There are so many horrible parents out there. Parents that don't care. Parents that pop out another one every nine months like clockwork because they don't understand birth control and planning. Parents that beat their kids. Parents that sexually abuse their kids. Parents that are never there; that can't provide; that won't listen.

Horrible parents.

Why do you need a license to drive, to fish, to breed animals, but not for having children?

We need a test.

This test would focus on the couple's marital bliss (if they split up, it's hard on the kid), their propensity for violence or abuse, their psychological makeup, their economic situation, their education, their parenting skills (can they change a diaper, can they handle a parent-teacher conference, etc.).

This test would not be too difficult, but it would at least weed out the worst offenders.

Don't pass the test, and you don't get to have kids.

If you have them anyway, you get put in jail, and the children get put with a better family.

Children our are future--shouldn't we make sure that they are raised by good people?

I personally think this is one of the best ideas that a civilization could produce, but, sadly, it's never gonna happen. Why?
It would set every single human rights group, everybody who doesn't like this idea-and I'm sure that's a huge chunk of people, and the aforementioned parents into a total rabid killer frenzy.

I mean, one of our fundamental rights is to breed, and that's taking it away.
And what about accidental pregnancies? If the would be parents failed, the child would either have to be aborted-and I'm not touching that one-or put up for adoption. And adoption agencies are already overflowing to begin with.

It's an excellent concept, one that, if implimented, would make our world a much better place, but one that, sadly, has impossible hurdles to overcome.

Not to get offtopic, but from everything I've heard, adoption agencies are far from being flooded, at least with babies. They do have an unfortunate surplus of older children, but couples are lining up in droves to adopt babies that don't exist. One couple I know got so tired of the wait that they adopted a baby girl from China at considerable personal expense to themselves.

That's a good point, you need a license to breed animals but to have a kid you're totally free. Of course, I think that making people get a license to have kids is a horrible idea. I'm a libertarian about most things.

you can't belive that we should choose who should, and shouldn't. The best thing to do is to conform to the parents and children so that the children don't have to suffer at the parents expense, example, HEALTH CARE. So that jsut because the parents can't afford it, the children don't have to suffer. free education, if you work for it, etc. a society can't go into people beds and tell them not to do things, if it happens then we should conform and help them deal with it. Underage parents? Give them grants, pay for their baby sitting, etc.

The reason there is a license for animals is because they aren't human, they don't have the same capacity as a human being or the same thought power, and also we assume that peopl can survive without help, we assume that a single parent can watch their kid while working at crappy jobs, and that the child can suffer because of the parent.

I see one problem with the testing, it could turn into a beuracratic nightmare. Say the testing does start and it works fine, there will still be people in society who want to improve it at any cost. So then what, you ask, why genetic testing for parents to get the rights to breed. People would get tested to see if they could pass on any sort of mental disorder of physical disease to their children because of how their genes would combine. Sure it would make peole healtier, but is it worth it if people are not allowed to have children if they could pass on some sort of minor disorder such as color blindness?

You know, that'll just end up being like the nazi purge of the jewish and slavs in my opinion.

I think so to. And the thing that scares me is that we have the technology to test people like that, just not the moral inclination. That could change fairly soon, because of the population boom. As there are more and more people in the world governments will place less value on the individual. They will want to streamline their societies so that they become more efficient than everyone else. It just bothers me how one good intentioned thing could cause problems down the line so drasticly.

Why should we pay for their mistake? If you've got five children, and you're on welfare, what's one of the worst things you can do? Have another five children. Should the government have to pay just because some people can't stop ****ing?

I do agree, however, that the children shouldn't pay for it either. That's why it's better all around that the children not get created in the first place. I think those who score abysmally on this test should just be spayed/neutered so they can't have kids anymore. (But I would not do this if their situation could be improved, like economic hardship.)



So...babies have more thought power than animals? I don't think so.

We assume that people can survive without help. That's a big assumption, don't you think? And I don't agree with it.

(Besides, when you "assume" you make an "ass" out of "u" and "me". Just to toss that in there.)



Well, there's the opportunity for corruption everywhere. You can't hold that against the policy. If this was implemented, I too would hope that those creating it would make sure that a neutral/unbiased party determined the testing procedures and that the creators would make sure that genetics didn't enter into it.

Oh, and Testify? Stop trying to end my thread with your talk of Nazis. We're talking about eliminating bad parents, not eliminating races. Are you saying that Jews are worse parents than other races?



First of all, the population has been booming for quite some time now. The government already places little value on the individual. Corruption and selfishness has prevented the inclination to be more efficient.
Second of all, the road to hell is paved, sir, and not with stone.
Third of all, that stuff about having the technology to test people--what the heck are you talking about? Test people like what? As far as I know the human genome is nowhere near mapped out.
And if we don't have the inclination to do so already, why would this new opportunity push us over that edge?

I don't think that any individual or institution has the right to set the standard for parenthood. I mean, what if it wasn't you designing the test? What if it was the religious right? Or some other institution you disagree with? For that matter, what right do I have to tell anyone else what makes a competent parent?

Reading into your words, you imply that only married male/female couples who are statistically unlikely to divorce should be able to have kids. Think about the implications of that for a few moments...

The government should only excersize their power to take away children in the case when there is clear abuse or neglect. Otherwise, the government has no right to control other people's reproductive activity.

Well they don't have it mapped very well, but at fertility clinic and such they could test people with existing disorders to see the chances of passing on a gene. The tests if they ever happened wpuld most likely be done to see if people where carriers of a disorder and didn't know it.

So... only people who are planning to have kids get to have kids? Those 'accidents' that turn out to be a wonderful experience & much happiness for families now can't happen anymore?

And I don't know that you can really test for a propensity to violence/abuse. That can be hidden remarkably well, as well as developed via other problems, like alcoholism, and some people with a family history of it now will never do the same to their kids, even though they may have a propensity to. Parenthood changes people, as well... the results of the tests before/after will be different.

Besides... my folks were dirt poor, and my mom has depression/anxiety problems, and they were the *best* parents I've ever met. (Four kids with no serious problems that aren't hard-wired in? I'd say they did pretty well.)

The real solution to the problem of bad parents is fixing the problems that make people bad parents... helping them rise above poverty, educating them, giving them the social help (counseling, etc.) to work out family problems.

And this is why rich people always turn out well adjusted children.

I dunno, a lot of the rich kids I knew were pretty messed up. One friend of mine and his general social circle, all of them were pretty wealthy and they were all heavily into drugs and stuff. I'm not talking drinking beer and smoking pot and maybe a little acid, they were doing some pretty hard stuff like ecstacy, opium, vicodin, etc. on a regular basis, too. And they were always crashing the cars their parents bought them and stuff. Crazy scene, they just have too much money on their hands and parents who think that they can do no wrong, I guess because they're so successful and upper class and stuff.