NATION

PASSWORD

Parenting licenses

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
GuessTheAltAccount
Diplomat
 
Posts: 544
Founded: Apr 27, 2021
Democratic Socialists

Parenting licenses

Postby GuessTheAltAccount » Thu Jun 03, 2021 3:58 am

Topic came up here.

So far the attempts to cut down on child abuse and child neglect have been focused on deterrence, but the threat of facing a taste of one's own medicine; and then some, depending on the prison; has not been enough to scare parents into only having kids they intend to raise properly. We could up the ante, but we could only up the ante so far. Death penalty might actually backfire if some parents would rather die than encounter other prisoners as a convicted child abuser, and would rather be executed than be remembered as suicidal.

So why don't we shift the focus to prevention instead? Why don't we have parenting licenses? The usual response I hear elsewhere is that the government could misuse this authority. Well, the government could also theoretically misuse laws against abuse and neglect by only prosecuting dissidents who abuse and neglect their kids while leaving non-dissidents who do the same alone. Nevertheless, we have standards on parenting, answerable to a plurality of voters rather than just the individual parents. Why not try to predict how likely those standards are to be met by the parents, and if that seems unlikely, give the kid to one of the many would-be adoptive parents out there clamoring to take on that role if the child is still in the infancy stage, to make abuse and neglect less likely?
Northern Socialist Council Republics wrote:Christian “charity” is morally at par with fascist soup kitchens; a transparent bid to buy goodwill for their reactionary beliefs.

User avatar
Grinning Dragon
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8407
Founded: May 16, 2011
Anarchy

Postby Grinning Dragon » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:17 am

Gawd NO.
There are already punishments for parents/guardians who abuse their children.
I prefer Dangerous Freedom over peaceful slavery! Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Gun-Control is the belief that declawing the cat will protect it against other animals; also why are anti-gun people so violent?
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery!
Socialism- the herpes of economic systems.
My Constitutional Rights trump your dead. Proud American infidel since the 1970's-Deus Vult
The made up term "toxic masculinity" is founded on nonsense psychologism

User avatar
Shahrukh
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 13
Founded: Feb 01, 2021
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Shahrukh » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:23 am

GuessTheAltAccount wrote:Topic came up here.

So far the attempts to cut down on child abuse and child neglect have been focused on deterrence, but the threat of facing a taste of one's own medicine; and then some, depending on the prison; has not been enough to scare parents into only having kids they intend to raise properly. We could up the ante, but we could only up the ante so far. Death penalty might actually backfire if some parents would rather die than encounter other prisoners as a convicted child abuser, and would rather be executed than be remembered as suicidal.

So why don't we shift the focus to prevention instead? Why don't we have parenting licenses? The usual response I hear elsewhere is that the government could misuse this authority. Well, the government could also theoretically misuse laws against abuse and neglect by only prosecuting dissidents who abuse and neglect their kids while leaving non-dissidents who do the same alone. Nevertheless, we have standards on parenting, answerable to a plurality of voters rather than just the individual parents. Why not try to predict how likely those standards are to be met by the parents, and if that seems unlikely, give the kid to one of the many would-be adoptive parents out there clamoring to take on that role if the child is still in the infancy stage, to make abuse and neglect less likely?


The government has no right over natural things a human has, if you want child abuse prevention, do a background check and fund foster care. Not regulate natural functions like sex and reproduction.
Have you ever noticed who runs those banks?

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Tech Modling
 
Posts: 59601
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:27 am

We don't have parenting licenses because such a measure would be wildly unpopular with everybody everywhere. In democracies the people in charge will lose elections, in autocracies they will be toppled, not in the least by its own military.
1. Tech modling. No idea what it means, but it has a fancy colour.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Size matters. Bigger is forbidden and won't give the mods pleasure.


User avatar
Ethraia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Jun 02, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Ethraia » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:33 am

Well, the government could also theoretically misuse laws against abuse and neglect by only prosecuting dissidents who abuse and neglect their kids while leaving non-dissidents who do the same alone.

