Should children be allowed to be parented by dangerous people?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Mr. Hamtastic, Sep 2, 2008.

?

Should children be allowed to be parented by dangerous people?

  1. Yes

    25.0%
  2. Allowed Contact, supervised, no parenting

    25.0%
  3. No

    50.0%
  1. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    Convicts?
    Mentally Ill?
    People who use recreational drugs?

    Should children be allowed near these people, much less be parented by them?
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2008
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    How does going skydiving make you a danger to your child?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    It shows a tendency to do dangerous things, probably encouraging the impressionable child to also do dangerous things.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    okok. I'll take that out. It is kind of silly.
     
  8. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    I disagree. Plenty of people like their adventure sports, but would not let their children do that until they were old enough for it.
     
  9. vslayer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,969
    define dangerous. the only reason a child should ever be removed from its parents is abuse. children need their parents.
     
  10. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    dangerous-having the potential for abuse
     
  11. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    Agreed.
     
  12. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    So children should not be protected from the potential for abuse, but only after the fact?
     
  13. CutsieMarie89 Zen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,485
    If the parent can't even take care of themselves then the children should be allowed to visit of course, but maybe should be raised by someone else until their parents get their lives in order. But unless the child is actually being abused then they should remain with their parents unless of course they have a good reason to not be. All parents could potentially abuse their children. I think most kids are happier with their own parents than they are in foster care.
     
  14. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    What about if one parent is competent, and the other is not? It's not often that both parents are incompetent, though it does happen.
     
  15. Pandaemoni Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,634
    I voted "yes" because the only way I'd let the government deny procreation to the "dangerous people" is if they elect me sole and absolute arbiter for life of who's dangerous.
     
  16. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    Mr Ham, this is not really a yes no question

    If you had asked should DYFS MONITOR parents which are at risk of abuse because of drugs and achole or what not then i wouldnt hesitate to say yes but removing a child is the LAST resort option for the department which is as it should be.
     
  17. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    I thought I gave that option-contact, supervised, no parenting.
     
  18. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    thats not what i ment though

    Im not talking about the parents only having supervised vistation but rather the family being visted by DYFS say once a week or once a month to check that everything is going alright

    Actually for some families DYFS intervention can help ALOT because then they have access to resorces that are unavalable to the general public like publicly employed babysitters to give the parents a break, access to more finatial resorces, access to purpose built public housing if needed ect.

    As i said its the aposlute LAST option for DYFS to put the kids under someone elses care
     
  19. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    What country are YOU talkin about? We don't have that fancyshmancy stuff in the US. It's real simple. If they decide to find a reason to remove your kids from you, they will.
     
  20. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    Australia
    and its the department of youth and family services (i live in SA

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )
    In Victoria and NSW its the Department of child services (DOCS)
    i cant even rember what its called in the other states

    I think the yanks call it CPS (child protective services) or social services?
     
  21. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    Yep. CPS will come and get the children for whatever reason they decide to give you. So will social services, although social services will come and ask to search your house without a warrant, and if you decline, you have given them probable cause. Woohoo!
     
  22. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,529
    No, but by "dangerous" I take it you mean people with a criminal record, severe mental illness or instability, aggression, etc.
     
  23. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    im actually a manditory reporter for suspected child abuse, so i do know a little about the system. When you report a case you give the reasons why you suspect child abuse or neglect, who you suspect and an urgency rating (imidiate, with in a day, with in a week and i think there is one more). Other people will also report it (for instance in my case i would report it because of what i have either seen in the home or in treating the child and then the nurses and doctors might suspect because of a more thougher clincial assesment and also put in there complaints) and then the case workers will start an investigation.

    Now in neglect cases this may well be that the solution is more finatial surport or a break away from the kids, or a house cleaner or pre prepared meals from an organisation like meals on wheels or a different house from the housing trust or symple for the house to be modifide

    None of these would involve removal of the children because thats not in the childs best interests. Its the surport that is nessary not punishment
     

Share This Page