While last week the US press was busy reporting on the Octuplet mother, the British press was buzzing with the story of a 13 year-old boy who became a father. Alfie Patten, was 12 when the baby was conceived (his girlfriend, Chantelle Steadman, was 15) and was quoted as saying “it would be good to have a baby…I didn't think about how we would afford it. ... I didn't know what it would be like to be a dad. I will be good, though, and care for it." Chantelle, told the newspapers that they wanted to "prove to everyone" that they could give Maisie a "great future" and also expressed her commitment to stay in school.
Former Conservative party leader Iain Duncan Smith, who runs the Centre for Social Justice think tank, described the birth as another case of "broken Britain" where "Anything goes…It's not being accusative; it's about pointing out the complete collapse in some parts of society of any sense of what's right and wrong… There is no opprobrium any more about behavior, and quite often, children witness behavior that's aggressive, violent, rude and sexual. It's as if no one is saying this is wrong." The Times reported that during the last ten years more than 40 other boys younger than 14 had fathered children. At the same time Tony Kerridge, a health specialist of Marie Stopes International, spoke of the need for better education and added that "We have got the social aspect of young girls in the UK seeing having a baby as a route to getting their own place."
And thus, some commentators started discussing the licensing thesis, advanced by Hugh LaFollette, a philosophy professor at East Tennessee State University, who called for the adoption of a parenting license through administering competence tests. You can't become a parent unless you pass certain competence tests. If you do become a parent without asking for a license, you will have to take these tests after the birth of the child, and if you fail, the child will be taken from you until you improve. LaFollette believes that although such testing may not be accurate and may prove unjust to some prospective parents, the benefits should outweigh the costs. Naturally, many people objected: “People have a right to having children, as they have the right to free speech and religion.” LaFollette answered that freedom of speech does not make slander acceptable nor does freedom of religion make human sacrifice legal.
Peg Tittle, professor of applied ethics put it as follows: “"We already license pilots, salesmen, scuba divers, plumbers, electricians, teachers, veterinarians, cab drivers, soil testers and television repairmen. ... Are our TV sets and toilets more important to us than our children?.. Then again, wait a minute -- we have set a bar for parents: adoptive/foster parents. Those would-be parents have to prove their competence. Why do we cling to the irrational belief that biological parents are automatically competent -- in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary? We have, without justification, a double standard.”
Pierre Lemieux attacked the concept. He wrote: “It is not clear if, in LaFollette's scheme, a license would be required before conceiving a child, or only for keeping and rearing the baby. LaFollette claims that enforcement problems are not insurmountable. ‘We might not punish parents at all,’ he adds, ‘we might just remove the children and put them up for adoption.’ Of course, laws are ultimately enforced by armed men, and scenes similar to agents with fully automatic weapons seizing Elian Gonzalez would be repeated. Usually, though, parents would let a social worker ‘peacefully’ take their children away because they know that they have no chance against the SWAT team. So, with a few exceptions, the tyranny would be soft and quiet -- tyranny with an invisible hand.”
What do you think? Do we need a license for parenthood or is it a form of tyranny?
Facebook Badge
131 comments:
I agree with Pierre Lemieux's comments and certainly his sarcastic tyranny remark. To think a philosopher would come up with a standardized test to evaluate the competency of parents is just odd. What standards are we to compare? I personally do not believe that all parents are competent because they are able to reproduce. Some children are brought into this world and are victims of circumstance drugs, teen pregnancy or lack of education. It is unlikely to have one solution for all these issues but an efficient foster system may help. Peg Tittles examples do not make a fair comparison to children as they do not render services or goods and are 40 children under 10 in ten years representative of a broken Britain? Marie Stopes I believe is on the right track in this article. Education may be the most effective way to deal with this issue. Abstinence it appears is not in our DNA. I do hope that child’s child has understanding stable grandparents.
i very much agree with Lemieux as well for his sarcasm with his use of tyranny in this situation. but in the same sense a test can in no way prove whether or not a person is fit to be a parent that judgment is left for the parent in question themselves to make it all falls into the category of responsibility more so than age or principle of having a child. look at all the children in poorer parts of the world forced to raise their own brother or sister because their parent doesn't have the responsibility themselves to do so. not every single problem when dealing with victims of teen or even preteen in some cases can be solved nor can they be victimized by others when saying their incompetent of passing a test.
Although this is an awful story, a standardized test is a ridiculous solution to the problem. Indeed, it is sad that anyone can conceive a child because there are so many incompetent parents in the world, but requiring someone to pass a test before they can reproduce is taking away a basic God given right. Unfortunately, many children are victims of sad circumstances, but better education and adoption agencies is a far better solution than requiring a license to have a child. The first thing I thought of when I read this article was the law in China where you can only have one child. I personally don’t believe the government has the right to take away a basic freedom, such as the right to have a child. The only case I believe the government should step in is if there are problems in the family, such as abuse.
Although i agree with Pierre Lemieux's comments, i don't think making people should have to take tests to see if they are capable of being parents or not. Parenting is a god given right that shouldn't be taken lighly. Being a father at 13 isn't the most responsible thing to do, parents should understand that when you bring a baby into the world it is up to the parents to have complete responsibilty for the well being of that child. As far a talking a test for becoming a parent goes... that doesnt help the problem either, who's to say the tests come out accurate in the long run.
I dont think that a standardized test is the right thing, but i do think that there should be some rules to becoming a parent. It is rediculous that a 15 year old CHILD and 13 year old CHILD had a child. They are in no way fit to be parents. The parents of these kids are going to be forced to raise their grandchild. I don't exactly know what "test" or anything that should be made but I agree with ianschmidt, I think that some sort of foster care would be suffice. I think that it is rediculous that to drive a car, you have to pass a pre-license test, get a year of experience and then take another test to get your permanent license, but to have a child, it requires no test or licensure at all. I don't really think that anyone will ever come up with a test or law to have children, but people should really be smart with sex and stop bringing children into the world if they are too young or not financially, mentally and emotionally ready.
OH sweet!i was just reading the story about that 13yrs old father the other day!and here we go we are talking about it, i guess it is a hot topic!! WELL, all I can say is- the parents of those two poor child-parents are responsible and should be blame for the actions of their kids!I mean they are not doing their jobs as a parents!jez...
ok, as for the issue! I think Lemieux Proposal is ridicilously wrong! I dont agree with it, and the idea of the test is a joke!!Common, knowing things about parenting and acting as a parent are completely two different ideas. Alot of parents out there "know" the idea of the right parenting but still dont "ACT" as a parent. In other words, its easy to say than done. For me, being a parent means being able to adopt. Adopting to the stage by stage pace of a child is the key. The best way to be a great mother/father is to have the child and learn. It takes practice, trial/error, and patient to be a successful parent. Now, if these parents failed the tests, how they are really going to know if they are good parents or not?
Having a license to parent does not guarantee anything, educating the parents is the future!! GOVerntment should work with the parents to build the foundation of the child. When the foundation is strong, the child will be strong, and when the child become a man, he will be strong, and when the man is strong, an elite society is born. confucius!?LOL
Administer a test to see if a person is suitable to parent a child or not….Yah Right!!!! Since when does a government or state have the right to impede on the civil right of “freedom” and choices we have as people in this society? Parenting at such a young age to prove a point, or leave home is not ethical and would only hinder the young parents’ future, but it doesn’t make it a sin or violation of any kind. It is odd to see young people parenting and they should understand the concept of life and the full responsibility that comes with it. But parents in general should not be punished or tested to see if they’re fit for parent duty. A test does not prove or disprove a person’s true capability and potential. It involves more than just testing skills. Obtaining morals, ethics, responsibility, intellect, and maturity are the foundation for basic parenting
Nanishauna
I am not sure if the families are in any position to raise the child. Alfie's father is reported to have 9 or 10 children of his own. I was just reading Baby-faced dad, 13, stokes ‘broken Britain’ fears at NBC
A standardized test could in no way determine good parents. To be honest what has this world come to people should wake up and take a grip on something called integrity and morals. Learn how to be patients and grow as a person in life, find who you are and your wants and needs as a human being. Then seek a mate (a husband or wife) before you decide to raise a child, especially in this world we live in today. Not saying marriages are always perfect but it may give you and that child a better chance of surviving in a stable environment with morals and an family basis mentality to pass on in there future so we don’t have anymore baby daddy’s, baby mommy’s , STD’s, HIV, etc……
I have always been saying that people who want children or who get pregnant should be forced to take a parenting class and pass in order to have children. There is more done to a husband and wife when they are going to adopt then when they have a child of there own. The safety of the children should come first. Not only should they have to take a class and pass to get a license but I also think someone should come over to there house and check to see if it is baby proofed and if it ok to bring a new born into. Just like if you were going to adopt. I honestly believe that the issues we have with child abuse would become a thing of the past. Woman after giving birth should also be forced to go see a physiologist to make sure they do not have post-pardon depression. And as far as a 12 year old having a baby, that is ridiculous, when did they find time to be alone together? My mom always wanted to know who I was with and where I was going. And I was never home alone until I was older. People need to educate there children earlier in life and better, and they also need to watch their kids better.
I think we need to stop all these "tests" and stop depending on all this technology to walk us through the path of life. Simply,this is crazy! No child at the age of thirteen needs to be fathering a child. He has no experience about how crude and hard this world can be,he hasn't experienced any of the drug, alcohol, scenes that in my mind are needed to become more mature and to be able to teach the child, "this is whats wrong, and this is why, no you decide." A child has given birth to a child! What kind of knowledge can a thirteen and fifteen year old give to another child? Usually we look up to people that are wise and have experience under their belts. And this is ridiculous that those children were in an environment that intercourse can actually be performed. Where are the parents?
Do we need a license for parenthood? When I look at the video posted in our blog, or read the articles about Alfie and Chantelle, I scream YES! Absolutely, those kids need a license. Along with the other preteens out there becoming so irresponsible in spreading their genes at will, as do the alcoholics and drug addicts having children without regard to that child’s future. We can’t leave out the racist, the sexual predator, or the religious zealot. What about the person who really thought they knew what they were doing, but soon realized that becoming a parent was so much more – that person like myself?
Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? So does a license for parenthood!
If we created a test to obtain a license for parenthood, wouldn’t we have to control being able to become a parent first? If we began to control the ability to become a parent, then the second part of the question comes into play – is it a form of tyranny? Tyranny means unrestrained exercise of power or unmerciful rule. Would creating a license for parenthood mean unrestrained exercise of power or unmerciful rule? Unmerciful rule, perhaps not. The basis of a parenthood license is in essence to show mercy on children. So it wouldn’t be unmerciful rule. Would it then be unrestrained exercise of power? Absolutely. It would be impossible to restrain the ability to procreate without an unrestrained exercise of power – and that would define tyranny.