This is nowhere near on the same level. A government actually in charge of sexual reproduction is a microscopic hair away from just flipping the eugenics switch, consciously or not. Consider states with embedded systemic racism and a lot of subconscious racial biases -take the United States for example. Can you not already see the statistics? "Study finds that over 80% of the turned down parenting licenses are for black applicants", etc. etc. It will just so obviously go down that route, and also, its just fucking embarrassing. If I decide I want to raise a kid with my wife, we might keep it secret from the rest of the family until she's pregnant - but I have to tell the government? No.
Last edited by Ethraia on Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rusozak
Senator
 
Posts: 4232
Founded: Jun 14, 2015
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Rusozak » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:36 am

Grinning Dragon wrote:Gawd NO.
There are already punishments for parents/guardians who abuse their children.


Punishments, not preventive measures.
NOTE: This nation's government style, policies, and opinions in roleplay or forum 7 does not represent my true beliefs. It is purely for the enjoyment of the game.

User avatar
Grinning Dragon
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8407
Founded: May 16, 2011
Anarchy

Postby Grinning Dragon » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:38 am

Rusozak wrote:
Grinning Dragon wrote:Gawd NO.
There are already punishments for parents/guardians who abuse their children.


Punishments, not preventive measures.

How does a license prevent anything? It's nothing more than a revenue generator.
I prefer Dangerous Freedom over peaceful slavery! Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Gun-Control is the belief that declawing the cat will protect it against other animals; also why are anti-gun people so violent?
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery!
Socialism- the herpes of economic systems.
My Constitutional Rights trump your dead. Proud American infidel since the 1970's-Deus Vult
The made up term "toxic masculinity" is founded on nonsense psychologism

User avatar
GuessTheAltAccount
Diplomat
 
Posts: 544
Founded: Apr 27, 2021
Democratic Socialists

Postby GuessTheAltAccount » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:39 am

Ethraia wrote:This is nowhere near on the same level. A government actually in charge of sexual reproduction

"How to identify people who didn't read the OP" 101.


GuessTheAltAccount wrote:Why not try to predict how likely those standards are to be met by the parents, and if that seems unlikely, give the kid to one of the many would-be adoptive parents out there clamoring to take on that role if the child is still in the infancy stage, to make abuse and neglect less likely?

Emphasis mine, at least this time around.

As for racial discrimination, incarceration is disproportionately targeted at minorities too, yet our solution isn't to abolish it altogether.
Last edited by GuessTheAltAccount on Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Northern Socialist Council Republics wrote:Christian “charity” is morally at par with fascist soup kitchens; a transparent bid to buy goodwill for their reactionary beliefs.

User avatar
Ethraia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Jun 02, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Ethraia » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:41 am

GuessTheAltAccount wrote:
Ethraia wrote:This is nowhere near on the same level. A government actually in charge of sexual reproduction

"How to identify people who didn't read the OP" 101.


GuessTheAltAccount wrote:Why not try to predict how likely those standards are to be met by the parents, and if that seems unlikely, give the kid to one of the many would-be adoptive parents out there clamoring to take on that role if the child is still in the infancy stage, to make abuse and neglect less likely?

Emphasis mine, at least this time around.

As for racial discrimination, incarceration is disproportionately targeted at minorities too, yet our solution isn't to abolish it altogether.


Champ, I literally quoted the OP in my response. I read it. Thats not a rebuttal to valid points raised. They are in control of sexual reproduction. They cant prevent it, but if you've done it and fertilised an egg without a license, and they dont deem you suitable, you yourself said your child is taken away at birth and given up for adoption. That is functionally control over sexual reproduction. Now address the points.

User avatar
Ethraia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Jun 02, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Ethraia » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:44 am

GuessTheAltAccount wrote:

As for racial discrimination, incarceration is disproportionately targeted at minorities too, yet our solution isn't to abolish it altogether.


Incarceration isn't a biological and natural part of humanity. Breeding is. You are trying to regulate something in the same category as shitting and breathing. Incarceration isn't remotely comparable.

User avatar
GuessTheAltAccount
Diplomat
 
Posts: 544
Founded: Apr 27, 2021
Democratic Socialists

Postby GuessTheAltAccount » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:48 am

Ethraia wrote:
GuessTheAltAccount wrote:"How to identify people who didn't read the OP" 101.



