A Scottish MSP is suggesting drug addicts sign a "social contract" meaning if they agree they will get benefits,methodone and housing - but face having these withdrawn if they breach it by having a family. The children when born will also be taken into care. As many as 60,000 children are currently living with parents with a drug problem in Scotland alone.

 

Is this the answer to protect children in danger or is it a step too far down the big brother government which we live in today.

...can't we ban people who haven't worked a single day in their lives from becoming parents, too.... that's for men AND women?

...can't we ban people who haven't worked a single day in their lives from becoming parents, too.... that's for men AND women?

 

But how is that the same as parents who are druggys? :lol:

All I say is that the well being of the child has to be the top priority.

I am against the idea

 

Where does it end ? ban smokers from having children ? ban drinkers from having children ? ban anyone below a certain wage having children ?

Totally for it, how the hell can a couple of junkies strung out on Heroin all day possibly be able to look after a child and make sure it's fit and healthy when they cant even look after themselves properly? Being strung out and in a zombified state for most of the day aint exactly conducive to effective child-rearing and there have been so many cases of abuse and neglect amongst parents that are drug abusers that I reckon this is spot on to be honest....

 

Just to pick an extreme example out of the air, could anyone imagine what kind of parent Pete Doherty would be....?

 

And Craig, I think that if you don't have the financial means to properly raise a child then you should deffo think twice about it, kids cost something like £100,000 to bring up to age 18 (according to statistics that I read a few years ago), so unless you got a spare £100k floating around, I dont reckon you should even think about it.... :lol:

Totally for it, how the hell can a couple of junkies strung out on Heroin all day possibly be able to look after a child and make sure it's fit and healthy when they cant even look after themselves properly? Being strung out and in a zombified state for most of the day aint exactly conducive to effective child-rearing and there have been so many cases of abuse and neglect amongst parents that are drug abusers that I reckon this is spot on to be honest....

 

Just to pick an extreme example out of the air, could anyone imagine what kind of parent Pete Doherty would be....?

 

And Craig, I think that if you don't have the financial means to properly raise a child then you should deffo think twice about it, kids cost something like £100,000 to bring up to age 18 (according to statistics that I read a few years ago), so unless you got a spare £100k floating around, I dont reckon you should even think about it.... :lol:

 

I can see where you are coming from Scott but I think it sets a dangerous precedent, an executive living in a 500k house coming home after a stressful days work and arguing with then beating the $h!t out of his wife with the kids about etc is just as harmful if not more to the child's physical and psychological wellbeing as having a poor drug addict as a dad etc so if drug addicts can't have kids then alcoholics and wifebeaters would be next in the government's sights as they are harmful to the development of children too :unsure:

I can see where you are coming from Scott but I think it sets a dangerous precedent, an executive living in a 500k house coming home after a stressful days work and arguing with then beating the $h!t out of his wife with the kids about etc is just as harmful if not more to the child's physical and psychological wellbeing as having a poor drug addict as a dad etc so if drug addicts can't have kids then alcoholics and wifebeaters would be next in the government's sights as they are harmful to the development of children too :unsure:

 

Oh, dont get me wrong, I wouldn't allow any drug abuser no matter what their salary bracket to raise a kid (which is why I gave a rock star as an example). And I definitely think you could make a case for alcohol abusers who beat up their wives as well...

 

 

I don't think the state should be involved in private matters at all.

Completely unhelpful to interfer in my view.

 

I'd love a total ban on gymslip mothers - instant termination for girls under a certain age... what on earth can these girls give to the child? And more importantly, what have they paid into the state to receive anything back from it?

I'd love a total ban on gymslip mothers - instant termination for girls under a certain age... what on earth can these girls give to the child? And more importantly, what have they paid into the state to receive anything back from it?

 

Why should a child be denied a right to life ? why should it be terminated ? it can be put up for adoption by social services

 

Why should a child be denied a right to life ? why should it be terminated ? it can be put up for adoption by social services

 

Or maybe they could actually look after it, even if they are underage? Help from parents etc...

I would never give my child away. Having an instant termination rule as russt68 said would be cruel.

And it's not as if young mums are a dangerous matter anyway, can't believe some people are saying drug addicts shouldn't be banned from having kids tbh :blink:

if an underage child wants to have a kid then fine - but I think the legal age to be able to collect any state help for a child should be 18..... then under-18 pregnancies would almost disappear within a year...

I don't think the state should be involved in private matters at all.

Completely unhelpful to interfer in my view.

 

It's not a private matter when you have all these bloody chavvy Vikki-Pollard types (of both genders I might add...) going around and having sprogs by about a half a dozen different partners and expecting the taxpayer to pick up the tab for it... Fukk that! Sterilise and castrate these fukkers.... <_<

 

Sorry, it's about time we got medieval on these leeching b/astards....

 

And I'm in agreement with Russ, about time to start with mandatory abortions, too many people in the world as it is.....