It seems as if we have an uncanny ability to look for the answer to a problem instead of its prevention. It would also seem that if we are such an intelligent creation (after all we can clone, right?), we would then realize that there are so many more things than drugs we should ‘just say no’ too.
There is definitely something that needs to be done about the underage births going on around the world, but the answer is not a simple solution. This problem is a systemic one that cannot be solved by a single solution or lackluster test. Every family situation is unique and there just may be 15 or 16 year olds that are better parents than 25 year olds. A blanket solution is not possible. The children should be given resources, assistance, and parental education if they should decide to keep the child. They should be scolded for being irresponsible, but not for deciding against having an abortion. I know underage parents that struggled, but all the while turned out be VERY good and loving parents. Let our government and its networks of social workers do their jobs of family monitoring. Should they find the environment of a child from an underage pregnancy unfit, let them make their decision then. Back in rural America is was COMMONPLACE for people to get married young and have children young. We are wiser now and know that we should wait for a better age and financial position, but it can be done at a younger age! We need to promote abstinence in schools, show children the statistics and consequences of teenage pregnancy, ask questions to our children, teach the benefits of waiting until you are married, teach family values, go to church!
What will they think of next? A license to breathe! The idea that 13 year old children, (and he was 12 when he had sex with the mother) in any culture are responsible enough to parent a child is laughable. The problem is the anything goes attitude in society today. "If it feels good, do it." I think as Americans we have to look at ourselves and ask when is enough, enough? Our country was founded on Biblical principles, and the idea that today people are trying to take God out of everything is exactly why we are having the problems with the young people that we are having. Parents do not want to be told what to do anymore, by anyone. So how are they to know right from wrong if they don't want to listen? And what does that say for the ideals the parents are passing down to their children? NO, we should not license parenthood. We should treasure our children and seek to give them the best we possibly can. To me that means teaching them what God says about issues and how to handle situations in life.
Parenting license and organ commodity, what is the world becoming? I think that the parents should take a Holy Spirit test and learn how to grow their children up in the Lord. The Bible teaches if you spare the rod then you will spoil the child; children are running their parents these days. God created us with a nice cushioned spot just for spankings. Maybe then some morals will be put back in the homes and children will not be having children, and this question about having to take a test to bear a child would not even have came up. It seems like ever since God has been taken out of schools and even most churches that more children are having children. I think by making people take a test to conceive a child will cause more social issues, especially for the children whose parents do not pass the competent test. What will they tell the child? “Your mother took a test, and she failed, so you had to be adopted.” This is a tyranny and a poor solution to a problem; someone could be well able to be a great parent, but not a good test taker. God is good and his ways work; the one solution is to follow him and his commandments. God created our little pea brain; he knows what is best. No philosopher can even compare to God’s wisdom and answers. Abstinence is definitely not in our DNA. Self-restraint is a spiritual thing; it takes the power of God to overcome natural desires that go against his word.
I’m going to start by reverting back to a comment I made in class, and for those in my class you might recognize this little story. In the election a while ago we had a choice of making same sex marriages legal or illegal, and although (due to personal/religious beliefs) I might disagree with it, I voted for it to be legal. Who am I to tell other people what they can and can’t do in their own homes? Secondly, how much control over our personal lives do we want to give the government? Either way, the same goes for this topic. Yes, there is a problem with the underage reproducing all over the world, but how is a test / license going to stop it? It won’t, and taking away kids from parents without the license just creates more reasons for the government to control us even more. Where will all these kids go to who don’t get into foster homes or adopted? Who will pay for all their needs and see to it they are properly raised? Can we say Taxes? You can’t make anyone properly protect themselves when doing “the act”, “the DO”, “the horizontal mombo”, etc… As far as educating them more so they know what not to do, if we’re talking about from the school system, personally I think that’s what got us here in the first place. The more audible information you give people of that age, the more they want to get a hands-on physical approach to it. After they implement this license and find it doesn’t work the next step will be to change the “Human growth and Development class” they give students in middle school with a more detailed, “This is a condom/birth control, and it is mandated by law that you use them, or you will get the death penalty, unless you have your parenting license” class. Truth is parents don’t want to raise children properly anymore (not all, but most) and these “oh so wonderful” new ideas get voted into law because parents seem to believe that the government controlling their kids makes it easier on them. More and more minors are being tried as adults in the court system, whatever happened to parents being responsible for their child’s actions (in the U.S.) if under the age of 18. If the parents we’re on trial and put in jail or given the death penalty for their child’s actions I would hope to see them taking a more active role in the rearing of their kids. Since they have nothing to lose anymore they just don’t care. I’ve gone off topic and blown this way out of proportion like I always tend to do, so this is where it has to end… Final comment; I disagree with the license for parenthood.
There's no way a standardized test could possibly gauge something like that. Hell, just look at the monumental failure of the FCAT test. We can't even measure our school system well enough. How could we possibly capture something so intricately subtle and indelibly subjective as parenting ability?
I mean, forget the moral and social issues for a minute. The sheer logistics don't add up!
Besides...it's just tyrannical. You can't have some faceless, bureaucratic power dictating who can keep their kids based on a standardized test. That's just so wrong, so easily abused, and just a few short steps away from what's essentially eugenics.
This is nothing more and nothing less than pure media sensationalism. They focus on the very, very dew depraved individuals, completely ignoring the millions and millions of perfectly competent parents in the world. They try to make it look like these deviants are somehow the norm, when really, that couldn't be further from the truth.
It's not "Oh, my God! What's the world coming to!? This is sickening! We have to do something!!"
It's "Oh, that's kinda sad. But for every bad parent out there, I know there's a few million good ones."
There is no way that a standardized test can determine whether you're fit to be a mother or father. Now I'm not saying that every person is fit to be a parent BUT using a test to determine that is to crazy of an idea. Having a child is a blessing but having a child when you're 13 is complete chaos. Just like he said, he never thought of how much money it would cost and the other sacrifices that they were going to have to give up raising that child. I honestly hope that the grandparents of that child are stable enough to take care of a child because I'll bet money that they're going to be the ones watching the baby, not the parents.
I see there is a unanimous rejection of LaFollette's thesis, so I must be the one to play the devil's advocate here.:))
In many states you must have a license to get married. So, yes, the government does interfere.
Adoptive parents are subjected to all sorts of tests and evaluations... again the state does interfere. (The biological parents are considered fit, the adoptive ones are under questioning.)
Of course the answer is that the government should not interfere with biological parenthood (actually at times it does)because "it is your body and you are allowed to do with it as you please."
But if we own our bodies then why are we allowed to consume certain drugs only (like alcohol) and prohibited from using others (like marijuana?)
Double standards?
As I said before, the state does interfere at times. From the article Judge Orders Long-Term Birth Control for Mentally Retarded Woman Pregnant for 10th Time I copy the following:
A Memphis, Tenn., judge on Friday signed a court order for long-term birth control for a 33-year-old mentally retarded woman who already has nine children and is pregnant again, the AP/Tennessean reports. Juvenile Court Referee Claudia Haltom signed the order, which supports the recommendation of a state-appointed therapist for Loretta McGee. The birth control issue was raised after McGee on Tuesday attended a Juvenile Court proceeding for one of her children, according to the AP/Tennessean (AP/Tennessean, 6/28). McGee's children, who range in age from four to 17 and four of whom also are mentally retarded, have appeared before the juvenile court for "delinquent or unruly behavior" 36 times in five years, the Memphis Commercial Appeal reports (Edmondson, Memphis Commercial Appeal, 6/27). McGee's mother, Dorothy Wise -- who cares for McGee, a mentally retarded son and seven of McGee's children -- and her lawyer, Christine Stephens, want McGee to be permanently sterilized after she gives birth in October, the AP/Tennessean reports (AP/Tennessean, 6/28). When asked if she wants to sterilized, McGee "giggles and nods," but if she is asked anything else, she would "likely answer the same way," according to the Commercial Appeal (Memphis Commercial Appeal, 6/27). Some civil rights advocates are concerned that McGee will not understand the court order and her right to decide not to be sterilized. A judge does not have the authority to force a person to take long-term birth control or be sterilized at a caregivers' request, unless they present evidence of medical necessity. However, if McGee refuses to undergo the procedure, Wise could have her declared incompetent and could force her to undergo the procedure, according to the AP/Tennessean (AP/Tennessean, 6/28).
I don't believe parents will ever have to be put to a test before they have children. Even though in some of his views he did have very valid points. Being a teacher of 13 year olds, I do know that having a child at the age of 13, is very very sad. They are babes themselves. I do believe that children who are pregnant and the fathers that impregnated them should have to go to weekly classes on parenting, involving one of those babies they carry around continuously that cry and wet at all hours of the day. They definitely need to experience what they are about to get into, and the 9 month period they will need to do it, is the perfect time for them to decide of they want to put the child up for adoption. I was only 18 when I had my first child, and have to admit even at that age I wasnt ready, but did succeed. Something does need to be done about teenage pregnancy and if a child is under the age of 18 when they become pregnant a nine month class should be enforced. Maybe then more children could be adopted to families who are ready for children, and so desparately want to be parents. I truely believe this would solve some problems, not all but some. We are making it too easy for unwed single teens to have babies. The government picks up the tab most of the time, something does desparately need to be done.
I think trying to establish tests to show competency in order to obtain a license (a "child-bearing" license), is absolutely moronic! How could you ever decide what to test the person on?
If there is no education for the children to understand that having a child is a big resposibility, then what would you expect them to know? Some people might hate this, but teaching and emphasising abstinince and self-control would probably lower the statistics of pre-teen parenting. But then again, we are humans, and we cannot stop what people's actions are.
My bottom-line, I am fully against a test for parenthood. But I fully support the education needed to provide good parenting skills.
A parent license, that could be an interesting chaos to add to the world. Very few would agree with it and even fewer would do nothing about it. The biggest fear I would have to say would be what standard would they hold us to? Will we have to be compared to some super-parent who no one could compare to, to begin with? The whole subject has too many what-if scenarios to make it happen. To make someone do a test that would say whether or not they could be a parent would be outrageous. The amount of nervousness the people would have during the test would guarantee a failing grade.
this is actually William Newcomes blog
I completely agree with Lafollette, I actually have been saying this for some time now. We live in a time where the only to surpluses are people and pollution, we have to start making decisions like this one. I believe the competency test should be administered from a social worker or probation officer-like person. I don’t think children should be brought into the world unless they will receive the best living situations possible. I’m also pro-choice if you haven’t figured that out. Children are our future even if we let no one have kids for like five years except really smart people it would probably have a profound impact on the world. I think to have a kid you should be able to pass some kind of test like the one you have to pass for getting into the army or something like that.
