Labor Law Talk  
Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Go Back   Labor Law Talk > Family Law Forum > Adoption Law

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-14-2003, 04:52 PM
Rhiannon Rhiannon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 786
Default Who's on First.... The question of medicaid for mothers.

adoptadad@aol.com (AdoptaDad) wrote in message news:<20031014100239.15436.00000782@mb-m23.aol.com>...
Quote:
Subject: Re: Who's on First.... The question of medicaid for mothers.From: sarallewellyn@gosympatico.ca (Rhiannon)Date: 10/13/2003 10:10 PM Eastern Daylight TimeMessage-id: <dafc70.0310131810.7862a301@posting.google.com> < snip >
Quote:
Maybe I didn't make it clear, but I'm talking about people who, ontheir own initiative, express the desire to parent.I look at it this way.There's retrospective responsibility, for what we've done or failed todo, for our actions and omissions.Given that a baby is a 'done deed' (however it was concieved),although the retrospective part is important, the emphasis now shiftsto prospective responsibility.
Agreed.
Quote:
So, if a person who's not an entire dingbat sincerely wants to takeparental responsibility for their child, and that person looks to be(without prejudice) a fair bet, then, IMO, they merit encouragementand support.
Absolutely. Conversely, foster care is full of children who have been born to parents who have repeatedly proven themselves to be unfit. (Julia gave one example of a mother who had 6 children removed from her care by the state - and took home her 7th baby.) My son's biological mother had at least 2 other children removed by the state before they terminated her parental rights for a third time (after he spent five years in foster care).
You are right, Dad. You've taken my point. I take yours and Julia's.
It's just that sometimes these distinctions get a little lost on alt.
a, and it doesn't hurt to get back onto common ground now and again.
(not but what I don't have a predilection for mud-slinging, of course)

My husband's cousin, a social worker in Clapham (London, U.K), works
with drug addicted women and their children. She has expressed
tremendous frustration with the fact that many of these women continue
to bear children, and struggle to hold onto them even though they are
often incapable of caring for them (and some are beyond caring whether
they care or not!)
Quote:

I know this sounds a little harsh, but such parents (dads included) shouldn't get multiple chances to abuse and/or neglect their kids. At the very least, they should be counselled towards relinquishment. For the most egregious cases, I would support sterilization for repeat offenders.
Like how, 'most egregious'?
Who'll evaluate and how?
Quote:


We chemically castrate men who have repeatedly raped and/or molested children. But offer state sanctioned sterilization for women who have repeatedly abused, neglected, and/or otherwise failed to protect their children and all hell breaks loose.
I'll sleep on that nightmarish proposal if you don't mind.
It requires an emotional distance that I can't yet manage to put
between my gut reaction and the idea itself.


Rh.




Quote:
Dad
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Message to The People XCobraJock Federal and State Tax Law 15 03-13-2006 07:17 PM
The big lie and the truth about Right-to-Work futureoftheunion Consumer Law and Fraud 4 02-21-2006 06:12 AM
Question - please take a note Noname Labor Laws 0 07-04-2005 06:08 AM
California Question about time... slyonic Labor Laws 2 03-03-2005 12:12 AM
Who's on First.... The question of medicaid for mothers. kat Adoption Law 1 10-14-2003 05:53 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© LaborLawTalk.Com 2008. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer and Conditions of Use

The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation. Please note that some of our forums also serve as mirrors to Usenet newsgroups. Many posts you see on our forums are made by newsgroup users who may not be members of LaborLawTalk.com

Topics pertain mainly to the following States:
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District Of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada North Carolina North Dakota New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming