Licence for having a baby? (loving, husband, daughter, social)

[NotARedneck]

Originally Posted by Megafoxy

Some people grow up after the baby is born. No parent is perfect, you must live and learn.

2% maybe. I see such arguments used to justify having children with really no plan but they are all self serving justifications. Not only does this almost never happen, but without a plan and the education to back it, there are fewer and fewer such cases every year. Back in the 1960s, there were jobs for the uneducated, where they could support a family but these evaporated in the 1970s. Why has it taken American youth so long to figure this out?

[NotARedneck]

Originally Posted by KWPN

And something that may make me VERY unpopular, but I feel I can say it with validity because I've heard it 'from the horse's mouth'. If they did away with the "big check" in welfare, many of those on welfare would stop having 15 children by different men just so they can obtain "the big check."

This is largely a myth. Welfare reform and the rapidly declining amounts they are paid, have made this a suckers game. Any young woman who wants to make this a career now, will be very disappointed.

This certainly wasn't the case 25 years ago. At that time, I was involved in auditing child protective services. The pattern then was very common. Starting at about age 17, have a child every 4 years so you could never be forced to take a job, until you were too old. Then dump the kids into the system when they became more trouble than the welfare payment was worth. The trigger was often the kid getting into her booze, drugs or food. Eight kids with 7 men, several unidentified, was the norm. "He wore a green hat" was all one could remember of the father! What I found really interesting was the places they lived. You would be amazed how many lived over gas stations and other unlikely places you go by every day and never suspect that people would be there.

My Mother was a teacher in the "sweat hog" class at that time. She was trying to help a girl to learn something when her friend helpfully stated, "You don't need to learn that stuff. Have a baby and welfare will support you." They were 14 or 15.

Long lasting contraceptives as a requirement for welfare and child care at age 2 so she can (and must) get a job should be part of the program. The rates paid now are so low, that this opportunity would likely be grabbed at.

With the recession, many middle class Americans are about to find out how bad getting welfare has become.

[NotARedneck]

Originally Posted by Chinolala

7) Unwed mothers must state father on birth certificate. If unknown, all partners must do a DNA test and the biological father is responsible for child support. If mother will not supply information, an ad would be run in a special section of the newspaper. Ad would state mothers name and that she is pregnant. This would protect men who impregnate women who never tell the man that she is pregnant and breaks up with him before he can find out.

Do these guys even read? Good luck tracking these dead beats down. Squeezing money out of them will be real fun.

Perhaps we need a DNA database of all deadbeats. I'll bet that many of these guys had more children than the women. State mandated vasectomies will be next!

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by dave nz

I'm not joking when I say this "Why should you not have to obtain a licence before having a baby".
Would save alot of the problems in the world, from inept parent/s. No licence then pregnancy aborted.

Because you can't force someone to abort a pregnancy. Just because you think abortion is right doesn't mean everyone else does and you don't have the right to determine what I find morally objectionable or what I do with my body.

No one died and made you God.

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by tag08

I've wondered the same thing for years.. You should have to take classes and pass tests to get your license. And everybody, men and women, should be on mandatory birth control until they get their license. Or maybe everyone should wear chastity belts.

???

I disagree. You are trying to apply your morals to others. They have the right to do with their bodies what they will.

I can see not letting them keep the baby if they don't pass a parenting test but not requiring birth control or limiting what they do with their own bodies. They would just know the baby is being taken away if they don't pass the test. The baby is not part of their body and not subject to their moral code.

[miasmommy]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Because you can't force someone to abort a pregnancy. Just because you think abortion is right doesn't mean everyone else does and you don't have the right to determine what I find morally objectionable or what I do with my body.

No one died and made you God.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!

[Chinolala]

Originally Posted by NotARedneck

Do these guys even read? Good luck tracking these dead beats down. Squeezing money out of them will be real fun.

Perhaps we need a DNA database of all deadbeats. I'll bet that many of these guys had more children than the women. State mandated vasectomies will be next!

Some fathers are used by women to get pregnant. Once pregnant, the women toss the guys aside so the men don't know they have a baby on the way. My Pregnancy Announcement notice idea would be to prevent this from happening. I know women with biological clocks ticking that have done this. Professional women who can get by on their own without child support. We can't judge these men as deadbeats. They have no idea that they have a child. That's not fair to the child or the father.