I think that both LaFollete and Lemieux make good arguments. Something should be done to keep extremely unfit or "extremely" young would be parents from having children. But I dont think that making a law to make parents apply for a license is really going to help the situation. Although i do believe that there should be some kind of competence check or something along those lines. Mainly because the adoption/ social services are not up to the standards that they should be. They may end up taking a child away and giving to a foster family that is actually worse off than the family that they were takin from in the first place. And i do agree that there needs to be more education about the obstacles that come about from being a young parent, because kids are going to continue what they are doing. Since, it appears, other forms of awarenass are not working.
Display name
Take a look at Katusha's post please.
A standardized test can in no way decide when one is ready to become a parent or not. We technically don't become an adult until we turn eighteen so I think that there it would be extremely difficult for one to be able to raise a child before that age. If someone does make a mistake and becomes pregnant before they are eighteen i feel that it is the parents fault for not raising there child right and they should have to take care of the baby until the mother and father are at age and can afford and be able to properly raise there child. But in any case i feel that for people having to take a test to decide if they are ready to become a parent is just wrong and hopefully we as human beings will never have to take one of these standardized tests.
No, I think you can’t force a parent or require a parent to have a license and whether they pass or not then the child can be taken or left with them. I think we need to educate our children and discipline them. Making parents get a license to be a parent doesn’t solve the problem but parents acting and raising their children instead of raising themselves or not even disciplining and teaching them right from wrong is just the beginning of the problem. One main thing is that we need to teach people if you can’t do it the government will take care of you and you can live off our taxes. Sorry but if people did not depend on others they would figure out a way and get a job to support their family if they really did love and care for them. But don’t get me wrong there are some people that do need help and should be helped. For example, I think someone or some couple who keeps having children but no job and live off welfare should not be able to keep their children because they are unable and unfit to provide a roof and the basic needs for a child to live and until they do they should be taken by the state.
I think that we should have to meet some sort of qualifications to become parents. At least to make sure that we are able to raise the children in a stable environment, and that biological parents should undergo as much scrutiny as adoptive parents... but I do not think there should be some sort of competency test to be a parent.
Just like SoulEater had said, look at what happened with the FCAT.
Other than heavily educating children and young adults on the issue and providing more cost effective (and effective) birth control, I really do not think there is an absolute way to solve our overpopulation and incompetent parent problem. Although, people tend to react to incentive a lot quicker... :P so maybe allow those qualified to have children have lower hospital bills than those who are not? Or... some solution that is less extreme but very clear cut.
WOW a 13 year old kid being a dad. It seems like a hard road from there. I guess his childhood just got blown out of the water at that point. I guess in the world anything can happen. Its possible that even kids at age of thirteen can have a kid. So i guess licensing cant do much. I know it seems weird that kids are having children but then if you you need a lisence it is like another thing that kids cant do and we all know in america that the more restraints you put on kids the more they want to do it. I actaully feel really sorry for this kid casue he has no idea what happen. His life is about to take a swing in he wrong direction unless they have rich parents. And thats another good question. What do the rparent sthink of this and where were they while this was happening. I can blab on about the subject but it seems like the news just finds the right stories to challenge the mind. I personally dont think that putting a license on being a parent will mean anyhting. Tryanny or not it will just make it more interesting for kids to do the deed and test out the waters. Especially now when i went to school kids were having kids already and it was all totally new to me casuei never seen that in school before. It was a big culture shock for me but if kids are doing it anyway i say you cant stop them. Its just going to cause more problmes for the goverment and for people to watch their kids even more. I know people are still going to do it and its just more of a hassle for people to be parents. But this is just my opinion
I dont agree with the deranged man to say people need a licence or test. in reality test cant perdict anything in most cases a person can be scum, a person that doesnt care about anything or no one, male or female. the only thing that might get them to act right is a baby girl or boy. many people change their lifestyle and finally realize its time to grow up and take responsibility for their offsprings sake. but to make someone take a test before that major addition to their life arrives is ridiculus. what if the children get sent to the foster homes how do we know what situation they are going to, does the foster parents get tested also. we have to pick and choose our battles everyone is entitled to having a child if they want to do so.
Without a doubt i agree with what Lemieux is trying to portray. We really do need to start testin people to see if they are fit and qaulified for being a parent because there are so many people in this world today who seem to just be having kids as if they are some type of "new accesory" or something. I really do believe that people are getting confused with the simple fact that babies/kids are not like pets, yes you have to provide for both but pets are more independent you dont have to worry about them or stress about them like you have to do with children. I see parents come in to this elementary school where I volunteer at everyday not even knowing what grade their own child is in, not knowing the name of their teacher, not knowing when school starts, regestering them for school the week after;which is absolutely rediculous because they are so caught up in themselves that they do not put their own childeren first. This story is terrible because in all actuality these are basically "babies having babies", so how can they possibly provide for another human being when they cant even provide for themselves? But what can we as a society do because we cant prevent these kids from having sex because that is all the world promotes is that sex sells which is true, but that does not mean that you should run out and have sex unrpotected just because you can and end up pregnant. So yes i do believe that there should be some type of law passed here in america that states that people should qualify or take some type of test that shows that they are infact able to provide for their child and it should take place within the pregnancy and not having to wait until after the baby is born so they would know ahead of time what their situation will be concerning the baby.
I disagree with the proposed implementation of standardized "parent testing". Obviously there are and have always been issues regarding people being "fit parents". Who's to say whether or not a person is or will be a good parent? A test can not make that determination, and this question will never have a direct answer. There is no right or wrong, age or underage, rich or poor, determination of parenting skills. I personally believe that everyone, any age is fully capable of being a good parent (whether they do so or not, is another story!) A more proactive solution would be EDUCATION!!!
First off, my question is, "Where are these children's parents?" I think that if they are old and grown enough to have sex, then they should be able to take care of this baby that they produced. The 12 year old boy said he will take care of the child and that they will stay in school. these children now a days are way to advance in making decisions. Just because we are able to have children does not mean that we are to take advantage of it. People who are 35 years old, for example, can't take care of a child because of being unstable and now a 12 and 15 year old say they can do it....I don't think that's right! The child is being brought into this world not knowing what is going on and i think that it is totally unfair. But i totally think that the parents should be brought into this issue.
The thought of giving people tests for being parents is nonsense. There needs to be a better way to teach our young people and also some of the adults about the consequences of sex and being a parents. Also you can't always point out the negative in every situation you have to show both pro's a cons so people can get the point. People have the free will to think and do as they please, but some people need guidance and education.
A piece of paper isn’t what makes a good doctor, lawyer, marriage or parent. It does seem a double standard to make foster parents go through such impossible hoops and yet have no standard for the drug addict or the family unable to support the number of children they already have. Honestly, the issue isn’t competence it’s intelligence! Let’s stop preaching safe sex, what is that anyway?!? How about teaching kids who don’t even have all their adult teeth yet that sex is not for them. Really laws for this and that are not going to do anything. The more you oppose something the stronger it becomes, prohibition anyone? Instead of focusing on teaching 13 year olds how to be good parents let’s teach them on how play their proper role in society as children.
I think you should be able to have children at any age without government interference. But in some cases I do see it as a problem that needs to be dealt with. These young kids having kids will just use up more welfare and other government benifits that could be used on someone else. I think they should start teaching sex education at younger ages since most kids don't learn about it until high school age. So I vote no for having to take a test or get a license to be a parent.
when I first read this article i was shocked at the idea of having to take out a license to have children, the more I thought about it I realized that this gentleman may have a point. I do not agree with having them take away your child or anything but the thought that evaluating the parents to see if they are fit to rear their children seems appealing. I would imagine that parents would work harder to keep their licenses and their children and this would cut down on more serious problems like children prostitues, gangs, violence etc.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2233878.ece
For anyone interested, here is the link to the video that has been disabled.
Do I hear BIG BROTHER out there?? As wrong as I may feel it is for a 13 year old to be fathering a child, I shiver at the thought of the government regulating our reproductive abilities. This sounds like something out of a sci-fi movie. I really cannot say what the answer is, but I do know what it is not. The government already has too much control over our private lives. Perhaps we should look at not providing so much social assistance for people who choose to have children that cannot afford them. Perhaps at that point, more unfit parents will decide to give their biological children up for adoption. We continue to up the ante and provide more and more money to people to have children. I saw an interesting bumper sticker a few months back saying "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em". We actually have people out there intentionally having more children, in order to get more social aid. Why are we financially supporting this?
well first of all..i think a 13 year old boy is way to young to be a dad. i dont think he is mature enough to handle having a child considering he got his older girlfriend pregnat. as for the license to parent, i dont agree with that. whoever made that test for a parents license that is their opinion on what a parent should be but that is not everyones opinion on it. its just ridiculous to me that if you fail the test its because you didnt meet the "requirements" of the test makers opinion. for the 13yr old father i believe they should get his parents involved in how to take care and raise the child..but not to take a license to parent test.
I think that there should definitely be an age limit to having a kid. If you have a kid before your old enough to live on your own that kid should be taken from you or your parents should care for it till you can prove your ready to care for it. The fact that these kids parents allowed this to happen just kills me. Having sex at 12 is obscene. I also agree that there should be a standardized test to determine if one can have a child but not till they can stably live on their own and be able to prove that they could support a child.
I don’t think a test can improve a person with his or her parenting skills. Alfie Patten is still a teenage boy “a kid”. How can he support of take care of the baby; At thirteen no kid should be thinking of having a baby. Providing this license would not stop the problem of the rapid growth of teenage parents. I believe this one of the biggest problems that society is facing right now. There has to be a way to make kids understand that they are not ready to be parents. To make them comprehend that there is protecting “birth control.” In conclusion the standardized test could in no way determine good parents.
It is sad to say that a baby is raising another baby. However, God has given us free will. Unfortunately some choice made are less responsible that others.
In this situation this child is the one who will be effected the most. We fail to recognize that child abuse is something occurring everyday in families that may of portrayed being the best candidates in becoming parents. That is why a simple test would probably not detect something like abuse.
I think they should give these parents a chance. However there should be social workers observing them and should remove the child immediately with any sign of neglect or abuse.
Having a license to parent is not the answer. With proper guidance, observation, and support by either there parent or family there might be hope for this child and the future children of this world.
