Bearing and raising children is a pretty serious thing. The future generation is at stake. Yet, I have seen and you have seen parents who do not (or are not able to) provide the sort of domestic environment that is necessary for an individual to flourish in, and become a useful member of society. In the modern world of today, one cannot even drive a car on the street without proving one's proficiency and receiving a license first. So, should something serious like having a baby be even more heavily monitored (especially because the world is already overpopulated)? Or would such a step be construed as an act against people's fundamental rights?
What is your opinion on this? If such licensing were to be implemented, what criteria should it address?
The issue is that there is quite a bit of conflict over what types of parenting styles and religious activities are acceptable to the authorities in question, and whether this sort of thing could be viewed as infringing on the rights of parents to be able to bring their children up freely. Personally, I feel that it would be impossible to implement a policy like this without adversely affecting the rights of others, although I will admit that there is indeed a significant issue with parents incapable of taking care of their children properly and mistreating or neglecting them while pursuing their own interests - those type of people are rather shocking to see. What needs to occur instead is the education of people about the signs of neglect, what is acceptable to treat children and to create an open community able to keep a watch out for "shady" parents (and others in general) and that it is okay to speak up. Although there have been efforts to promote these sorts of things, in my view there simply has not enough being done to minimise the damage caused by issues such as these.
Every species has an inbuilt parenting instinct. However, humans seem to have lost it. We have evolved into a people who don't have a clue how to parent. As each generation grows into parents with no parenting skills we just get worse. At the very least a compulsory parenting course should be attended by every expecting couple.
I think that it would be a better idea to have parenting classes in schools to teach potential parents of the future on how to take care of children? I feel that having a license to have children would be violating the rights.
having a drivers license doesn't mean you know how to drive, it just means that you are allowed to do so.
IMO if one does not have any children that that person does not have the right to discus or even talk about this subject.
also, if you don't remember the 80's then you are still a child and don't know what you are talking about. back in the 80's your father would kick your behind for misbehaving. nowadays people are afraid to discipline their child.
it's easy to criticize parents.. try parenting a child...
But then it does mean you know how to drive. In most countries, the process of obtaining a license involves various tests in order to verify whether the person knows how to drive. So, if you meet a person who has a license, I think you can safely assume that that person can indeed drive a vehicle. Plus, one needs to renew one's license periodically, which confirms that the person's driving skills refer to his current ability and not just his ability to drive in the distant past.
While I get what you're saying, I have to disagree. What we're talking about here is the matter of discussing a subject. Yes, having experience in the matter will give your intelligent points a bit more credibility, but you can't really forbid people from having any part in a discussion. Use your experience and intellect to express your intelligent opinions, not to show your superiority and try to forbid people from ever talking about something.
There are scientific schools of thought on these things. Child psychologists who have been researching these subjects for decades. Hundreds of books have been written on it. Yes, not everyone will have the same style of parenting, and that is based on the parents' personality, and intellect. What I am talking about here are the absolutely horrible parents, people who do not have control over their own lives, let alone be able to help another life flourish. You must agree that becoming a parent entails certain responsibilities, and if one cannot bear these responsibilities, it must be logically true that one should not have the right to be a parent in the first place.
I am not criticizing all parents. All I'm saying is that bad parents do exist. The definition of "bad" is pretty broad, but I have made clear that the parents I'm referring to are those who are absolutely incapable of taking responsibility of their children.
And that's why we have already the necessary institutions to deal with those issues in any developed country without the need of such an aberrant idea as a parenting license.
The issue of smacking children has just been raised here again with some doctors advocating that it should be illegal and jail time for offending parents. I disagree with that one totally and reckon that the lack of smacking and discipline is the problem with parenting today.
Nobody can judge the right to live. Especially humans.
I think everybody have rights to have children. Limiting children is against the god's law in my religion. Not all stupid people have stupid children. Genius people also can have dumb children or criminal children. It all depends on the government on the human resource development programs. Teenage also have right to have children since they have right to meet their grand grand grand children. So, i totally disagree on the lisence of having children.
Why not ? I see drunk, crack head or sick parents killing their children, abusing them. One of the hardest thing in 21st century is to raise a child safely imho.
We may need a license. We need one when driving cars, doing technical shit. Why not here ?
Requiring a license would not stop people anymore than requiring a driver's license to drive stops people from driving without a license.
There seems to be a consensus that education or licensing parents would not make any difference. We end up with kids who aren't interested in school so end up illiterate. Maybe we should focus on the kids. If they get through school without adequate education there doesn't seem to be much sense in releasing them into the world. Maybe they should go to compulsory national service run by the army where they learn discipline and get an education. If they get through a couple of years of that without learning then put them back through again. Just a thought.
I guess no need to have license to do that. Its a privilege in every human being to have a children whether poor or rich.
Everyone is accountable on it and it is a gift from God no need to ask permission in your government to have a child. lol.