 

As Bill Hicks once said "Hey, let's talk about this whole 'food/air' deal for a minute..."

if an underage child wants to have a kid then fine - but I think the legal age to be able to collect any state help for a child should be 18..... then under-18 pregnancies would almost disappear within a year...

 

:lol: :lol:

 

I'd vote for that. Hear, Hear! Why should I pay my hard earned taxes to these stupid fukkers who dont know one end of a ruddy condom from the other.....?

if an underage child wants to have a kid then fine - but I think the legal age to be able to collect any state help for a child should be 18..... then under-18 pregnancies would almost disappear within a year...

 

You are wrong, it would increase crime as they would steal or mug to get money, doesn't work the simplistic way you are making out

 

Most under 18 pregnancies are drunken or drug fuelled 1 night stands again after 10 pints of cider each I doubt the 2 that are shagging would even know whether its day or night let alone benefit laws

Edited July 25, 200618 yr by Ozzy Osbourne

While I am not defending teenage mums I know of a lot of middle class to middle upper class young criminals in my town who are acting just as badly as chavs because both parents work all hours of the day or night and give them no love and attention and just leave them to their own devices so in boredom and fed up with their wealthy parents neglecting them by putting their careers first the kids turn to crime out of boredom and lack of parental guidance and attention, is 2 posh parents neglecting their kids any better than a single teenage mum on low income or benefits ??

While I am not defending teenage mums I know of a lot of middle class to middle upper class young criminals in my town who are acting just as badly as chavs because both parents work all hours of the day or night and give them no love and attention and just leave them to their own devices so in boredom and fed up with their wealthy parents neglecting them by putting their careers first the kids turn to crime out of boredom and lack of parental guidance and attention, is 2 posh parents neglecting their kids any better than a single teenage mum on low income or benefits ??

 

Oh, please, I'm sick of hearing this whole "mater and pater didn't love me" horsesh!t from all these over-priveleged little middle-class fukks who use any excuse in the world in order to not take responsibility for their own actions. I come from a fairly tough working class background, no silver spoons in my gob mate, mum and dad went out to work to support me. I didnt turn to crime or get into gangs or gluesniff or knock up any 13 year olds.....

 

I'm really surprised that you of all people are coming across all 'tree-hugger' and 'liberal' on this issue Craig....

 

Just seems to me that people really need to think about exactly why it is they're having kids if they cant be arsed with them....

 

I'm really surprised that you of all people are coming across all 'tree-hugger' and 'liberal' on this issue Craig....

 

 

LOL I am not, I just think that single teenage working class parents are being singled out in this thread so I am making the point that the offspring of working class teenage girls are not solely responsible for what is happening in this country today, there are bad parents right across the social divide so just because a wealthy daddy can afford to take the family to the Seychelles each year does not mean his kids are not annoying little $h!ts who are every bit as bad if not worse than chavs off a council tower block

 

I just think that there is too much teenage single mum bashing in this thread as opposed to of ALL bad parents

 

Example - A case recently over here where some windows were smashed in a shopping arcade, who was found guilty of criminal damage ? 2 chavs in hoodies ? nope 2 17 year olds from public school who's parents both work in the city in banking and live in a £750,000 house (I know the road well) why is she not being steralised and just the single mum off the council estate ??

 

I just think that teenage single mums are a convenient scapegoat when there are parents as bad if not worse higher up the social scale

You are wrong, it would increase crime as they would steal or mug to get money, doesn't work the simplistic way you are making out

 

Most under 18 pregnancies are drunken or drug fuelled 1 night stands again after 10 pints of cider each I doubt the 2 that are shagging would even know whether its day or night let alone benefit laws

 

I don't agree at all.

 

I live in Wales, and the people that are left here after the better part of 20 years of Tory rule don't seem to be getting pregnant whilst high on coke or cider, I'm afraid.

 

In fact, ALL the under-age pregnancies I'm aware of in this area are brought about by the ones least likely to.... or the ones that are certainly not on drugs. And whilst they tell the social they are single, will be bringing up the kid alone - 90% of them are not... the houses they get given willy-nilly tend to house the girl AND the boy they happened to get pregnant with on that occasion. Of course, the line-up changes more often than not for baby number 2, but that's another story.

 

It's a cheap, easy way to get colossal benefit handouts, free housing and a surefire way to ensure these lazy cows don't have to work like the rest of us, end of.

 

The only way to curb this is to either stop all handouts to these kids.... or mandatory adoption or abortion. The country simply cannot afford to pay out to people who have never paid in - or simply have no intention to.

 

Also - as parents are now liable to pay damages for children in trouble etc.... why not make it mandatory that any kid who gets pregnant - ALL or at the very least a hefty portion of her maternal and living costs will be met from their parents' money - whether that money be from working or from the social. Again - I think this would ensure we don't see 14 year old girls hanging round the streets like hookers in every village, town and city in the country... these parents would keep a much closer eye on their sprogs - or face a hefty payout if they don't.

 

The state is making having babies WAY too easy - if it was made more difficult for these lazy cows to claim from the state - they simply wouldn't be getting pregnant.