First of all, the only people that should be thinking of having children are those who are married. This thought is taken from a religious veiw, being that those who are marreied are the only ones to be engaging in sex. Even in this case, there are couples that are not competent enough to raise children. These are the people that should be tested for parenting license. However, I don't belive in removing a child from their parents unless the circumstances are proven to be unfit for a child. However, as for the children having children....A major part of this epidemic has been caused by those ^ unfit parents. Leaving it up to society to teach children about sex has made it possible for the chapter on Abstinence to be removed.
I'm obviously against a "parenthood" test. (Not a huge fan of government regulation, or governments in general, if that's not obvious by now.)
Adoption is always a viable option for someone in the shoes of these young teenagers. There are many loving, competent couples waiting to adopt babies.
Our entire culture seems to revolve around sex now, and I'm not sure if teaching abstinence is even effective now that sex is everywhere.
I actually shudder when I think of how hard it must be to raise a child up the right way in the culture we live in today...
Yes I agree with Pierre Lemieux's comments and certainly his sarcastic tyranny remark. There is a problem with the underage reproducing all over the world, but how is a test license going to stop it. It won’t, and taking away kids from parents without the license just creates more reasons for the government to control us even more. Where will all these kids go to who don’t get into foster homes or adopted? Who will pay for all their needs and see to it they is properly raised? Can we say Taxes? You can’t make anyone properly protect themselves when doing “the act”, “the DO”, “the horizontal mambo”, etc. As far as educating them more so they know what not to do, if we’re talking about from the school system, personally I think that’s what got us here in the first place. The more audible information you give people of that age, the more they want to get a hands-on physical approach to it. After they implement this license and find it doesn’t work the next step will be to change the “Human growth and Development class” they give students in middle school with a more detailed. And I do agree that there needs to be more education about the obstacles that come about from being a young parent, because kids are going to continue what they are doing. Since, it appears, other forms of awareness are not working.
This is so ridiculous!!! This young boy hasnt even fully matured mentally or physically. Good God! It's not like he lives in a third world country were maybe parenthood becomes before adulthood. #1. Although it would be nice , there will never be a test for parenthood. #2. If underage children have babies, their parents should be put through a adoption screening. #3 If they can not pass, the child needs to be placed in foster care until either the underage child becomes of age or they can pass the grueling adoption processes.
#4. The parents of this 13yold father should have to pay some form of child support to the foster care until their son becomes an adult, then he can take over by being held finacally responsible.
Im not so sure that just eductating is the most effective way, it needs to be combined with hitting them in the wallet too.
No I do not think parents should be required to have a license to raise their children. I’m afraid that children would be taken out of perfectly good situations just because one or both of their parents are not good test takers. Would those children be put into orphanages? What kind of life would that be for them then?
Besides, where some parents lack intelligence, they abound in love! There must be a better solution!
Something MUST be done to educate people in that region about family planning. These days sex is treated like a biological need (comparable to water) or like a form of recreation - when in reality, it is neither. I believe that sex was meant to be saved for marriage between one man and one woman (created by God for relational unity, an expression of love and commitment, pleasure, having children, etc.), and I think this ideal needs to be re-taught to the modern world.
As Dr. Gary Chapman says, “As a counselor for over 30 years, I have never met a man or woman who regretted following the biblical plan (saving sex for marriage), but I have met thousands who are trying to find healing for the pain they have experienced because they have treated sex lightly.” He goes on to say, “If the youth of this generation will take time to rediscover the love of God and understand that His commands are for our good, they will save themselves from many heartaches, and create a better world for their children and grandchildren.”
And I wholeheartedly agree.
There may be some situations that seem completely absurd, but it would be ridiculous to create a standardized parental test. There are many unfit parents that seem to live perfectly normal lives at a perfectly normal age. You cannot predict the outcome of a situation with complete confidence as to label parents unfit. For underage parents, there is always adoption and child services. A test of the compidency of parents is a complete violation of a person's natural rights. It is a solution to the epidemic we are facing, but is it too major? Enforcing a test on something as natural as childbirth is out of the question.
A new twist, maybe Alfie isn't the dad. Below is an excerpt from a British paper - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/4642363/Alfie-Patten---the-exploited-face-of-broken-Britain.html
"And for all Alfie's enthusiasm for parenthood, two other boys, aged 14 and 16, have entered the fray, kissing, telling and claiming paternity of Maisie. It could be said that in this age of feckless fathers, their putting their hands up is to be saluted. Then again, the spur appears to have the prospect of tabloid payouts. Alfie has promised to take a DNA test as soon as possible, which will provide Clifford with a new twist. However, given that Alfie, voice unbroken, hasn't reached puberty yet, and that at least one commentator has wondered if it really is biologically possible for him to have fathered a child, it's fair to say he won't be getting any encouragement to beat a path to the lab before it's strictly necessary.
The two other boys, meanwhile, have apparently made sworn statements in front of a solicitor, giving chapter and verse of their alleged sexual encounters with Chantelle. One tabloid alleges that at the time of her daughter's conception, when she was 14, she was sleeping with no fewer than eight teenage boys on the estate. Chantelle's family insist she was a virgin until she and Alfie had sex; Alfie insists that he was Chantelle's only boyfriend and that Maisie was conceived on their first night together. Chantelle, one of five children, whose parents are both unemployed, says she was on the pill, but had forgotten to take it."
This is definitely interesting; I think that it would be wrong to ask people to take a test to prove whether they are competent enough to have a child. I think it is wrong and I think that it is a violation of our rights. Maybe the solution is not to take a test, but to further educate kids about sexual intercourse, and what the consequences are. Just because someone isn’t smart we shouldn’t keep them from being able to have kids. If they were to start this testing, does this mean that everyone has to be tested? Even adults, who are responsible enough?
I feel that if these kids are better educated at school, and at home then they will know what the consequences of their decisions will be. On the other hand in Europe fornication isn’t a big deal to them, neither is sexual intercourse at a young age. They have different standards; just like they are allowed to drink alcohol at whatever age they want as long as it is given to them by their parents, and as long as they are supervised. When I was in high school there was this foreign exchange student who said that he had started drinking alcohol when he was 6. To me that was absolutely absurd.
This article was a bit disturbing to me. Where were those kids parents, why weren’t they further educated on what would happen? What happened to the middle school sex ed. Class that was mandatory?
I dont agree. I believe that if a child gets pregnant and the parents dont mind then it should be ok for the child to have the baby. Who are we to say what other people should do with there kids. No a license shouldnt be put down for when to have kids because babys can always be made at home. People do have home births. Pierre Lemieux had a point but at the ame to some people choose to plan there life early and ahead and if having a baby early is one then so be it we cant change and judge society off of things that have nothing to to with us. Yes they are way to young but its there business and not ours we're not taken care of them so we shouldnt have anything to say. So no I dont agree to putting a license on parenting.
This is one of the most frightening news I have read. As a mother I can't even to begin imagining my 9 year old daughter becoming a mother at age 13, but unfortunately this is the reality for many teenagers. I myself became pregnant when I was 17 years old so this news is close to home. I don't agree in testing people to see if they are competent enough to be parents, but I do belief it would be a great idea to give them counseling and professional help to go through this difficult situation. Being a parent is not easy, and nobody is born with an instruction manual of how to be a good father or mother. A 13 year old doesn't know how to care for him or herself so it would be reasonable to have social services checking in to make sure the family and the child are doing fine. Nobody can judge and think they have the right to decide if a baby should stay with the parents or not, except if the child is suffering from abuse. The safest place for a child to be is with his or her parents and there is no substitute in the world for the love of a mother or father. Instead of doing something so drastic, education is the best weapon and it is my personal opinion that teenagers should first be educated and second be allow to have access to birth control, if they want to have sex they are going to do it whether the parents agree with it or not and it is better to prevent these situations than be sorry that you didn't take in consideration this choice before it was to late to do anything about it.
I think it is a good idea to have a standardized test to become a parent. If you can’t pass a simple test then you should have not the right to raise or keep a child. Because after all raising child is going to be much more difficult to accomplish then what will be on a test. So if someone can’t even gather enough knowledge to accomplish that simple task how are they going to gain enough to rear a child? Do we let uncertified doctors practice medicine, then why should we let unlicensed parents practice parenthood.
I have always been a firm believer in some sort of testing for parents before they are allowed to have a child. In Florida you have to take a class before you get married, why not when you have a child? A standardized test is very general but some sort of mandatory class with a test to follow. You get a pre-license like when you drive, take classes and get certifications where they give you different approaches to parenting. If you can't take a simple class and devote yourself to study to pass a test then you really shouldn't be having a kid.
Kids shouldn't be having kids. It bothers me how many teen moms there are and now 13 year old boy fathers... really... ?? Especially in America with welfare and food stamps people don't think about how they will afford to have a kid because they know they can get money for free.
I agree with displayname. Kids are our future. They should be brought up in the best possible situation If you can't provide that for a child don't have one. WAIT.
Well, I think the whole idea of the standardized testing is rather ridiculous. Indeed I do not agree with the concept of babies having babies because SEX should be the last thing on a 12 year olds mind, but it is a right we as humans have & though they are young I still don't think their competence as parents should be judged based on some test created probably by someone who believes that he/she is a good parent. It's not right, I mean there are different styles of parenting but whose to say which is right & which is wrong. Maybe there should be another alternative to this situation, maybe parenting class or something of that nature, I'd say give them a chance to prove themselves, babies are gifts from God & who gives any HUMAN the right to take them anyway from those parents without a worth wild cause, especially if they are committed to being good parents to those children.
Trinity
Thanks for the update...!
I defintly don't agree with adults having to take a competence test in order to decided wether or not they are able to have a child of their own. Although its sad that we have many childern who are definatly mistreated and have parents who just should NOT be parents I don't think the best solution is make a test for parents to pass. A test cant judge wether or not the parent is going to be a well fit parent or not. For one people could lie on the test and so fourth to just give answers they think we would be passing answers. I think like "court" said, that the only time the government should get involved would be when there are obvious problems in the family with the children such as absuse etc.
I agree with Duncan Smith and LaFollette. I already feel there are many adults who have children are not fit to be parents. Most twelve-year-olds only obligation is to do their chores (clean room, wash dishes, mow the lawn, etc.) they don't have the mind capacity to be fulfilling parents. They legally can't even work full time.
In this situation the government should definitely intercede. The standardized test should be enforced, not only to children with children, but also with adults who seems to be struggling and not providing the care to their children that a child should have.
My mother has foster children, and she had to take classes and tests so that she qualified to be a foster parent, although she raised and provided for my younger brother and myself exceptionally. I do see the double standard. I believe the tests will give children a better chance at succeeding in life than with with a "child parent."
