Should You Have to Get a License to Raise Children?

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

No...hell no.

What happened to "liberty for all" as an ideal? I appreciate the need to intervene when children are being abused, living in shit. But...innocent until proven guilty.

You don't surrender everything in life to legislation or government control.

 

[Mikkaddo]

The question is in the title, we sometimes hear about terrible fucking parents neglecting their child (usually for Facebook it would seem) and the child dies. The license I was thinking of is earned when the parent passes an exam on parenting and can demonstrate good parenting skills, then they can have a child with someone who also has this license. Now if by some odd chance someone has a baby and doesen't have this license then it will be taken by social services and will be returned when the parent obtains the license, or they'll give it to someone capable of raising the child if the parent-to-be refuses to get a license. So what are your thoughts, suggestions, is it a good or bad idea?

Yes. Plain and simple.

However, let me add this:

If the holder of the license loses their license, however if one parent still has their license, the one who lost it loses custody, possibly in a divorce like scenario. You know. "court ordered separation"

However, if they can prove through a form of probation that

1. it was not intended and
2. it will not happen again

then they can go through the process they went through firs to gain it back.

Also, there should be a method of reinstating one incase it turns out the pedophile wasn't the father (not that the modern society would want you to ever think it isn't . . . aren't stereotypes LOVELY my fellow gentlemen?) or other such scenario.


The point I'm trying laboriously to get to is this:

Treat it like a real license, including having a obsolescence just like a driving license meaning you must get it "reset" (for having forgotten the right word) every few years or so. That way no one goes reading up a "study guide" online once and gets one then decides as soon as they have it "ok . . . abuse time!" you must remember after all, most abused children/spouses/other stay silent out of fear. just like bullied kids . . .

 

[Zykon TheLich]

No, no, no and no again. No. Very hard to enforce and open to abuse. Once people prove themselves to be unfit parents you might be able to force them to take parenting classes etc or to offer incentives to parents who take classes voluntarily but to deny the right to have children based on some bullshit exam or various other 'you don't come up to my personal standards' factors ? No.

 

[Macrobstar]

Ok guys, hear me out now - what if, there were a procedure like a vasectomy, that leaves you fully functioning downstairs, makes you unable to get a woman pregnant, BUT, was reversible?
What if, this procedure was performed on ALL newborn male babies. Then, the only way to possibly have a child would be to take such an exam, allowing you to 'reconnect the tubes.'

thats a very good idea

 

[teebeeohh]

yeah, great idea but i have something even better: we deliberately poison the air with something that will only kill humans and you have to buy a license to breathe that gets more and more expansive after lets say your 65th birthday. So we have taken care of illegal immigration, unwanted children, aging society, people having more children than they can take care of, it's fucking brilliant.

 

[loc978]

Yes, but not for the reasons you gave... and it's never going to happen. Idiocracy is a true vision of the future. Get used to it.

 

[Tiny116]

No, Definitely not. To jump on the EU's bandwagon needed a licence or pass an exam to be a parent contradicts one of the most basic and primal human rights.
Not to mention what several other people have said about this rule being un-enforceable Parenting is also something that can't really be quantified, each child has very different needs.
Then there's the issues of underage pregnancy, un-planned births etc. What's going to happen to these parents if they can't pass the exams in time?

Quite honestly I think the idea is despicable. I know there are children out there who have a rotten life or whose lives are in danger, but that's what social services are for.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Hell yes.

Getting to raise children shouldn't be a "right". It's supposed to be a privilige...

 

[Jaker the Baker]

This is one of those rights you just shouldn't take away. It's just...inhumane
I don't care how many bad parents there are, this is just ugly

 

[ReservoirAngel]

1)First of all a medical. Asses the chances of whether or not you're likely to drop dead and leave the kid whilst they're too young to look after themselves.

2)Find out whether or not you have a history of genetic/heredity disease and whether you're likely to pass that on to a child.

I was thinking more 'Gattaca' than 'Orwell' here, but I get your point.

To be honest I think there should be a system like this. You can't pass a test on child-care? Sorry, no baby for you. We don't need you fucking up future generations.

So yeah, I'm in favour of this. [sub]But then there'll be a whole debate on whether or not gay people are eligable to take the test and bla bla bla whiney protests.[/sub]

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Quite honestly I think the idea is despicable. I know there are children out there who have a rotten life or whose lives are in danger, but that's what social services are for.

