tinfoilhat Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 How? It's so Easy to fake your answers. Of course it is. Even Sharon bloody Matthews tried to make a job of making out she was mother of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Of course it is. Even Sharon bloody Matthews tried to make a job of making out she was mother of the year. Some people who seem well prepared for bringing up children end up finding it too difficult, which leads to psychological problems. This whole suggestion is bonkers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon1 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Income should have absolutely nothing to do with raising a child. You can't tell me that rich kids don't have troubled lives I believe that resourced people make better parents. They don't have to be rich. Parenting test is just a wast of tax payers money. Anyone could pass it It would be more a matter of education. Providing folk with the tools to cope eg with the power struggles they'll encounter with their children How would you factor in post navel depression? Women would be taught that this is a possible consequence of motherhood. Would be given all the support and help that they need, in order to get well again. How would you factor a massive change in circumstances, leading to poverty? Such as? How would you factor the number of children a couple can have? If you permit 1, they could have triplets, or even more If they prove that they can cope, there would be no limit, within reason If you failed the test, or you was unemployed, how would you guarantee that the state provided contraception would be 100% affective Implants and what would you do to the couple if they got caught pregnant? Force and abortion? Let them have the child, then take it off them? Am liking all this thought Bonz I don't know what we'd do about this bit, really. I guess it would happen so rarely, that there would be a number of compassionate options What if one of the parents passed away, then the single parent couldn't meet the minimum income to have a child? They would have state-funded support I could go on, and on, and on. Too many if's and but's. Keep iffing and butting! It's good Not to mention the fact that it's a direct attack on a person's freedom of choice As is being born Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 I believe that resourced people make better parents. They don't have to be rich. It would be more a matter of education. Providing folk with the tools to cope eg with the power struggles they'll encounter with their children Women would be taught that this is a possible consequence of motherhood. Would be given all the support and help that they need, in order to get well again. Such as? If they prove that they can cope, there would be no limit, within reason Implants Am liking all this thought Bonz I don't know what we'd do about this bit, really. I guess it would happen so rarely, that there would be a number of compassionate options They would have state-funded support Keep iffing and butting! It's good As is being born A roof over your head and three right attitude is all you need to be a good parent. Wealth has nothing to do with it. All of the above could happen to any parent. All these tests you're talking about are totally futile and would probably cost as much as bringing a child up on benefits would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) Agreed But a selection process would mean that the god-awful parents out there, who shouldn't have kids by ANYone's standards would be weeded out I think that's a good enough trade I do understand the point you're making Mister M However, I think the benefits would outweigh the costs But who's to say that once someone is deemed to be a fit parent, they have the kid and then they become unsuitable parents? Unfortunately life happens. And being a parent is stressful - someone could end up with post natal depression, abuse alcohol to cope, and they then become unfit to look after themselves.... There again, having children could be the making of someone who, on paper at least, doesn't have much going for them, but would make a great parent! ---------- Post added 04-01-2015 at 16:36 ---------- if you havnt got the means to support a child yourself you shouldnt be able to spawn one and make the taxpayer pick up the tab. What are you going to do about it if the parent becomes unemployed after becoming a parent? Come to that, what are you going to do about it if someone on benefits has a child? Withdraw benefits from the parent? Anyway the benefits wouldn't outweigh the costs because it ain't gonna happen! Who'd want to live in a society where the state, via a bunch amateur know-it-alls, deems who can & who can't have children Edited January 4, 2015 by Mister M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 We can all agree who shouldnt be having children. Which people shouldn't be having children? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab6262 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Which people shouldn't be having children? anyone who hasnt the financial were with all to provide for their child in a safe and loving surrounding. i.e druggies, educationally challenged, mentally challenged, financially challenged. a licensing system for looking after and bringing up a child should be adopted, in that way unwanted and neglected children would be at a far lesser risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 anyone who hasnt the financial were with all to provide for their child in a safe and loving surrounding. How do we measure this? A means-test? educationally challenged, mentally challenged The disabled? The mentally retarded? Come out and say it. a licensing system for looking after and bringing up a child should be adopted What about people who have children without a licence? Do we arrest them? Force the mother to abort the pregnancy? Take the child away? Do we force sterilisation on people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubermaus Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Which people shouldn't be having children? Peados, violent offenders, people who cant support themselves or current kids properly. The list goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 anyone who hasnt the financial were with all to provide for their child in a safe and loving surrounding. i.e druggies, educationally challenged, mentally challenged, financially challenged. a licensing system for looking after and bringing up a child should be adopted, in that way unwanted and neglected children would be at a far lesser risk. Not at all. People who abuse and neglect children come from all walks of life. Plenty of wealthy people take drugs, there are terrific parents who for a variety of reasons don't have the financial were with all, or who didn't have a good education. Obviously you haven't thought about it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now