There is no way that a test can determine whether you fit to be a mom or dad. That doesn’t mean that every person is fit to be a parent but using a test to determine that isn’t the right idea. What if a couple wants to have a baby, but they didn’t do so well on the test. That means they cannot have the baby? I don’t think no one can tell you if you can have the baby or not. Although having a child when you are 13 is completely crazy. Average of 13 years old can’t even support themselves and how are they going to support themselves and the child? All I’m saying is that I am fully against a test for parenthood. Age of 13 is pretty young to be a parent, but then again, you see a lot of older people do crazy things to their children.
Even though it sounds crazy to come up with the idea of having to pass a standardized test to be a parent, I think its a good idea. There is a lot of children who are suffering because their parents do not take good care of them. Maybe this would make people take parenthood more serious. And I also agree that if a person cannot take their time to study for a standardized test and pass it, then how in the world can they be prepared to take care of a child? It sounds ridiculous but if you think about it, it makes a lot of sense.
I agree there is no test good enough to "prove" a person is a good parent.
As for this dilemma, the best idea I can come up with is, given the age of the parents, a case manager/social worker should be assigned to look in on the baby periodically.
Education is vital and needs to start at an early age. So very many lessons start in the home! I believe in the saying "It takes a village to raise a child". Everyone needs to be accountable for the effects they have on children. In other words, be a good example to younger children, both in private and in public.
License to parent?? What is this world coming to? If it isn't one thing it's the other. This is probably one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Why do other people in this world want to control what other people do? It's none of their business. If kids want to lay down and do grown-up things then they have to learn to accept the consequences of their actions. Yes, it's sad that most of these kids and their kids end up doing drugs and everything that society as a whole frowns upon, but I say they have to learn.
Society is always preaching what's wrong and what's right. But society seems to forget that different cultural groups have a greater effect on what people do than society. In class we talked about, for example, hispanic groups who's culture is having lots of kids and being family oriented; whereas in some cultures, China, having more than one kid or having a kid of a certain sex is strictly prohibited.
So as much as some may agree with Pierre Lemieux's comments, we all need to remember that everyone has a choice to make in everything that they do. So if they choose to do something that society, as a whole, doesn't agree on; we have to remember that they made that choice and they have to live with it, not us.
I also do not think that there's such as a thing as a good parent or a bad parent. People just have different ways of rasing their children. It'sup to a person's point of view what they see as right or wrong it their eyes. I think that people do not have the right to try and impose their point of views on people. Everyone is entitled to what they think but trying to pressure other people into thinking what you see as right or wrong is insane. And we wonder why there is so much corruption and war in the world.
i think that they should make a license to have childern. they should make a class or something that parents or going to be parents should take when your when they are thinking of having a baby. i mean it shouldnt be like a hard class or anything difficult but like a class that will teach the basics of parenting and taking care of a child and just like give some kind of test at the end of the coarse to just make sure that the person actually paid attention. but i think that both parents should have to take the class not just one of the spouses.
I don't think licensing should be required in order to have babies. What determines whether you're competent or not? Your age? Your income bracket? Your IQ? That's ridiculous! It's sad that young kids are having babies but just because someone is older, that doesn't mean they will be a better parent. If a license is forced I think that'll create a bigger problem. These kids will continue to make babies that they aren't responsible for because someone stepped in and took them. How are they ever going to learn responsibility if that happens? Being a birth parent doesn't give a parent any special rights. Dept of Children and Families can come and take your kids if someone says, or if they think, you're not fit. As far as adoption, I don't know what type of test or licensing they have to get but I do know that can be circumvented if you have enough money. I think if the parent/s have the means to take care of their child/ren, who cares. In the case of these teenagers, assist them the first time, because everybody makes mistakes. But make it clear that if they go out and make more babies that they're on their own.
Although I do agree that some people are not fit to be parents; there are also people who become a better person because of becoming a parent. So, on that note I have to say no, competence testing is not a suitable solution. If there were a one-time competency test for parenting it would still not ensure a stable or safe home for a child, people do change. People can become an alcoholic, a drug addict, and just plain psychotic later in life. People can even become an abuser years after their children are born, an example of this is the book “A Child Called It” written by Dave Pelzer…about his personal life as a child. However, parenting should not be considered a right either; it’s a privilege and a responsibility that should be taught as part of our moral fiber. I think the real issue is education; people make uneducated decisions about becoming a parent. Lack of education is obviously the case in this story of “Alfie and Chantelle”, not that they can’t become good parents…but they definitely lack foresight and planning capabilities.
This is going to be total opinion...
I think this situation is the result of the "Do what feels good" philosophy of the 60s. Our country has undergone a complete shift over the past 30 years or so as the policies of the "hippie generation" have become standardized in our media, our culture, and our textbooks.
I actually believe our country was better off when we stuck to morality based on Christianity. Not religious law, or everyone must convert to Christianity, but just the moral base.
Now, anything goes.
Smoke crack, steal, have meaningless sex with anyone, don't respect others cause YOU are the most important, you are all that matters...
Maybe I am crazy, but earning money feels good to me. I appreciate it and I am proud of myself. Stealing is dirty, it feels dirty, it is hollow.
Maybe I am crazy, but getting to know a woman, "courting" her so to speak is exciting. A kiss or a touch can be amazing. It is so different from just using her as a receptacle and her using me as a dildo as so many do now.
I find it a priviledge to help those who need it, to respect women, to respect my elders, to respect those who are different than me, or in a "lower station". I have learned so much from them and been blessed by their love.
Anyways, I'm rambling, which is what I usually do here, but I guess my point was...
We've thrown out the baby with the bathwater. Morality, or laws, or just common sense based on Christianity actually makes sense imo.
Nature is weird. It pretty much governs and has a plan for every living thing on the planet. Its crazy (but not really) to think that nature has made the human body capable of creating life at such a young age. Who am I to say that nature is wrong? It has been giving this life-giving grace since the beginning of time.
The problem comes into play when you think that this planets population has tripled in the last 60 years. With this explosion of people comes a responsibility, not only to the planet, but to mankind (womankind). We are running out of resources, not only the fuels that get us by in everyday life, but also $. It is not fair that it has become an occupation to have children. To be rewarded by an outdated welfare system to do nothing more than have kids is nuts. Yes, people were made to reproduce just like every other living thing on this planet but our species is the only one making $ at it. Getting a license to drive isnt that difficult and everyone has to do it. I say for a person to be eligible for any sort of Govt benefit that every tax paying citizen is paying for, then, at the very least, take a class!
This story saddens me enormously. I just don't get how two little immature teens could possibly bring to life a little baby just like themselves. I mean, even two well off, established couple could take months or years to think about consuming a baby and here we see how two little irresponsible teens have a baby like its no big deal!!
and who in the world said that taking a standardized test will guarantee anything! This test sounds just as stupid and ridiculous as teens having babies.
I feel the licensing of parents by a competency test is a good idea. It is apparent that so many parents rearing abilities are very poor, and have no business reproducing so why not? Although many people pass their driving tests and know the proper way to operate a motor vehicle safely. However, when they are actually driving they follow nothing of the sort. Too, i feel this could be the same with the parent-competency test, but it would be an interesting thing to try. Also, I know in the past people married young and had children at young ages because the life expectancy was so short, among other reasons. But, to think a couple of 12 year olds can raise a child is absurd. I think “their” parents need a competency test “for sure!”
The first thought of a license to parent, makes me wince. The mear thought of having a test to decide whether one is a competent parent strikes me, not feasible. On the other hand, there are an excessive amount of parents out there who are incapable of bearing and rearing children, yet they are allowed. There is no assurance on the dependibility of a test of that degree. I just do not agree one can develope a complex test that could accurately determine whether a person can or will be a suitable parent. People say one thing and do another this is human nature. We are presented with a situation verbally, and asked if this occured how would you react, more than likely we say we will act one way, but in that situation we will in actuality react differently; such as in the Milgram experiment. This is proven to be true, so how can one go off of how we suppose we will behave rather than how we actually behave. The test results would not hold true. Do I think 13 year olds should be popping babies out in every which way, no. It is the parents responsibility to educate there kids,to communicate properly, to install rights and wrongs and when that fails situations of child birth at an unfit age will occur.The parents should resume responsibilty. Once the 13 year old had a kid I find it highly unlikely they will have another after the first. Regardless I do not believe in license to parent only because I doubt the test could accurately measure if one is a competent parent. Lack of education, communication, rights and wrongs is one of the main problems, this information needs to be readily available for anyone interested.
License parents, That's really funny. There is no such thing as a perfect parent, or a perfect kid. every child is different, they react differently to any given situation. Yes we need parenting classes, for those parents that abuse and neglect their children.
Passing a test implies certain standards have to be met. Who sets these standards? What happens when they are not met?, Who pays for the development/ maintenance of the infrastructure that will be needed to take care of licensing/classes etc?. Take an educated guess- we the taxpayers. Society is everychanging, most parents teach their kids how they themselves were taught. Not everyone has the ability to be good parents, and there is nothing we can do as a society to prevent bad people from becoming parents.What we can do is to start sex education earlier in schools, and also offer more educational programs in communities for parents. Parents who possess the knowledge will improve their parenting skills much more than any test/license.
It's not going to solve the problem of extremely underaged kids having children together. If a 12 and 15 year old children cant understand that they are going to be completly inept at caring for a young child, why would they be able to understand the concept of taking a test before they decide to concieve a child. If the child is in a unsuitable home it will be removed either way. I believe everyone has a god given right to have children and adding a test wont solve problems just create more.
there is no test that you can give to see if anyone is ready to have a child. in some situations you should prove that you can provide for you child,if you are on welfare and already have six kids you should not recive inverto, to have octuplets. This lady will not beable to provide for her children. You have to be responsible about having a kid, if you arnt ready its your responsibility to take all precation. Children dont come with an instruction manuel an how we work, like what you get when you recive any other license. The case in the UK is most likely lack of education on the subject. I think there should be some rules or certian things you must prove before you have a child, like proving that you are able to provide for a child without being on state assistance or doing something illegal to get paid.
In a way I agree with both sides due to the fact that both are partly correct but yet wrong. The world as we know it is only getting worse by the day and unfortunately children are now having children. Something has to happen and maybe a license would be the answer. Either way be it a license or something else this cannot be allowed to continue. Grown men and woman can’t even take care of their kids half the time so a child is just ridiculous. A 13 year old boy can hardly take care of himself let alone his toys so what business does he have with the well being of a human life.
