Is having children an automatic right?

[Mr Prime]

I agree - it's not just money, job, housing - there is a term in social services which is "good enough parenting" - doesn't mean they have to be perfect parents but generally their caring meets a good enough standard.

 

I also agree, working with children in both rich and poorer areas of Sheffield - you get kids that can have emotional difficulties from both sides.

 

I used to work in a family court and often social services would bring a family in to be grilled by the judge. The mother would come in resplendent in a tracksuit and stand in the witness box. The judge would question her and she would reply that the kids were clothed and fed. The fact they were fed on micro chips and wearing stolen gear did not register as a problem to them. When the judge asked the key question of what intellectual stimulation the kids were given the mother would just look perplexed. It would never occur to them to interact with their kids, just shove them in front of the TV.

In worse cases the social work team would find the situation exacerbated by dog dirt on the carpets. The unifying factor was that in 99 out of a 100 cases benefits was the big 'income'.

[hitch_1980]

Is having children an automatic right?

 

 

In a word ………….. No.

 

Some people think it is though, as they get money in return

[Mr Prime]

What I also resent as a side issue is these people who see Raoul Moat as some kind of folk hero. Such people hate the state, they blame their problems on the council/the government/the police/teachers/social services. Simultaneously all their money, housing, healthcare and education is provided by the state.

[hitch_1980]

I agree - it's not just money, job, housing - there is a term in social services which is "good enough parenting" - doesn't mean they have to be perfect parents but generally their caring meets a good enough standard.

 

I also agree, working with children in both rich and poorer areas of Sheffield - you get kids that can have emotional difficulties from both sides.

 

Kids having emotional diffilculties is different from bad parenting.....would you agree?

[finoni9]

I used to work in a family court and often social services would bring a family in to be grilled by the judge. The mother would come in resplendent in a tracksuit and stand in the witness box. The judge would question her and she would reply that the kids were clothed and fed. The fact they were fed on micro chips and wearing stolen gear did not register as a problem to them. When the judge asked the key question of what intellectual stimulation the kids were given the mother would just look perplexed. It would never occur to them to interact with their kids, just shove them in front of the TV.

In worse cases the social work team would find the situation exacerbated by dog dirt on the carpets. The unifying factor was that in 99 out of a 100 cases benefits was the big 'income'.

 

It's a sad cycle though isn't it - the parents in the court wouldn't know any different as most would have grown up without stimulation also - we learn mostly from our own families - and if there are no role models then it's just going to get worse as generations continue.

[Grandad.Malky]

Some people think it is though, as they get money in return

 

Without wanting to get too involved in politics and religion I think it is fare to say that it is not a “right” to have a child, who gives this right in the first place?

[finoni9]

Kids having emotional diffilculties is different from bad parenting.....would you agree?

 

Yes it is - you could say the kids with emotional difficulties are too over stimulated//looked after and expectations are too high unlike in bad parenting when the kids are unstimulated/not looked after properly and are given no expectations!

[hitch_1980]

Without wanting to get too involved in politics and religion I think it is fare to say that it is not a “right” to have a child, who gives this right in the first place?

 

I dont think anyone gives this right as we are supposedly a free society in this country.......could we be too free?

[Mr Prime]

It's a sad cycle though isn't it - the parents in the court wouldn't know any different as most would have grown up without stimulation also - we learn mostly from our own families - and if there are no role models then it's just going to get worse as generations continue.

 

Yes, this is why I think the state should beef up now. Far from having minimum input into people's lives it should be increased. Those ultra violent brothers in Doncaster were allowed to go on and on because of the principle of keeping kids the family. Why? If you see disturbed kids with useless parents you know it is unlikely anything will change. They should be taken into care sooner rather than later.

 

Social workers power should be beefed up and pay increased. They were told for years by the tabloids and pub experts to stop intefering. When they keep their distance kids suffer or die then the experts go mad and demand to know they they didn't 'get involved' earlier! Insane.

 

The bottom line now is that when parents are useless the state has to be the parent. I can't see any realistic alternative.

[hitch_1980]

Yes it is - you could say the kids with emotional difficulties are too over stimulated//looked after and expectations are too high unlike in bad parenting when the kids are unstimulated/not looked after properly and are given no expectations!

 

I think the second point may be quite close (home education plays a big part), but you are over simplifying why kids have emotional diffilculties.