Well, in communist countries such as China the only allowed 1 child policy due to there high population but somehow it is not also good. I guess there government act like a God.
If a person has a drivers license, it means that we can assume that the person is able to operate the type of vehicle of which he or she has a valid license for and that he or she is familiar with the rules of the public roads, but it most certainly does not mean that the person is a good driver.
just because one passed an exam doesn't make him/her a doctor in the matter.
there are millions of people that, morally speaking, should not be allowed to have children, but that is not our call. Children of criminals tend to become criminals and the children of junkies have a higher chance of becoming junkies, but not all choose to follow the path that was chosen by their parents.
not so long ago an Italian father was on vacation with his family, I think it was to Sweden, and he was arrested and jailed for disciplining his son.
this is ridiculous, I mean, children will always test their boundaries and their parents authority and it is the parent's responsibility to keep their children in check. not doing so will result in having an ungrateful child that doesn't respect a thing.
limiting people from having or doing something that is natural ( and no I'm not talking of smoking weed ) is just not right and there will always be people against it.
look at the poll.. at the time of my first post it was 3/3 and now it was 5/5
There's no need for such license, the government just has to stop funding those who are too lazy to bring their asses to a job interview, hence just stay at home and f*ck. Without the money who's gonna have children?
This problem's especially serious in New Zealand, with 75% Maori are on the dole, and one Maori family with 20 children is not rare. Those 20 children will soon become 26 new family each with 20 more children, and chances are, most of them will be on the dole.
On the other side of the Tasman Sea, we've got more problems with parents apparently unable to feed their kids but able to spend their money in RSLs and marijuana, all the while getting drunk and spreading their legs once more. Then their kids go out on the streets and get into fights for the smallest of things, which is why the crime rate is so damm high.
Does anyone really think that a parenting license will prevent people from having kids? Unless you plan to condemn offenders to death penalty.
Does anyone really think a parenting license will mandatory make a couple good parents?
Does anyone really think a parenting license will bring money to parents that can't raise their kids?
Does anyone really think that a parenting license can be compared to a driving lincense? kids are not machines.
... the best possible. Fine
It has been said that raising children is a community event not just a parenting task.
In any event government organizations in a community is important. Just how governments apply intervention is questionable though. Generally speaking I've seen a lot of government programs fail that seek to take control. Community activities that interact with individuals have been much more successful. I would say the role of government might be more useful when it comers to helping children to be there to supply money to community programs rather than to take money away from families for the purpose of regulating.
There are laws in most countries that protect children and some education is available to needy parents for the raising of children of their children. I think this an area which could be improved without the issuing a license because again the less government interaction (other than giving funding) into community programs is much better in my opinion.
this is a problem also here in Belgium. I grew up in a "citι" (sorry, there is no other language for this page on wikipedia) which is a neighborhood that was built for the people that used to work in the coalmine. so you're looking at a lather large neighborhood with a lot of immigrants.
The coalmine closed back in the 80's when I was a child and there are still a lot of people that came to our town for work after it had closed and stayed there, getting funds from the country for doing nothing.
As the head of the family you cannot get thrown off the "wellfare" (as we call it) as long as there is nobody in the family earning any money. you are looking at 1000-1100 a month.
+ child support and possibly unreported employment these people are earning more money then I do.
because these people usually have little or no education they will end up working at a factory where they earn less, so they'd be stupid to actually get a job.
and these people are like bunnies...
IMO radical measures will not resolve the problem but most likely open doors to even more radical ideas and actions.
we are all humans and it is in our nature to resist to change. back-doors will always be found and exploited, parasites have always been among us and will be there for as long as there is something they can benefit from.
if a genius would come up with a blueprint of a flawless society he would most likely end up killed by people that are making way too much money off of the existing 'system'.
I think there should be something similar to what you propose; it will definitely help to contain the size of the population as well, which I really concern about. Indeed, I am pretty much convinced that the motive of a lot of our current problems is the overpopulation (I'm something like a Malthusian fanboy, LOL).
The government here used to pay several thousand dollars as a baby bonus because they wanted more population. So it became a business for some single mums to keep having children, getting their baby bonus, and increased welfare payments each time.
Instead of giving money as a reward to have more children, perhaps providing other things such as heavily subsidised healthcare for children, free education as well as coupons worth hundreds of dollars such as food and strollers to parents to make it easier for them to raise a child. Perhaps this idea should be considered. However, I still agree to the policy above to some extent.
Which means that this person was educated to be a good driver. And if this person fails to do so, it's his/her fault. Having a driving license here in my country is a commitment. You have to take lots of classes (both practical and theoretical) and you have to pay to have said classes. You have to be 18 or older to have a driving license. It's a big decision, just like having kids. So when you obtain your license you were given all the tools to be a good driver. Why not do the same with parenting skills?