Testing people to see if they are capable of caring for a child????? I don’t think so! Honestly, I don’t agree with children of such a young age to be sexually active and of all things have a baby… but if they do then I think they should take full responsibility for their actions. Whether it is giving the baby up for adoption or taking care of it, they chose to do what they did and now they have to face the consequences. A test can’t prove a parents ability to raise a child through care or love. Especially with first time parenting it takes practice and time to learn how to be the “perfect parent” but then again you most likely never will because we are HUMAN… people constantly are making mistakes and learning from them!! Therefore this test would never actually be efficient!!! NO TEST!!!
I have to agree with Lemieux on this subject. However, I do believe that with our economy continuing to fall we must come up with some standard to become a parent. Sure almost everyone can become a parent, it takes two to tango, but what happens when the baby comes? The cost of raising a child from infant till they graduate from high school is hundreds of thousnads of dollars. Becoming a parent is a difficult decision no matter what age you are because you have a new mouth to feed, clothing to buy for, school supplies, yearbooks, and the list goes on and on. Many people who come from money and get pregnant at an early age are fortunate enough to have their family to fall back on for medical expenses and so forth, but the majority of our society are middle class who can barely make it paycheck to paycheck and having a baby would be financially impossible. Do not get me wrong, there are so many joys of having a child, their first smile, their first word, when they crawl, when they walk, but the heartbreaking thing is the money issue. It is so stupid that some people cannot have children because of their salary! Whether or not they are able to raise the child does not matter, it is unfortunately based on money and it is sad that this is how our world has become, a constant revolving around money. So do I think a person needs a license to parent? No. But do I believe that there must be something to give us a break, yes. If everyone is just allowed to have kids, but if they cannot afford to take care of them then they go into foster care and if nobody adopts them then they are turned "loose" at age 18, and forced to make it on their own. The government is not there your whole life and some people have too much pride to take other people's tax money to raise their children. Basically all I am saying is do not have a baby unless you are mentally and financially prepared for it.
"Some times it takes a village to raise a family." After reading this article I first thought of the movie,” I am Sam”, casted with Sean Penn, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Dakota Fanning in 2001. Where a mentally retarded man is forced to care for his child after the mother abandons them. When the child starts grade school she realizes that her father is not like other fathers, which seems to reflect in her school work. Once the school board understands the situation at home they feel that it is critical to remove her from her father and place her in to custody for child services. The father decides to fight the case and prove to the jury that he is fit to provide for his daughter. I feel that a standardized test should be applied to individuals that start a family at a young age or are not mentally ready. The 12 year old did not even understand the word, “financially” how do you believe he might raise a child if he doesn’t even know the first thing in handling one. You wouldn’t want to bring a child into the world knowing that parent is a drug addict or mentally unstable, this just shows negligence. Until the parents can prove that the child will be well taken care of, the child should be taken into custody until proven otherwise. This is not heartless. This is just one step that society is taken to help children from abuse and or neglect.
Coco85
This is the movie I thought of as well!! :)
I do agree on Lemieux's statement and tyranny remarks. It is just, in all honesty, ridiculous in all aspects. A child will be a kid. Always until they reach adulthood. We a child so young like 12 can be a father then our society has just lost it. I do however disagree with the test of being a good father. Anyone can pass a test and still not learn from it. What makes anyone think that it would be different for this test. Children shouldn't be able at all to have an outside relationship at that age. What has the parents got to say about the situation? Its just a shame to see news that ridiculous yet so real. Whats next a baby inside a baby? Seriously we as an society should have better control of our children at that young age. When it comes to 16 going on 18 then the children would have more responsibility in life.
there is no test to see if anyone is ready for parenthood.it definatley is not easy to be a parent, and it does take time to adjust from being someone with no responsibilities to being in charge of a child and caring for the child atleast until graduation of high school. first of all i dont feel that 12 and 13 year olds should even be exposed to having the chance of having sex. when you guys were 12 and 13 u werent mentally ready for a child, because i know i wasnt. i had sex education in high school, maybe they might need to take it as far as maybe elementry schools and middle schools to let the children know how a baby can change someones life so drastically. second of all money is a big issue, having a kid is not free!! i know my parents spent a ton of money on me while i was growing up. as far back as 22 yrs ago before i was born and up until even now. there is no way i would bring a baby into this world unless i was financially stable. im not a parent, and im not saying i would "be too overprotective" but i would know what he/she is doing and who he/she is with. my mother did not let me officially date until i was 16 and i can kind of understand why. then again sex is beginning in a younger generation. i was also raised in a religious background, my grandpa is a preacher and i was always looked upon as the "good girl". my mom was a little overprotective, and now that i look back and i never got pregnant at 12 or 13 and yet to have gotten pregnant, so i guess she did something right. all i am saying is that parents should have an eye on there children and then none of this would happen and we would not have to even have to discuss this issue and come to some kind of conclusion that we need a test before having a child. is this really what the world is coming to these days?
This so called test I think will prove nothing because it is absolutely ridiculous, a license to have a kid ? What's next a license to breath or talk in public ? There are grown people who have kids and end up being terrible parents because they are not competent for whatever reason it may be. I feel that if you are old enough to have sex and know what sex is as well as knowing what the outcome can be (meaning having a child) then you should be responsible enough to take care of the child and man up and do something about it.
Yet, we have incidents like this that happen and a child is having a child, like what is he/she going to know how to take care of someone smaller and that needs attention 24/7 going to know what to do if they can't even take care of themselves ? It makes no sense at all, they won't know what to do. As far as the mother thinking a child would be a great thing to have, what in the world was she thinking ?! Don't get me wrong having a kid is and can be the greatest thing to happen in someone's life but not at 15; she should of went to a parenting class or boot camp for first time mothers or something and have people hand her a 6 month old baby for a day and see how hard it is to take care of a child. I do believe the government should raise awareness in the schools with a sex ed class and require all students to take it starting in junior high as well as provide a class or something to show them that taking care of an infant is not easy. I think by doing this it will "scare" the kids so they don't mess up and have a child.
I do not agree with Peg Little’s comment about licensure of parents before being able to successfully raise them. Yes, we do license professionals, but they choose to have those opportunities. These young children have this responsibility thrust upon them. Who are we to decide for others what is correct or incorrect for their well being. There are already laws in place people are aware of about adoption as soon as they are conceived so there is an out right there. Also many are still living with their parents so instead of a child it would be as if having another brother/sister. I do believe better education would slow down the number of teen pregnancies, but not by much. I believe it is more of a social aspect of where the teenager is from, rather than how much the teenager knows. Hormones exist in every race and class, but money however does not exist with every family. So in short yes it is tyranny, and licensure should not be mandatory.
I don't believe it is right to make up a standardized test to see if the parent is competent enough in the government's eyes to be a parent, If they made up this test, they would have to give it to every adult in the country that has had a baby and going to be a parent, to just give it to the younger citizens is NOT fair and it's profiling. Anybody is capable of being a parent, If the person is too young, but believes he/she is old enough to to do adult things such as becoming sexually active, then he/she has to deal with the consequences of those actions, and If for some reason, the young couple ends up pregnant, then they need to step up to the plate and act like adults. A standarized test wouldn't really be able to test them on their parenting skills, it would just be basic knowledge, I think it's absurd to have a test, there are lots of good parents and bad, but there still parents.
I agree with some people and I disagree with other. I agree to cheek the history for the mother and father before they get babies, or licenses. For example if the father his history says he under drugs, or the mother under drugs we cannot give them licenses to have a babies. But I don’t agree if the father and mother if they have some small problem, like if the father and mother their family has devoirs or they fight some time. We cannot don’t allowed this people to have babies because a lot of people get devoirs and some fight together but this is not mean this people is not perfect to have licenses to babies. Because no one is perfect, but we should watch the family’s when they have babies. About teenager I agree they are not allowed to have babies, because they don’t have any experience to deal with children and family in the same time.
Most things here we need licenses for. To drive a car, to be a plumber, and to even get married you need a license. The list just goes on and on. But to me I do not think that you should have to get a license to have kids. To m that is a little to much. I understand why foster parents to take a test to see if the are good enough. But I do feel like there should be as age limit to having kids. The age of thirteen and fifteen you should be going to school playing sports, not taking care of a baby. Come on you cannot even work let alone support yourself. So I do not think that their should be a license in order to have kids but there should be an age limit at least to help prevent younger kids who should not be parents becoming parents.
Wow. This article is outrageous! I don't necessarily agree with anyone because all of their statements were flawed in some form or fashion. I don't think there needs to be a license to have children. If you decide that you want to reproduce, that's your prerogative. The media also has a huge hand in decisions made by today's youth. The media even said it themselves, "Sex sells". I think the schools need to further continue sex education so that young adults know what they are getting into. I don't think there should be a test to prove competency, because the results would probably vary and prove to be inaccurate. The same rules should apply to every parent and age shouldn't matter.
A test is not the correct way to handle the situation. Its all in the hands of the people who teach our kids. its not right to tell someone they cannot have a child for the fact that they did not pass some test. If we teach children to have personal responsibilities when they grow up, then why not let them have the responsibility to have a child. You learn from experience, and having a child now, will help someone be a better parent tomorrow.
I agree with the article in where it suggests that becoming a parent when you are just a child yourself is simply wrong, but I do not believe that requiring a license would help. This is the reasoning I came up with. If you have a child and then take the test and the government determines that you are not capable of caring for the child, then what happens? The child is taken into custody and then what? What kinds of effects would this have on the child? Can we really guarantee that a test that can effectively determine whether a parent can be a parent? It seems to me that we already have trouble doing this. Think of all the “bad” foster parents that are out there. This just seems like a bad idea all the way around.
License to parent? What will we need next? License to crap maybe? While I realize things are way less than perfect with some of the moms and for some of the kids in the world, requiring a license to be a parent could possibly lead to all kinds of rediculous drama. I think the government should come up with a more effective way to deal with parents who do not do the right thing by their children. These people need more than any license would be able to provide.
Just because a person has a license to do something does not mean they are good at it. Look how many lousy drivers there are out there. Rather than waste time on the license thing, time and money should be spent finding a way to provide shelter and protection to those children who need it.
I completely agree with Fundakat. Of course it is a big surprise that a child is born to a child, but who says the child is going to be brought up poorly? The idea of making people pass a standardized test is ridiculous. What's that going to stop? People are still going to get pregnant whether or not they pass a stupid test. Think of all the accidental pregnancies. Maybe this person doesn't believe in getting rid of their child. Who is the government to take away someone's child? Never should the government interfere unless a human being is being harmed and maybe this child had a baby, but who says this baby is going to be raised improperly?
I agree with Pierre Lemieux's comments even though I know a test can not really prove if someone is able to take care of a child or not. But I do believe the parents in question need to really think about what they are doing and if they have the slightest doubt about being able to support the child then they need to make the choice and give the child up for adoption. Teenage parents have no real experience in the real world and have no idea how hard it is to raise a child; they need to take this into consideration when deciding what to do.