And social services have an exemplary record of always working and insuring that all children recieve a decent upbringing... (yes, I am in fact being sarcastic).

Procreation is NOT a "human right". Claiming it to be a human right is tantamount to spitting every neglected and mistreated child in the face...

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

This is one of those rights you just shouldn't take away. It's just...inhumane
I don't care how many bad parents there are, this is just ugly

And by extension, you don't care about the children suffering and dying due to these imbecile parents. Because enforcing some goddamned standars that parents have to fulfill would be "ugly" according to you. *facepalm*

 

[Lord Kloo]

Smashing idea, my biology teacher has always been going on about having a breeding pass and it made very good sense.. would be very good for a few reasons:

One. Population control, quite like China does it, there are too many humans so instead of culling the existing ones just suppress the amount being born, makes sense really..

Two. There wouldn't be many kids growing up with parents who teach them to fight or be stupid, drink early and take drugs, would be a blessing to society.

Three. Great for child welfare and also people's welfare as a lack of children makes it easier for an individual to survive.

Just a couple of problems, it can't be enforced liberally. The only two ways to stop people breeding are sterilization and abortions for all those who managed to get someone pregnant without a breeding license.. so unless some form of temporary sterilization or suppression field (like in HL2) can be developed it seems that governments might have to be a bit hard line on these issues..
Also if children get born 'illegally' then they might get abandoned in card board boxes in the London docklands like what currently happens in China, although that at least proves a complete lack of ability to be a good parent if you'd abandon you're child to avoid a jail sentence or fine..

And also to all those mentioning the negative of removing a human right or whatever, this system would likely only be for a few generations to completely remove the disease of bad parenting as only (hopefully) well-brought up children will be having kids and teaching them well. Hopefully it will lift society much higher than it is today and then the scheme can be removed. Can't you just allow a few of your liberties to go so the whole race can advance..

 

[trophykiller]

One would expect to find a lot of abandoned children if parents don't have to take care of them. Also, what about divorces?

 

[Toeys]

This is
- anti free will
- reminding me of stalinism or even nazisim
- allowing ppl who arent any better themselves to lecture others of how to act(as in the Elite)
- a typical simpleminded rightwing view on how to fix a problem. Like when the britons sailed their criminals to Australia


parents, school, community and society is already giving all the education you need to become a parent, and those that neglect already gets punished. kids arent cars or weapons, kids arent the same, kids arent things. if you think theres one type of program that will work on each and every child, then you are incredibly naive.

if this sorta thing was to go through, they might as well just chip everyone right away.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Ok guys, hear me out now - what if, there were a procedure like a vasectomy, that leaves you fully functioning downstairs, makes you unable to get a woman pregnant, BUT, was reversible?
What if, this procedure was performed on ALL newborn male babies. Then, the only way to possibly have a child would be to take such an exam, allowing you to 'reconnect the tubes.'

I've thought of the same thing myself.

The main issue right now though is that there are no such procedures that are 100 percent reversible, so putting into practice of doing it to all newborns might as well make them irreversably sterile as a result, effectively meaning that we might ruin perfectly capable parents who would ace the tests and pass all inspections with flying colours from concieving any children at all.

But conducting some research into finding such a procedure would definetly be a positive thing.

 

[laughingstock2909]

wasn't there a terrible movie that covered this problem? and also, house broken, it is an instinctual pattern instituted since humans first walked the earth, so to be honest here, all points validating licensing for parents should remember that there is a natural order of things and nature will continue to do what it's always done, mankind NEEDS TO REMEMBER THAT HUMANS ARE ANIMALS AS WELL!!!!! WE STILL HAVE THE NEED TO PROCREATE AND WE STILL HAVE SEVERAL NEEDS THAT CANNOT AND SHALL NOT BE CONTROLLED BY A CENTRAL BEAURACRACY THAT DOESN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COMMON MAN KNOWS

 

[WolfEdge]

Indeed! So, hypothetical:

A woman who has not passed the exam gives birth; I suppose the government swoops in on day one, and snatches the child from her? And if she resists?

How would you enforce such a law? Who would pay for it? Would the exam cost a fee? Isn't that a bit ridiculous?

How would you decide who's morally and sociably acceptable and who isn't? What parameters would you use to judge another person as being worthy of parenthood? What if someone fails by only a few points? Are they denied the right, or in this case, the metered privilege?

I see absolutely no good coming from such bullshit thinking. It reeks of the "I'm better than you so I'm going to tell you what you can and can't do" mentality.