The debate "Should people who have children be subjected to the same standards as people who want to adopt" was started by
February 3, 2016, 5:06 pm.
14 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 8 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
ReadyToBegin posted 4 arguments to the agreers part.
sloanstar1000, truth_vs_true, debateisgreat, kirizkiyah, waynemc15, llemponen, ReadyToBegin and 7 visitors agree.
fLipp3r, franciscotrejo and 6 visitors disagree.
I question how you would enforce these new rules on parents-to-be. With adoption, they can spend months doing checks and making sure yours will be a good home for a child. If someone got pregnant by accident, they are unlikely to have done those checks, so there is a max of 9 months to get the process done.
How would you deal with people who don't follow the process? Do they get arrested, or simply have their children taken away?
I understand the desire to help and protect children, and it is a good goal. The problem is that a law like this would be impossible to pass since the public would not support it, and would cause so many legal issues as parents fought to get their children back.
"So you propose to solve poverty and abuse by dumping more children into the already overburdened foster system? That seems like it would not accomplish much change."
- the foster system would probably have to be reformed. It would make a significant change for those that follow it. Wealthier families have better means to take care and house children. Children born in poverty are more likely to stay in it, so if it was not allowed it would lower the chances and issue.
-The real proposition is for legal papers and background checks before you are allowed to have children. Then cases of molestation and rape of children would down as they couldn't have kids. That was for it people did not follow it.
I think perhaps the rules governing adoption may be too strict. I hear it can be overly difficult to adopt. Why should that be when there are so many orphaned children around the world? Of course there needs to be some basic verification (e.g. no criminal background, no prior CPS issues, etc...). After adoption, the same laws that apply to natural children are in affect.
I understand what you are saying. It does seem like a good idea in that it would means all kids would grow up in safe stable environments but you do have the problem of taking away people's freedom.
So you propose to solve poverty and abuse by dumping more children into the already overburdened foster system? That seems like it would not accomplish much change.
They would be put into the system like foster care. I don't know how people will manage that. A friend of mine did a paper on it. It seemed like a good idea to combat poverty, literacy, child abuse etc.
And if they have children without consent? What happens to the children? Are they forcibly taken away from their parents and put into the system? It sounds like a bad idea.
Should we really give the government the power to decide who has children or who doesnot?
I am conflicted because it would do so much good, but would violate civil rights (maybe ) and aid the gap for the rich and poor
As in criteria (ex income and safe environment )