I do not believe that individuals should have to obtain a license to become a considered a competent parent. Although it is true that one is required to earn a license to become a Doctor, Lawyer, Pharmacist, Technician, Mechanic…. etc., but all of these types careers have situations where there is only certain ways to successfully fulfilling the duties required. All of these professionals that were listed above may have their own individual ways of approaching a problem, but there are also numerous principles and rules that they go by to get to the solution. There are various situations where one is either planned, accidentally, or for some unforeseen circumstances forcefully put in the position of parents. What standards epitomize what a good parent should be? How can a standardized test be administered, and upon what factors: maturity, finances, educational level, health or mental capacity will be used to determine what makes a good parent?
I strongly believe that having a license for parenthood will be like a form of tyranny, because if the parents to not pass the exam, then the children will be forcible taken away and either put up for adoption, or become foster children. We not only have to think about what the affect will be on the parents, but most importantly, what will these actions affect be on the children, regardless of how young or how old? The effects of removing children from parents care can be psychologically life altering. There are definitely some circumstances in which the children should be taken away, especially where alcohol, drugs and abuse play a role in the up bring of the children; however, parents should not be separated from their children because of financial challenges or if the parents education level is not up the “standards” required by the government.
When faced with a problem, one must first look at the stem of the problem and determine what originally caused the situation before trying to solve the problem. I strongly agree with Mr. Duncan Smith. In the British as well as the American society, love, sex, passion and pleasure are all advertised in every form of media and are available to almost every individual that has access to this, regardless of age. I believe that sex education needs to be forcible implemented into the educational system to show the young individuals that along with sex comes immense amounts of responsibility and that parenthood should not be taken lightly. Being a parent is a very arduous but rewarding journey that should only be experienced by individuals that are mature enough to realize the consequences and responsibility that are inevitably attached to bringing a child into this world.
I definitely fell that education could solve some of these problems. I just don’t understand how such a young kid can honestly think that he can support a child at the age of 12. Something needs to be done for sure. Another thing if underage children making is such a serious problem then their government should do what it takes to change it. If that includes making a license to make it legal to have children then so be it. I don’t know how they are really going to enforce that however. I’m nineteen and have no plans on a child anytime soon within the next five years.
I understand what Mr. Lemieux is saying about situiation but to me it doesent even sound right to get a license to consieve a child. Yes this certain situition in Britain is surprising but that doest mean you have to chalenge the people. Parents need to have a closer understanding with their children and watch what they are doing..at a certain age with the way things are now you just cant let your child out in the world to discover it for themselves help them understand things as they come along. What they can maybe do is at a certain age require females to get tested and fit for some kind of birth control like they do vacines.
Isn't it against the law to even be having sex before the age of consent...16)? If a law was made to "test" how competent parents are as of now, I can't even imagine how many kids the government would take away from people! There shouldn't be a competency test, but maybe some sort of agreement from the young grandparents stating they will support the infant until the "parent" is 18. This isn't too harsh but ensures the infant a somewhat stable and safe environment. The young parents could possibly agree to keeping their share of the infant's future also by staying in school and having some sort of income. I think this way the government isn't trying to set specific standards on how people can live their lives (under a bunch of laws) like they already constantly try to do.
I don't think any type of standarized test could proof the good or bad parenting skills. However, I strongly believe to provide educational classes to the teenagers and adults parents because unfortunatily, most parents in our socity are failure to do their job this is the reason a child having a child. There is a big problem with the underage reproducing in our society. This is not the only 13 years old who become a father. Unfortunatily, there are many of them. There are not even mature enough physically and mentally.I believe religious education could prevent problems like this one. However, I disagree the concept of having a license for parenthood.
Yes, we should have a class for want to be parents. We have come to the place in society where 13 and 14 year olds are becoming parents (that's not even the working age) and having their own kids something is wrong with this picture. If people went through this class they would at least know what my child needs and how that involves me. That includes time, love, gifts, food and shelter and even more than that. Then they will be able to judge whether they are ready for that jump or not. And if they pass the test and have kids and someone comes by their door one day saying did they take their test they can say yes. But, if the scenery and activity in their house doesn’t look like anything in the class, then they can take the kid away. What shocked me in this article is that this kid who doesn’t know what he's going up against is ready to take this huge responsibility on himself when some real grown men are not ready to say or do so. They just want relationships for the night and then be done with it the next day. And o the girl is left by her self, or is pressured into getting and abortion which I am completely against. No matter how you look at it or what the circumstances you are still murdering a person. Some people think they have a right to have a kid when ever they choose to have one. Well, with the way things are going, with kids having kids, and people not taking care of their responsibilities like their kids needs, something needs to change. I would rather go through this class than let any one without the brain capacity or heart to give what their child needs. Don't ask me where we're going to get the funds from, but this needs to happen. Kids and teens are having kids and I don't believe that that should be happening. I believe you have sex AFTER you are married and once you are married you stay married unless someone is getting abused, no matter what. Something in society has to change, and I hope this does.
For some people, I actually do believe we need a license for parenthood. I think it depends on the person and if they are willing to be responsible in being a parent. Age has a big factor in this situation. You should be at least eight teen years of age in order to make that decision on whether you would like to have a licenses for parenthood or not. If you are under the age of eight teen it should be a requirement not a choice. Parenting is not as easy and cute as most people think it seems to be. It takes a lot of time and dedication.
I think that the tests have great intentions for the well-being of children. Call me a wimp if you will, but I personally am scared of children. They are a great joy, but a lot of work. What they most require is love, which means a lot of attention. How will any test be able to determine how much love you are willing to devote and give to another life? Not only time to care for the child, but time to be able to provide for the child. One must have a license to take care of children and to be able to teach them as well, but having a license to be a parent is insane. What if too many children are conceived, can there be a shortage of parents if not many are licensed? There are many guides and resources available to parents and soon to be parents. Like the Parenting magazines, parenting classes, and books that describe the different stages of a child and what to expect during those stages.
First of all, I think this start with the official parents. Where are these parents when the young kids are having unprotected sex? Guidance needs to start with the adult. What needs to happen is finding out what is going on in the household, what is triggering this action. The parents are slacking somewhere, or the kids are getting out of hand. Somewhere in this situation it appears the parent is crying out for help.
I don’t think the options were weighted out when choosing a resulting factor to assist with incompetent parents by requiring them to take a test. I feel a test is not the answer to the situation. The article clearly states the test may not be accurate, which will off top give me a different view of the parents’ ending results. The fist question you would want to ask yourself, is the test correct? How do you clear your conscious when you take a kid from there parent and that parent could have possibly been the perfect parent. There should have been other options listed to determine with the parents are incompetence enough to take care of their kid.
I understand how the idea of a license to parent can seem appropriate when you look at everything else you need a license for. However, there are far too many circumstances where this would cause more problems than it's worth. The best we can do is already being done. When a problem is noticed in a child's up-bringing, social services does get involved. If we begin licensing for something such as bearing a child, who knows what they will want to license next!
I cannot imagine what sort of competence tests they would design. No doubt there would be those who would not pass, but still make wonderful parents somehow. There are various forms of parents, and the only "right" form(s) are those that raise a child with the least amount of mental issues related to their upbringing. Unless they can pinpoint each of those potential issues and what may cause them (and not just the obvious ones), they cannot design such a competence test.
I agree with Pierre Lemieux remark and certainly is tyranny.Duncan Smith himself describe the British society of today as one where children experience agreesive behaviour and voilent. So what happens to a teenager who with all this behaviours in the society gets raped and through that she get pregnant. What i beleive is good for the society is a good standard of education to all children of child bearing age. They should teach them about the consequences of what happens if their children are not well taken care of.Also,we go into parenthood with our experience to guide us.Parenthood is a matter of age.As people grow,they learn new things and this high level of wisdom and experience cause them to change and evolve into a better individual.Thus i'm totally against the fact that parents should obtain a licence because i am not sure i even understand how licensing could be effectively intoduce in today's society.
I agree with Court, Even though this is a major problem and obviously a 14 year old child could never be expected to take care of a baby but a test for every person before they become a parent is a bit crazy. It is my right to have a child, there is no reason i should have to pass a test in order to become a father. Although i do think that there should be some kind of age limit to have a child because what kind of person could teach they're child about the lessons of life if he himself hasn't learned them yet? this issue most certainly needs to be solved but a test is not the right answer to me.
I was actually reading about this somewhere the other day and I was completely shocked, so I am glad that this was the topic of the week. I do not think we need a test to tell us that a thirteen year old boy is not ready to raise a child. I read in another article that he does not receive an allowance and he does not know the meaning of the word “financially”. I believe a test would only further the point, but I do not think it is something that should be used to determine one’s eligibility for parenthood.
As a person who spent the first half of his life living with parents who couldnt keep them selves together, let alone a child, I totally agree. I grew up in a poor, alchohol and drug fueld enviroment. Yes I am the first to graduate high school and the first to go to college out of any body in my family. Anybody! The road has been long and tough. Lots of therapy. All because the state didnt seem to look my way when I went to school with bruises and cloths that I wouldnt give a homeless man. Yes people should have to apply for a license. If you have your crap together then there should be no problem. If you live off of the government who raises your kids. The government. They give you food stamps. They give you Section 8 housing. So yes they should have a say so on who has kids. My parents to this day dont even realize the crap they put me through. All because it was their "God" given right.
I think that it is crazy to think that a standardized test can tell if someone is fit to be a parent. I do think that more should be done to teach kids about abstinence and to teach them at a very early age because nowadays kids are moving at a faster pace. I think that it is sad that they are going to be parents at such an early age because they have to give up a lot of things in order to raise a child and they probably still aren’t mature enough to know how to raise the child. I do hope that the grandparents will be there for them and help them with the child because they will need it
I believe that we should have a licensing system to be a parent some sort of class or something to go thru. Because i believe just because you can have kids doesnt mean you should be a parent. Too many times have i seen abuse in so many different forms. There are just some people who are not fit to be parents.I would vote to approve a bill that required a class or something. But granted it would be incredibly difficult to regulate and enforce. Penalties for having children without a license would be interesting to see. But i agree that there needs to be some sort of System to decide whether or not people are eligble to be good parents
Grenadian, you dont think theres such a thing as good/bad parents. Hust different ways of raising children? That might be the most un-educated thing i've ever heard. So the lady who drowned her kids, she must be trying new disciplinary actions right? Come on you got to explain yourself if your going to make statements like that.