Emphasis mine, at least this time around.

As for racial discrimination, incarceration is disproportionately targeted at minorities too, yet our solution isn't to abolish it altogether.


Champ, I literally quoted the OP in my response. I read it. Thats not a rebuttal to valid points raised. They are in control of sexual reproduction. They cant prevent it, but if you've done it and fertilised an egg without a license, and they dont deem you suitable, you yourself said your child is taken away at birth and given up for adoption. That is functionally control over sexual reproduction. Now address the points.

No, that's control over who gets to keep the kid.

Comparing that to control over reproduction would be like comparing taking kids away from convicted abusers to comparing forced sterilization of convicted abusers.
Northern Socialist Council Republics wrote:Christian “charity” is morally at par with fascist soup kitchens; a transparent bid to buy goodwill for their reactionary beliefs.

User avatar
Stagnant Axon Terminal
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16543
Founded: Feb 24, 2014
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Stagnant Axon Terminal » Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:53 am

I didn't think anyone would ever argue something as blatantly nonsense as parenting licensure but here we are.

No.
TET's resident state assessment exam
My interests include baking cookies, make-up,
shopping for dresses and high heels, glittery Christmas ornaments,
and dead things.
I scream a lot.
Also, I'm an Ancom.
Also, I'm gonna fuck your girlfriend.
Nanatsu No Tsuki wrote:the fetus will never eat cake if you abort it

Cu Math wrote:Axon is like a bear with a PH.D. She debates at first, then eats your face.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:THE MAN'S PENIS HAS LEFT THE VAGINA. IT'S THE UTERUS'S TURN TO SHINE.

User avatar
Kilobugya
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6180
Founded: Apr 05, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Kilobugya » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:02 am

There is just no realistic way to implement them that doesn't imply massive coercion and violation of rights, making it much worse than the problem it tries to solve.

I would rather have well-funded social services ensuring that children aren't abused/neglected, and ensure parents aren't omnipotent despots over their children, by making school attendance mandatory (no homeschooling), having doctors and not parents take the final decision for most health-related issues in children, and more generally making childcare a joint responsibility of parents and society, not of parents alone.
Secular humanist and trans-humanist, rationalist, democratic socialist, pacifist, dreaming very high to not perform too low.
Economic Left/Right: -9.50 - Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.69

User avatar
Valentine Z
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10459
Founded: Nov 08, 2015
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Valentine Z » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:07 am

Oh, boy. I don't like to go this political, but here we are. Personally, I am seeing several problems.

- What happens if the parents that are unsuited got the licenses? Sure, they can play the act for years, but what if they one day decided to be the nastiest parents from Hell? Revoke their license? Sure, but it's just child services with extra inconvenient steps.

- And then the opposite: How would you gauge the fitness of being a parent? Even corporal punishment and spanking is divided (though it's mostly in the favor of NOT hitting kids, but I am saying that it's not unanimous) amongst parents, so what about things like coming out, difficult-to-handle kids by nature, and the like? Is there a right or wrong way about this in getting a license?

- Then the middle ground: What about those parents who spoiled their kids rotten and raised them to be the worst person ever? You know, the ones that lets their kids do every single thing they wanted without a care of the world. Sure, they treated their kids well and pampered them way too much, but consider the implication of "If only I have taught him and be stricter (not physically), he would have been on the right track of life!"

- Andddd of course, the government. Ahh, now what happens then if religion (I am not slamming religion alone; it's just something super common that came out regardless of generations) and more politics are involved? "Oh, sorry, you two are homosexuals, you don't get a license," even if two of you have read Parenting 101 and are potentially going to be better than the ones that the government gave licenses to?

------

In short, I am not in favor of licensing kids. I will admit that not a single measure is 100% effective in preventing child abuse, BUT consider parenting lessons (even parents need to be taught sometimes), better and more accessible counseling, and of course, child services. Life is unpredictable - turning the worst parents into best, and vice versa - and it starts with every one of us to make it a little heavenly or hellish for both the parents and kids involved. ♥

EDIT: Typo, gawd.
Last edited by Valentine Z on Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:29 am, edited 3 times in total.