[cmacf1]

Before one can adopt a child in this country, you have to go through a process that is more involved than just getting a license. You have to have your entire life spread wide open to a social worker for hours, you have to have inspections of your house to make sure you have space for a child, you have enough smoke alarms, the bedroom where they'll sleep has the proper number of egresses in case of fire, you don't have vermin, and that the number in front of your house is large enough for the fire department to see, etc. Some people, including us, have to complete a parenting course that is weeks long. Your financial situation has to be proven to be adequate to raise a child. You have to be medically fit to raise a child and have doctors' letters saying so. These are the requirements for people who choose to adopt and/or cannot have their own children biologically.

While I'm not saying everybody should have to go what we had to go through (twice) to adopt our two kids, they sure knew we were fit to be parents long before any child ever came into our lives. The US government would never approve this kind of scrutiny for everybody wishing to have children, but I will go so far as to say that parenting would be a much more deliberate and a far more well-informed undertaking than it is now. And that would only be a good thing for childrens' well being. It won't happen, though.

I will end this with saying that I was pretty pissed off when going through all the hoops we had to go through to adopt. Just because we were unable to get pregnant, our lives were turned inside out. However, I'd do it all again to bring our sweet kids into our lives.

[trishguard]

Find a country that gives a license and move there.

[trishguard]

Originally Posted by Chinolala

To give you an answer, it's because having children is considered a God given "right". I live in a large metropolitan area that has "Safe Haven" laws for born and unwanted babies. Even so, people still throw them in the trash or leave them in bags under bushes, in apartment lobbies, etc. I often wonder why God allows these people to get pregnant. It seems more difficult to adopt a dog from a shelter or become a volunteer for some child based organizations. The reason that is is because the selection of who can do those things is controlled and those interested have to meet certain criteria. I like the idea of those wanting children having to meet certain criteria too. The problem with that is that there would never be a societal agreement on what the criteria should be. I don't think a license would work because too much could happen from the time one gets a license up to the time the conceive. My plan would kick in post conception. If the US became a nation that was ruled by 1 person and I was that person, my criteria would be:

1) Must have a high school diploma or GED
2) Mothers must pass drug and alcohol testing throughout pregnancy and if she fails, live in pregnancy "center" for women on drugs and receive treatment during and after pregnancy
3) Must show proof of financial responsibility. Something reasonable for the city/town where the baby will be raised.
4) If both parents need to work, daycare provider must be lined up by beginning of 3rd trimester and must be a licensed daycare facility or relative.
5) A complete home inspection and home study to be done by a social worker. This is done for adoptive parents and should be done for biological parents too. Why should adoptive children only be granted this safety net, which is not 100% but at least it's pretty good
6) Parent(s) must show proof of health insurance coverage for pregnancy and the baby or pay cash for the pregnancy and delivery. Payment plans accepted.
7) Unwed mothers must state father on birth certificate. If unknown, all partners must do a DNA test and the biological father is responsible for child support. If mother will not supply information, an ad would be run in a special section of the newspaper. Ad would state mothers name and that she is pregnant. This would protect men who impregnate women who never tell the man that she is pregnant and breaks up with him before he can find out. If a man wants to be a part of his child's life and is a decent person, he should have that right and his child should have that right. There could be a special "Pregnancy Notices" section.
8) In cases where parents do not meet these, we have a problem. Seeing that there are millions of people wanting to adopt, we could consider bringing back the orphanage system to speed up the process. Adoptive parents would have to meet the same criteria.

The idea of big government is scary. But how awesome would it be to know that every child born in this country was entering a family that was responsible and well equipped for the chlld's well being? I don't see why anyone would have a problem with that. I think we would all agree that we all want what is best for our nations' children. Yet, children are born every day to people who don't hold up their end of the bargain. There are millions of kids living below the poverty level. Millions who don't know who their father is. Some are left home alone because their parents can't afford day care of they leave them in the hands of babysitters that are not well equipped and responsible. We had a case recently where 2 children died in a fire from a space heater. They were left home alone while their single mother went out to party. That kind of stuff bugs me to no end. Should she be allowed to have more kids?

Not awesome enough for me to trade my freedom for it.