Well, those people are short sighted. Because the cost of a poor childhood is exponentially larger than paying for that mother to be taught how to raise a good person. Intelligence is something that can be nurtured, and can be destroyed with poor parenting. I have witnessed this many times in my life.

Just as with intelligence, how 'good' or 'evil' that child becomes can also depend on the type of childhood it experiences. Thus, making sure children have good childhoods is essential to a healthy society.

But no, there should not be a "license", yet another hidden tax. Just a course, that should be mandatory but cost nothing to the mother. Proper child rearing should be a priority.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by mopusvindictus
 



that post jacked me up.



that is all.
stay outta my family's life and welfare. If you can't undestand it, then I will assume that your purpose is to indoctrinate my family into a similiar line of please and thank you, everything will be alright type of world.
For all actions after said observations, I will not be held accountable for....
.....this line of thinking is so dangerous to me it makes me stop my lurking obsession.
The morals my parents passed onto me are not for sale, nor are they negotiable.
that explanation should turn away any sane person.
my fear is it wont.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:46 AM
link   
I could see the reasons behind a parenting license. There are some very valid arguments for it. However I also believe there are some very valid arguments for licensing people to use technology.


But seriously, I think some serious psychological and financial scrutiny should be applied to those wanting to have children. Although on the opposite hand, I think there is a lot to be said for the level of individuality that comes from raising a child with nothing more than your own life experiences.

A tough choice either way.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 02:46 AM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


I feel compelled to answer this profoundly idiotic question in the title.
Sorry, but it is the worst idea I have ever come across on ATS.

While I agree, their are parents today that just suck...

But to think you can run a background check on someone and that be an accurate sign of how good of a parent they are going to be is just inane.

And who are you or who gives any government agency the moral authority as to tell me if I am a good enough person to have a baby or not...?

This is a below top secret thread and is sad that such a thing is even considered...

sorry, op..bad idea to the tenth power



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   
One more thing I wanted to add...

What you need to remember about licenses is that when you apply for a driver license for example and pay you the fees you are essentially paying society for the priviledge to drive on the tax dollar payed for streets, the tax dollar paid for police that responds to the accident scene, and the tax paid for fire department that responds to the fire...amongst the other regulatory tax dollar paid for services...

paying a fee to have a child is like saying ok society, I owe you for having my offspring...
..yes. laughable.

i owe no one for my children. and no one owes me for theirs...

some countries (including the u.s.) actually pay for adults to have children...

the other way around would not work here.

even people protest about chinas 2 child laws all the time...



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


It is the very nature of control that is the problem. It is control for the mere sake of control that replicates generations of hateful parenting. And I don't care if the family is well off and are trained insect taskmasters (educated in some's eyes); if these families are spitting out yet another generation of empathy-less, empty, sociopathic parasites, then they are doing nothing to make the situation on this planet any better. They are merely stretching the problem (which also ultimately corrects it, but all is ultimately self-correcting, but I digress). Perhaps you should sign yourself up for culling, for the good of humanity. As long as people think strengthening the supremely myopic mechanism will help, things will still cycle in the ridiculous fashion that they do. We all internally can find the way out, but many do not have the testicular or ovarian fortitude. Lost in a sea of replication and confusion, many are.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


Dear kiwifoot

Quite right Here Here Parenting should be licensed.

There are people who should not be allowed to live let alone have kids.

Only good folk should have kids and we should chouse them.

Oh hell it all be done before by a guy with a silly mustache called Adolfe Hitler

Sorry mate but you asked for that one.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by open_eyeballs
reply to post by kiwifoot
 





While I agree, their are parents today that just suck...


Yes there are, and whatever rights you think you're protecting, doesn't help the poor dead children killed every year by abuse and neglect, what good are your rights there? Don't they have rights too?


But to think you can run a background check on someone and that be an accurate sign of how good of a parent they are going to be is just inane.


READ what I put in the OP:


criminal background checks to rule out those with records of viloence or abuse.

What about those who fail the background & suitability checks? The system obviously cannot stop them from having the child, but at least they would be flagged as an at risk preganancy and given special attention, plus help to try and pass the license test and to address issues found.


You have to have background checks to WORK with Children, but to HAVE your own you don't. Now get of your panic button for a minute and see the glaring hypocrisy with that.

And yes, I said the system would not be able to STOP anybody having kids, read it!

But any system that flags up people with abusive/viloent criminal pasts, who may be a risk to kids isa good thing.

And the other points:-

Giving training to new parents
Providing equipment to new parents
Supporting and advising new parents

Oh defiintely bad ideas!

Try to read the post next time, instead of reading ONLY this:




Parenting License arghhh

Background check arghhhh

Fee arghhhhhhhhh

Control arghhhhhhhhhh



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by MAC269
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


Dear kiwifoot

Quite right Here Here Parenting should be licensed.

There are people who should not be allowed to live let alone have kids.

Only good folk should have kids and we should chouse them.

Oh hell it all be done before by a guy with a silly mustache called Adolfe Hitler

Sorry mate but you asked for that one.


That was low!

I said nothing of the sort, that's just what you wanted to read.

I said background checks were to highlight criminally abusive/viloent persons, to protect the child, not to stop them having children, so they an be supported more.

The idea was for support and training, advice and help, not control.

Like I said in a previous post, I once tought in a school, I had to do a thorough background check, now that was for working in a scholl, for god's sake if I'm having a child, how can that be any less of a fitting situation to do a background check?

Oh, and I hate mustaches.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 05:16 AM
link   
Honestly I don't think parenting licenses are a good idea. I mean I hate it when children are hurt or murdered (I can hardly stand watching it in a movie) but something like this would only solve a small fraction of child abuse/murder cases? And what about the parents who get a license and then turn out to horrible parents? And let's not forget that you can't really control who gets pregnant and who doesn't with a piece of paper stating they can have a baby...

Sorry if this doesn't make any sense I'm really tired lol





new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join