Breeding licenses... what do you think?

[fordneagles]

A friend of mine and I had this discussion recently. I suggested in casual conversation that breeding licenses should be imposed on people. My friend argued that doing that would take away a persons right to choose, in part I agree, and I totally understand where they are coming from. However, I made the following point:

In almost everything important in your life, you have to obtain some kind of permission to do it. If you want to drive, you have to get a driving license. If you want to vote, you have to enrol (or in some cases, you are made to enrol and then get fined if you don't vote). If you want to drink and/or smoke, you have to be of an appropriate age in your country. If you want to travel to another country, you have to get a passport. And yet the *MOST* important thing you could do in your life, bringing a tiny, vulnerable human being into this world, is something anyone is allowed to do regardless of whether they are capable of caring for that child or not. Instead we wait until the parent has proved they are NOT capable of caring for the child before taking it away and in most cases after the child has been traumatized/abused/disabled/etc.

So what do you think, Escapists? Should we have to prove we would be fit parents before we bring a child into the world? Or not?

P.S. This is essentially a hypothetical question. It's not really something you can police, but if it were possible, would you support it?

 

[hazabaza1]

No. It's a stupid idea and it always will be. You can't judge how much someone 'cares' based on a test or something like it.
So if I had the choice I'd be against it.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

I have two points to add:

1.) The parental instinct can lie latent in some people. It won't be until faced with the responsibility that they'll really prove they are capable.

2.) It won't stop anything. Making it that you have to have a license for children will not stop people from having sex and getting impregnated. If you impose a mandatory contraceptive drug law, then you'll likely have a massive revolt on your hands.

 

[D Moness]

the same topic was on here not less then a month ago
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.257516-Should-You-Have-to-Get-a-License-to-Raise-Children#9678599

 

[Macgyvercas]

I'll say the same thing here that I said in the other thread on this a while ago. While I do believe that some people should not have children, any means of enforcing that ruling would be very Orwellian in nature.

 

[Lilani]

No. It's a stupid idea and it always will be. You can't judge how much someone 'cares' based on a test or something like it.
So if I had the choice I'd be against it.

Agreed. On the surface it's nice, but finding how suitable someone is to be a parent is far too subjective and fundamentally flawed. So much growing up occurs when someone actually begins the experience of raising a child. To expect them to be fully prepared beforehand is unrealistic and unfair.

If something like this were imposed, I would foresee a huge rise in "accidental" and "unplanned" pregnancies. Women would get pregnant just out of spite. I think Prohibition proved that if you tell someone they can't do something and they want to do it badly enough, they WILL find a way to get it done.

 

[Rainboq]

They should at least make it mandatory for parents to attend a class so they know what they're doing.

 

[Nimcha]

I do think certain people should be disallowed from having children. For example, the mother who had 13 children all taken away by youth care because she neglected them, who's pregnant again.

 

[steevee]

Forced sterilisation in certain elements of society. A 3 child limit. Better education, and getting rid of child benifits.

Lots of ways to cut down on the breeders of society. We need to get to a stage where having children is a revered thing. Where rasing a child in the right way is one of your biggest responsibilities, where having a child means raising another human being, and not just forgetting a condom.

 

[Wolfram23]

I think that just because the law tells us what we can and cannot do, doesn't make it right.

I would be against said law, although I do indeed believe there are people who should not under any circumstance be allowed to breed.

Anyway, we have social services for a reason... not saying it's perfect (at all!) but it's there to help when the parents are fails.

 

[Woodsey]

No.

How can you possibly judge how someone will be as a parent before them being a parent? It takes having a kid for some people to pull their shit together.

 

[Wintermoot]

I agree, allot of kids have parents that are unfit of raising them it would prevent ALLOT of kids with fucked up childhood and kids turning into criminals

 

[Pyode]

As much as I enjoy the idea of preventing morons from breading, I could never actually support any such legislation.

It would be too much of a breach of our civil liberties.

 

[linwolf]

First it would be almost impossibly to say who would or would not be a good parent. Second it would be a way expensive law to enforce think of all the foster homes. Lastly it would interfere with basis human nature and people would never accept it.

 

[Lilani]

I agree, allot of kids have parents that are unfit of raising them it would prevent ALLOT of kids with fucked up childhood and kids turning into criminals

But how exactly are you supposed to gauge this? Parenting is extremely subjective, and not to mention it would be very easy to BS your way through such a test. The correct answers would be so obvious. No parent is ever a professional from the get-go. So much growing up and learning happens during the experience of raising a child. To expect someone to know how to raise their kid before they even have one is like expecting someone to know everything they need to graduate from a college before they even get accepted.

 

[Ganthrinor]

Yes, yes, by all the gods and demons, YES.


Natural Selection has been artificially limited in the majority of human society and needs some kind of replacement.

 

[Wintermoot]

I agree, allot of kids have parents that are unfit of raising them it would prevent ALLOT of kids with fucked up childhood and kids turning into criminals

But how exactly are you supposed to gauge this? Parenting is extremely subjective, and not to mention it would be very easy to BS your way through such a test. The correct answers would be so obvious. No parent is ever a professional from the get-go. So much growing up and learning happens during the experience of raising a child. To expect someone to know how to raise their kid before they even have one is like expecting someone to know everything they need to graduate from a college before they even get accepted.

simple the parents get a kid and regulary get checked up by the government if one of the parents does something wrong (or if the kid commits allot of crimes due to a bad home situation) the license will be revoked and the offending parnet will be sterilized it sounds extreme but its the only way to enforce a law of such kind
PS:
alternatively forced parenting lessons can also be used as punishment on minor offences

 

[soultrain117]

Um no However I would like to see some form of a law that stops people from having like 7 kids on welfare. Basically if you are on welfare and you have your second child either the government says we will not pay for a 3rd or we require a permanent solution. I think the earlier would be best, and it does not need to be 2 kids i could see 3 being ok. My issue come they have like 12 kids, because they are just like o we can support them with welfare. HOWEVER just to be clear this is only people on welfare if you can support 12 kids by all means have 12 kids. I just do not want to be paying to support someone and their 7 kids. I mean seriously you know your on welfare you know you cannot support more kids without assistance.