There was a woman who called into my morning show the other day that got my mind going. The situation was like this:
Her sister is a long-time drug user who’s been in and out of jail over the last several years. She just had her third child, a son, who has birth defects like his two older brothers as a direct result of the drugs his mother used while pregnant. This woman who called in is now adopting this new baby and has asked her sister to please stop having children as they are all mentally and/or physically challenged because of her capriciousness and all of the boys have been taken away from her. The sister refuses.
My issue with this:
1) this drug user obviously can’t take care of herself or the children she’s bringing into this world
2) this woman’s addiction and irresponsibility have directly and forever negatively impacted the lives of her children
3) the state and its taxpayers are now financially responsible for taking care of these children and she is not held accountable in the slightest
So what’s the answer? Whose job is it to hold her responsible for her actions and the damage she causes to those around her?
Do you tie this woman’s tubes and physically restrict her from having more children and causing more harm? Is it the government’s right to take away that ability from her, even if it's the government who has to clean up the mess for years and years? If you do physically restrict her from having kids, what happens if in 10 years this woman cleans up her act and wants children that she would take care of?
Do you lock her up in jail or a treatment center (also at the state’s expense) away from men so she can’t get pregnant and hopefully gets better?
What should be done?
2023 Year in Review: Tough breaks, but it’s all right
10 months ago
10 comments:
Hmmm, this is tough. I would tie her tubes, this can be reversed now I believe. If not, then I don't know, can they do forced birthcontrol like shots??
I don't know if locking her up is the answer, because she could continue her reckless lifestyle there.
Make her get a 10 year IUD - the $400 is definitely worth it. If she proves to clean up her act sooner she can have it removed and have normal kids, as long as she can support the ones with defects.
Actually, it would be better if proven substance abuse during pregnancy were a criminal act. Then she'd have to go to jail.
it's the using drugs that is pointed as the "cause" for this. That is the illegal part, having handicapped children is not a crime (unless something like Viki idea were instated, but then, that can be difficult to prove...additionally there is the critical time when a woman doesn't KNOW she's pregnant). however. where are these children's fathers? it is NOT just the responsibility of the mother, as there had to be a sperm donor in there somewhere.
Additionally, it is not the goverment's responsibility to control baby making, in any case. You do that, and the next thing you know, there is complete gender segregation or permits to procreate, and only the upper class can do afford the permit. Not that it doesn't sound nice to need a license to have children, I've joked at how ideal that would be. It's not feasible. The govt should not be controlling biological actions. Yea. it sucks for some individuals. But God gave us FREE WILL and she is using it!
I agree with Martha. Where are the children's fathers, Grandparents, etc.? It is the drugs that are illegal and she should be punished for that crime. Unfortunately, we can't force any of these issues and we as tax payers are forced into "helping" these people. People do stupid things that directly affect those around them and she is one of those people.
This annoys me on a variety of levels. Once I get my head together, I'll try to post my thoughts on this.
I agree w/Martha too. We can't restrict someone for procreating necessarily... permits and whatnot would get ridiculous. We'd be spending more time and effort than needed. Obviously this lady is an unfit mother and the fact that social services isn't stepping in immediately baffles me... the fact they didn't step in after the first one baffles me. They just need to lock her up so hopefully she learns a damn lesson!
I agree with Martha to a point.
Regarding fathers: Yes, some need to step up. However, being male, I have to say that if it comes right down to it, the mother has ALL the rights. Fathers face an uphill battle getting custody over mothers. Doubt it? Take a good look at court cases. I'm not lying.
Sometimes men have absolutely no choice in the matter.....
The government is already WAY too involved in our lives. ANY control in reproductive health is too much control. People have to be free to make their own decisions, end of story.
Oh, Vikki.......substance abuse during pregnancy is a criminal act in Ohio. It's considered Child Endangerment. Just like murdering a pregnant woman in Ohio is considered double homicide.
I remember a conversation I had with my mom when I was a teenager. I was a very opinionated teeny and we were discussing pretty much these same issues. Back then I thought forced birth control was a good idea. My mom shut me up with a short sentence: "That's what the Nazis did."
the only problem with it being criminal to do drugs while pregnant, is I suspect you have to know you're pregnant while doing the drugs for it to be criminal.
I'm thinking the fathers could step up to help out/take the kids if she is apparently putting them up for takes anyway. but then. If she's that screwed up, she's probably not sleeping with the most stable individuals...
I find it ironic that if a pregnancy is wanted, it's double homicide. If the pregnancy is not wanted, it's absolutely nothing to get rid of the baby (how is it a person in one instance and not in the other?)
Yup. govt. has too much control. They could back off on a few things.
Our joke was put birth control in the water (way to ensure everyone had it in them). Then, once approved to be licensed to reproduce, you are given bottled water so you are no longer on the birth control.
Gov't should back off on a LOT of things. I'm all for smaller (waaaaay smaller) government and a lot less intervention in our lives. Check out the Constitution sometime.
Post a Comment