I believe that there should be a required parenting class to educate. It will also help someone realize if they are ready for parenthood. However, I do not agree that someone has the right to tell a man or a woman that they do or do not have the right to have children. That is their choice and their choice alone. When it comes to the 13 and 15-year-old kids who had a child, you have to look at the parents or guardian. I feel that it is their fault and not the children. Why did they not educate them and where were they when they were making this child. Yes, there are some parents that should not be parents, that is true. But why should we take the right away from people that are intelligent and adult to have a child.
It is bad that 14 year old boys are having children. Its very ridicoulous. I dont think there should be a standards or test to have children either. Yes the young boys have responsible but i blame this on more of the parents not watching what there kids are doing. You have to be monitoring whats going on in your childrens life. I know if i was a father i wouldnt be watching my son or daughter making sure they werent having kids. But if I chose to have kids and i felt ready and i was of a certain age where i can afford raising a kid i shouldnt have to take some standardized test to see if i can. Its a mixed feeling for me. However i dont think you can inforce this, but very interesting story.
I beleive that you should not be alloud to put a license on parenting. Instead of handing out sex licenses they should spend more time on better educating parents in teaching their kids about waiting and using safe sex to prevent them from haveing children too young. I know by the time I was 12 i knew the consequences of having sex and the outcomes that happen from it. I listened and now I am 24 and still haven't had any children because I am not ready for that commitment. So basically I'm saying don't be a crappy parent and educate your children about practicing safe sex while there young so they know what the consequenses are and hopefully help them to make better decissions. Don't wait for school or someone else to tell them, because it could be too late.
I believe it is a good idea to license parents. I wish we wouldn't have to, but it seem that parents are becoming younger and younger by the day. Maybe if the license does become legal, then people or kids will think twice of wearing a condom or come kind of protection. At first I thought it wouldn't be fair to us, and we should have the free right to have as many kids as we wish. Then again, I feel that people are becoming too irresponsible and they don't think about the consequences.
It is ridiculous enough to hear of young ones having their own, but to hear that they should take a test to be a parent to the child they have already produced?! How does this make sense? They want to have sex like grown ups then they should deal with the consequences like grown ups. I think that the parents of these kids should step in and take care of the babies for a time since the kids are still learning about themselves, and if they don’t have parents then some kind of guardian. It’s shocking that the kids actually get away with it and know what they’re doing. Where are the parents? The babysitters? The relatives? And what good is the test if the test maker is basing a good parent on themselves? How do you know that said person is a good parent? There are so many flaws in the test it’s not even funny. The test is a joke.
All human beings are endowed with the ability to create life; this does not mean that we are all suitable to be parents. Although many people around the world are not fit to be parents I don’t believe it is necessary to have a parenting license in order to have children. Don’t get me wrong I think that certain people shouldn’t have kids due to their social status. For example, homeless people, mentally ill, and the mentally handicapped shouldn’t have kids only because they are unable to take care of their own lives let alone someone else’s. Becoming a parent takes much responsibility but even still a license should not be needed in order to have child. In my opinion, becoming a parent should not be the same as getting a drivers license and the idea of needing a license to be a parent is totally absurd.
Requiring a license to parent is the most ridiculous thing I have heard. Planned parenting has been taught in our schools for years with no prevail. Instead of making it a law, we should continue to find other ways to educate our youngsters. More focus on birth control would be a good start. Encouraging the use of birth control, education and awareness is the only ammunition out there. Our welfare system would not be as overloaded if we could control unwanted or unplanned pregnancies at any age. Much work is needed to continue this uphill battle.
Having a "liscense to parent" would be ridiculous. Who's to judge who a good parent or bad parent is before the kid is even born? I do agree with most people that in this particular situation the kid was too young to become a father at 13 years of age, he hasn't learned yet what it takes to raise a kid that comes with getting older. Bad and good parents come in all different ages of life, the one thing I believe should happen is instead of a parent licensing,the parents should be closely watched to make sure that they are providing proper care for the kid, and if they are not then the government should step in and take the kid from the parents instead of judging by some kind of test that proves nothing.
I totally agree with Hugh LaFollette. What is wrong with a having a license for parenthood!? In my opinion, it’s about time someone pulled their head out of their *ss and faced reality. We put nearly all potential adoptive parents through extensive and rigorous back ground checks, not to mention all the money that changes hands, only to ensure that children are entrusted into a good and loving home. Yet, anyone from street corner prostitutes, to underage teens, to abusive parents can have at will as many kids as they choose and enslave their children into a lifetime of poverty and abuse, thus continuing the vicious cycle that has become a large part of the American society.
I believe that when it comes to children having children testing is out of the question at that point. Their age proves that they are not responsible and no test can prove that a chilld should be placed in their hands. How can children think that can raise a baby and they are not even old enough to work or even get to the teen years of age. The government should make a rule or something saying that if a child does have a baby the option of the birth mother or fathers parents can gain custudy until the parents are of age. Now if an adult has a child i still think that testing is something that should not be thought about. It is their child and they are of age to raise it how they want.
Unlike many other decisions, to decide whether to take away the child of a teen boy or girl or to give them the right to keep the child is a very hard decision. Wither side of the coin has its pros and cons. If we take away the child, they parents of the child might feel sad, depraved, etc… which might cause depression or serious effects to their emotions. If we let them the privilege of having the child, then the child might have the chance to grow with a little different concept about life because the parents aren’t mature enough. Remember that to be able to raise a child does not only require financial stability but to make sure that child grows mentally healthy.
A test does not prove anything. There are many adults in this world that can not take care of their children. A test will not determine if the parent can be there when the child needs them or when the take care of the child financially and emotionally. A young boy and a girl having a child is a problem. The best way to solve that problem is through education because kids are going to do what they want to do. I'm sure when everyone was little they did not do as they where told. If they could not do it they will find some way to get it done. through education they would at least know what they could do to protect themselves or what will happen if they do this. No I do not think there should be a license to a parent to become a parent because the license would have specific rules and people raise their kids different ways. Also you never know how the parent would treat behind close doors. A license does not change horrible parents. Just like a driving license does not change a drunk driver from driving and harming people lives.
I agree with BabyBri22 when she said “I believe that when it comes to children having children testing is out of the question at that point. Their age proves that they are not responsible and no test can prove that a child should be placed in their hands.” I also agree that the test is not enough to guarantee the chance of the children to raise a child. I believe that to be able to raise a child a person has to be old enough and had to go through their teen years and also have experience in this life.
This is such a slippery slope because we must remind ourselves that we are dealing with human beings with human emotions. In no way would we ever be able to enforce such laws as testing future parents because we would never find a proper way to moderate the system without it becoming corrupted. In what way would we go about setting "guidelines" for new parents anyways? Sure we would all like to see children brought up in drug-free, abusive-free, safe homes but licensing mothers and fathers just doesn't seem right to me. There’s something very “Big Brother-ish” about it and if we started these kinds of tests, soon we would be applying for marriage, told what job we are well “suited” for, and destined to live a life controlled by someone else. Honestly, I like living a free life, with the ability to live the way I want to.
i think it is unethical for the government to make it a requirement to have a license to bear children. i feel its something the government should have no part or say in, although i do feel they should enforce some type of defence against underage pregnancies. the difficulties with that is the options to what they can do is limited. as for the competency test, different nationalities raise their children differently relevent to their own culture therefor it would be a handicap for many.
I think that licensing is an extreme, but as a society we wouldn’t have to come to this as a solution to irresponsible people. Having a child is a beautiful thing and sometimes people take that for granted. No one is ever really prepared for a child and what they may bring. At 15 and 13 an individual can’t drive to the store on their own and purchase dippers and milk to care for the baby. Also when you have more than one child the personal attention and love that each child needs is taken away with every being that is brought into this world. I think that we do need to start taking more responsibility for actions and if a license is the way to go then so be it.
When I read this I was just not happy to see a young boy of 12 years old with a child and his girlfriend was only 15. I am aware that in this world there is alot of young kids becoming parents. Becoming a young parent is dangerous and can ruin the parents and the childs life in many ways. Such as not having the right state of mind to care for this child mentally physically, emotionally and financially. It becomes a burden and a struggle. We as adults know how hard it is to raise a family and it takes a toll on us, imagine a young child that isn't equipped for the hardships of parenting. My oppinion is that I would love and vote for parenting at a young age under 18 years of age to be illegal and against the law. If they decide to make that choice and have children under age 18 they should be penalized, what penalty I havnt thought that far yet. But something strong so that they will be scared to break the law in that way. It's scary to that this world has come to this, and its getting worse its not getting any better. The people of today and as a whole is loosing respect and the morals of family of this human race. I agree with the test because a test can determine the knowledge and understanding an individual may have on being a good parent and if you have this wisdom and understanding of parenting your chances of being a good parent is greater than for those who are ignorant of parenting. For example we are in school to gain the knowldege to prepare us for our career right.. So if we dont have the knowledge and concept of our studies and subjects then we lack the information and understanding of our courses. THen the outcome is that we don't pass the class. FOr some we repeat the class and for some we dont want to even finish school. Same goes for the Licence to parent, with the proper testing it can determine how much knowledge this young child has on parenting skills. Thats why we need a degree or a licence to practice medicine etc.......
In my opinion, a father at the age of 13 is far from the age of maturity, responsibility, and independence that is critical in order to raise a child. The idea of tests in order to assess your ability to father a child is very reasonable because if you fail as a parent, its not you who pays, its the innocent unfortunate child that will suffer. Im not denying anyone the right to bear children, but if you choose to do so at such a young age, taking a simple test should not be such a burden on you if you truly care for your child and have the intention of giving him or her the best. Psychology and sociology tell us that children at this age have not matured fully and it would be stupid to put the life of a child in a potentially uncaring and irresponsible teenagers hands. Although standardized testing may not be the best measure of ones ability to raise a child, its a step in the right direction and in order to solve the root of the problem, proper education and lessons must be taught to our youth in order to help them make better life changing decisions.
Quagmire
Thank you for sharing your personal story. You are in school however, you will graduate and you will have a hell of a story to tell your kids. PLus you will also be an excellent role model to them.
The vast majority so far has voted against the idea.Interesting!
I honestly believe that the issues we have with child abuse would become a thing of the past. Just like if you were going to adopt.Woman after giving birth should also be forced to go see a physiologist to make sure they do not have post-pardon depression. And as far as a 12 year old having a baby, that is ridiculous, when did they find time to be alone together? My mom always wanted to know who I was with and where I was going.There are various situations where one is either planned, accidentally, or for some unforeseen circumstances forcefully put in the position of parents. What standards epitomize what a good parent should be? this is ludacris!!!!
Post a Comment