Photography Stuff.
Flag Bracket - 1st for Mk I! 2nd for Mk II!
Issues Thread 4th in Gen Sec

The Sixty! Opinions Deposit! Valentian Stories! Gwen's Adventures! Cat Anthem! Valentian News.
If you are reading my sig, I want you to have the best day ever ! You are worth it, do not let anyone get you down !
Glory to De Geweldige Sierlijke Katachtige Utopia en Zijne Autonome Machten ov Valentine Z !
Q & A Here! | Heights of NS! | F7 Etiquette

Clarissa mistaken for Smurf/Avatar: 14
Valentijn Misgendered: 59
Valentijn now a She!

• Never trouble trouble until trouble troubles you.
• As a wise man once said: 我等は砲兵 皇国の護り (We are Artillery Guardians of the Empire).
• World Map is a cat playing with Australia.

User avatar
Ethraia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Jun 02, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Ethraia » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:07 am

Kilobugya wrote:There is just no realistic way to implement them that doesn't imply massive coercion and violation of rights, making it much worse than the problem it tries to solve.

I would rather have well-funded social services ensuring that children aren't abused/neglected, and ensure parents aren't omnipotent despots over their children, by making school attendance mandatory (no homeschooling), having doctors and not parents take the final decision for most health-related issues in children, and more generally making childcare a joint responsibility of parents and society, not of parents alone.

Yeah, this.

User avatar
Ethraia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Jun 02, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Ethraia » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:11 am

Valentine Z wrote:Oh, boy. I don't like to go this political, but here we are. Personally, I am seeing several problems.



- And then the opposite: How would you gauge the fitness of being a parent? Even corporal punishment and spanking is divided (though it's mostly in the favor of NOT hitting kids, but I am saying that it's not unanimous) amongst parents, so what about things like coming out, difficult-to-handle kids by nature, and the like? Is there a right or wrong way about this in getting a license?


This too. A conservative government is going to have different views on whether parents "encouraging homosexuality", by being likely to accept a kid coming out as gay is acceptable to a progressive one. Theres just no way this doesn't turn political, and making the ability to have a child political, especially in the current hyper partisan climate of the USA (which is where I assume you are from but I am not personally) will go absolutely terribly. Furthermore, the reverse is true; parents who would otherwise be spectacular may be denied a child for harbouring homophobic viewpoints, because that would reduce their fitness to parent!
Last edited by Ethraia on Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Free Joy State
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 14976
Founded: Jan 05, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The Free Joy State » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:16 am

Of all the dreadful, unnecessarily invasive, unworkable ideas with little to no merit that have been raised in NSG this is... definitely somewhere in the top 10-15.

Grinning Dragon wrote:Gawd NO.
There are already punishments for parents/guardians who abuse their children.

Granted, punishments for child abusers could stand to be harsher.

But this idea... No.
"If there's a book that you want to read, but it hasn't been written yet, then you must write it." - Toni Morrison

My nation does not represent my beliefs or politics.

User avatar
Kilobugya
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6180
Founded: Apr 05, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Kilobugya » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:21 am

The Free Joy State wrote:Granted, punishments for child abusers could stand to be harsher.


It's not so much that the penalty are too light (they might for some offenses, but overall they tend to be quite high already) but that enforcement is very hard, so most child abusers manage to slip through.
Secular humanist and trans-humanist, rationalist, democratic socialist, pacifist, dreaming very high to not perform too low.
Economic Left/Right: -9.50 - Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.69

User avatar
The Free Joy State
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 14976
Founded: Jan 05, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The Free Joy State » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:24 am

Valentine Z wrote:Oh, boy. I don't like to go this political, but here we are. Personally, I am seeing several problems.

- What happens if the parents that are unsuited got the licenses? Sure, they can play the act for years, but what if they one day decided to be the nastiest parents from Hell? Revoke their license? Sure, but it's just child services with extra inconvenient steps.

I am reminded of a case of wealthy adopters who murdered their adoptive child. Passed all the tests required to adopt in the UK... and killed their little boy.

People can lie. People can be suitable at the time, but go off the rails later.

