- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 16,386
- Reaction score
- 7,793
- Location
- Where I am now
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Does she have a child of her own and collecting services for herself and her child? If not, then no. BTW, I'm talking about long-term BC now because sterilization is too permanent.
Again, this is about the person who has an open claim receiving welfare benefits with at least one child. The child of someone collecting would not count because it is not "her" claim.
:roll:
Again, refer to above. The long-term BC would only apply to the person who is claiming benefits for themselves and their child/children.
Lol! What?
Not sure what you mean by "time limits." Regular visits to a physician to ensure compliance with long-term BC, which anyone on birth control is supposed to do anyway.
Well, then, why can the child not stay with the parent indefinitely and keep claiming benefits through her parents extra welfare income for having dependents?
This would allow her to receive (indirectly) welfare benefits as an adult without having to be sterilized - would it not (since she is technically a dependent)? At least until she wanted to have children.
Also, what happens if a 14 year old child of a welfare parent had a baby? Would she have to be sterilized to remain with her parent?
Theres a place that does something like this its called China.
No, I think you know there is a BIG difference. China's laws are nationwide and apply to everyone and anyone. In this scenario, it would only be applied to those who have proven that they cannot support themselves or their child/children and who are collecting services at the expense of the taxpayers and government.
yeah im not on board with that.
The long term BC(depending on how long of a term) would be ok but not the sterilization. Im shocked its legal and wont be surprised if its not for long.
Well, then, why can the child not stay with the parent indefinitely and keep claiming benefits through her parents extra welfare income for having dependents? This would allow her to receive (indirectly) welfare benefits as an adult without having to be sterilized - would it not? At least until she wanted to have children.
Also, what happens if a 14 year old child of a welfare parent had a baby? Would she have to be sterilized to remain with her parent?
It's NOT authoritarian to expect people to practice common sense and use birth control when they cannot afford to support the children that they already have, or themselves for that matter. It is simply common sense to prevent people who cannot support their own from having anymore until they CAN support them. It is just CRAZY for the state to provide for someone and to allow them to continue to have children.
No, I think you know there is a BIG difference. China's laws are nationwide and apply to everyone and anyone. In this scenario, it would only be applied to those who have proven that they cannot support themselves or their child/children and who are collecting services at the expense of the taxpayers and government.
I'm shocked that more states don't consider substance abuse during pregnancy to be criminal child abuse.
STATE POLICIES IN BRIEF
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SADP.pdfSubstance Abuse During Pregnancy
Whereas some find the practice of offering money for sterilization (even by private citizens) to be immoral, I wonder how they rank this immorality compared to drug abuse during pregnancy.
Common sense cannot be legislated or forced on the population.
Are these people that you are talking about breaking some kind of law?
It's odd how some people consider a pregnancy to be an "assault" on their bodies and also consider birth control to be an "assault" on their bodies. What the hell?
I see people are pushing for what people warned against a century ago when considering the welfare state. :lol:
I agree with that too what your point? What does that have to do with anything or why is it relevant to what i said?
theres nothing logical about offering addicts and unsound mind people money for medical procedure that is permanent :shrug:
please list the people here that think its ok to abuse drugs while pregnant or were you just appealing to emotion
i think people are bothered by "sterilization" being offered to unsound people by entrapping them with money
but you have it wrong, what most people think that "ASSAULT" is, is the FORCE not the pregnancy or the BC themselves
1.)It's absolutely logical. As I said in my first post on this thread, the issue is that it's controversial and believed to be an infringement on liberty. What I said that you bolded is relevant because it shows that only a minority of states consider fetuses to have rights to be protected against their impaired mother's substance abuse behaviors. This indicates to me that the fixation is on the mother even to the detriment of the unborn baby.
2.)I'm not suggesting anyone considers it OK, what I'm suggesting is that they're neglecting the responsibility we have to protect fetuses from their own abusive mothers.
Well, it's also FORCE when we have to pay to support these people and their terrible choices, not to mention assault on the poor children who don't have any choices in the matter.
I think he admitted his stance is not a libertarian stance.
Well, it's also FORCE when we have to pay to support these people and their terrible choices, not to mention assault on the poor children who don't have any choices in the matter.
Why is it better to force children into a life of poverty than to force a mom to take birth control?
taxes arent going anywhere so theres no sense of worrying about that
if you are worried about the poor children then you shouldnt be worried about the taxes that might/could help them
nobody is saying that but how far are you willing to go to destroy americans freedons, rights and liberties?
Id rather reform healthcare, foster-care and child care before i force medical procedure or meds on a person against their will, no thanks
But the 18 year old could still live under the parents welfare paid for roof for free.I don't understand your question here. You cannot collect welfare for adult children. They are independent from their parents once they are an adult - a completely separate entity and responsible for their own lives.
Again, I told you that I'm talking about long-term birth control. That 14-year-old would be considered a separate entity from her parents as well. If you are that age and you become a parent, you are eligible to collect welfare only if you have documentation that you buy and prepare your own food separately from your parents and that you pay some kind of room and board or rent to stay with them. Otherwise, the under-aged mother and her child would be considered part of the parent's family. That is how it works now, and I see no reason for that to change.
I never said it was a "perfect" plan. I said it would help out.
That doesn't even make any sense. There is nothing wrong with mandatory birth control for those who are too irresponsible to use it on their own and who keep having children that they cannot afford. THAT is abuse.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?