[*snip*]
- Andddd of course, the government. Ahh, now what happens then if religion (I am not slamming religion alone; it's just something super common that came out regardless of generations) and more politics are involved? "Oh, sorry, you two are homosexuals, you don't get a license," even if two of you have read Parenting 101 and are potentially going to be better than the ones that the government gave licenses to?

And this, of course. Letting the government decide this kind of metric is inevitably fraught with politically manipulatable metrics.

In short, I am not in favor of licensing kids. I will admit that not a single measure is 100% effective can prevent child abuse, BUT consider parenting lessons (even parents need to be taught sometimes), better and more accessible counseling, and of course, child services. Life is unpredictable - turning the worst parents into best, and vice versa - and it starts with every one of us to make it a little heavenly or hellish for both the parents and kids involved. ♥

Yes, encouraging new parents to take parenting classes would be a good idea. Also, making counselling more accessible.

Kilobugya wrote:
The Free Joy State wrote:Granted, punishments for child abusers could stand to be harsher.


It's not so much that the penalty are too light (they might for some offenses, but overall they tend to be quite high already) but that enforcement is very hard, so most child abusers manage to slip through.

I personally do think punishment could be tougher, but I agree that abusers do slip through. I think lack of funding for social services and lack of personnel is partly responsible. There's a case where social services applied for an interim care order, but withdrew the application because they couldn't get a foster carer.
Last edited by The Free Joy State on Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:32 am, edited 2 times in total.
"If there's a book that you want to read, but it hasn't been written yet, then you must write it." - Toni Morrison

My nation does not represent my beliefs or politics.

User avatar
Borderlands of Rojava
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14813
Founded: Jul 27, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Borderlands of Rojava » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:25 am

No, you shouldn't have to have a license to have kids. That's literally beyond the hellscape George Orwell imagined.
Leftist, commie and Antifa Guy. Democratic Confederalist, Anti-racist

"The devil is out there. Hiding behind every corner and in every nook and cranny. In all of the dives, all over the city. Before you lays an entire world of enemies, and at day's end when the chips are down, we're a society of strangers. You cant walk by someone on the street anymore without crossing the road to get away from their stare. Welcome to the Twilight Zone. The land of plague and shadow. Nothing innocent survives this world. If it can't corrupt you, it'll kill you."

User avatar
Ethraia
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Jun 02, 2021
Ex-Nation

Postby Ethraia » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:27 am

Blackmoon Clan wrote:
Furthermore, the reverse is true; parents who would otherwise be spectacular may be denied a child for harbouring homophobic viewpoints, because that would reduce their fitness to parent!

They wouldn't be spectacular if the offspring is gay... or by raising homophobes...

I agree man, but was trying to be fair and balanced to both sides cause not sure where the OP stands

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 115596
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:46 am

Sometimes Its a pity you don't need a license to start a thread
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
Molotovsk
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 110
Founded: Jun 02, 2021
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Molotovsk » Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:58 am

Borderlands of Rojava wrote:No, you shouldn't have to have a license to have kids. That's literally beyond the hellscape George Orwell imagined.


This.

Extra licenses are just a way to anger everyone.

User avatar
Saiwania
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19267
Founded: Jun 30, 2008
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Saiwania » Thu Jun 03, 2021 6:31 am

The problem is that its not all that hard for people to reproduce, assuming they're not sterile and can find someone of the opposite sex. People intuitively know how to have sex or figure it out on their own. And some societies that're at sub-replacement level fertility sort of need at least some people to still have kids at some point for that society to continue. It already is too unappealing or too expensive for many people to even have kids these days. It sets back your career/economic prospects and disrupts your home life at minimum.
Last edited by Saiwania on Thu Jun 03, 2021 6:35 am, edited 2 times in total.
Eco-Fascism is the future! I see a ton of potential for it going forward because of climate change. There will be need for a savior to rescue nature and ourselves from ourselves.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Deus eorum loquuntur, Esalia, Esternial, Google Adsense [Bot], Gravlen, Keira, Kerwa, Old Hope, Omphalos, Salandriagado, Salus Maior, Sincluda, Wormfodder Delivery

Advertisement

Remove ads