Lots of people didn't grow up around a father/mother figure and teaching some people how to raise their kids would be a good way to transmit some important values/knowledge. I'm not talking about beliefs, I'm talking about simple things like changing a diaper or even big things like calculating the amount of money you'll need to raise your kid until s/he's 18. I bet that would make a lot of people changing their minds about having kids.
I work with animal reproduction and I tend to think a lot about genetic diseases. I know I'm about to play the devil's advocate here, but I don't think people with serious genetic disorders should have kids. People love to use the world "love" to justify everything. "The guy is my soul mate, I don't care if our kid will be born without both kidneys, we will love s/he anyway!". This is not love. This is egotism. So you'll have a kid just because you can and you don't care if s/he will have to be attached to a dialysis machine during his/her entire life? What a loving parent.
Lol thread. The parenting license is the solution to every problem. Just incredible. And soon going even closer to eugenics ideas. Unbelievable.
suppose not need any license, its human right
I think it is better if everyone has the same rights and then take them away if they are proven to not be suitable parents. I know it's kind of late then, and what to do with children of unsuitable parents is not obvious, but I still think it is better because most parents are good (enough) parents.
It is probably better to try to get rid of the reasons why people are bad parents, like drugs and poverty.
In my eyes hitting a child always makes that person a bad parent and unsuitable to have children. There are other, better ways. If you make friends with your child it will do as you say because it cares about you and feel bad if you feel bad. If you treat it bad why would it treat you any better? Only because it is weaker and have no other choice than to obey orders like a slave. That makes the child feel very bad and feel hate.
Physically abusing a child will of course make it do as you want right away but often is not the end of the world if it doesn't. Be tolerant and allow it to make mistakes. The child will learn eventually and if it loves you it will listen to what you have to say and learn from it.
It's not ridiculous. If he visits Sweden he should of course accept the laws of Sweden. This law is supported by a big majority of the people.
If we want to limit the size of the human population (which would solve many problems and will be necessary in the future anyway) I think this approach is much better. It gives the same rights to everyone which is good. Question is what to do when people break the rules. Forced abortion or forced sterilization if the second child is already born could be possible solutions. I don't think taking the child away from the parents or giving high fines or prison penalty would be good for the child(ren), and would just create worse parents.
I think the concept is good idea in theory, but how do we enforce it? In other words, what do we do with the parents who bear children without the license...?
I don't know exactly which is the question.
About China and his one child policy I will say that even ideas that can look great at first glance can have unwanted secondary effects.
This is pretty what much what happens today in any western country, I think.
I think that a lot of people have been trying to do that in the past but failed because of several reasons that I mentioned earlier.
a child needs a trusting and understanding 'parent' not a friend or a buddy.
also, define hitting... IMO the "only" way to discipline a child under the age of 12 is a single slap on the wrist or against the "bottom". the child should know why it was disciplined and the only way is through communication. the slap is not the punishment but just to get their attention.
Physically abusing a child is wrong, If you thought for a second that I'm OK with this then I must have expressed myself in a wrong way.
No, I do not think that there should be a license to have children. Having Children is a gift of nature. It is our biological purpose. It is a right and should stay that way. For me, having a license to have children means limiting the biological needs and rights of people.
What that being said, I wouldn't mind that there are restrictions to have more children after already having two.
However, taxpayers should not have the burden of raising a child. Families should take care of their own.
Taxpayers pay taxes for everything that is considered to be a benefit for the whole comunnity and not only for what that taxpayer thinks benefits himself. Be very careful when you start to think that some things must not be considered anymore as a benefit for the whole community because you don't see how it benefits you. And this happens a lot during a crisis when people starts to think in which would be on their opinion the things in which their taxes should be better used because they can only see the benifit of things that actually benefit themselves. And in this specific case in my opinion is just absurd. Please compare the amount of tax money your government invest in this parenting issues with the money it invest in military.
If a government is giving funds for a child birth to help parents raise the children but government realize some people are exploiting it unhonestly, in what can be called a fraud, then is exactly those frauds which must be pursued and not all the parents that are getting those funds nor the whole parents of the country.
And a child that is born in a country automatically adquires some rights as well as he is going to have some duties in the future. He is not only the son of his parents but a son of the country. The child is not responsible of his parents acts. This means the child has the whole protection of the government no matter anything else. That's why when parents are totally incompetent and negligent there are court proceedings to remove custody from parents, at least in developed countries.
I'm pretty sure that if you were a child with negligent parents you would like your country, your government to look after you. And you wouldn't like your government saying, "Hey man, your parents didn't have a parenting license so it is not my problem. Let your negligent parents take care of you".
Do you know what solidarity means?
What is being suggesting in this thread is that by default all parents are incompetent and negligent so we need something to try to make then competent. All of them are committing fraud so we have to avoid that, all of them are ... For all this, a parenting license is neccessary. This is pretty obvious FALSE for anyone with the minimum common sense.
I have a feeling that the people that would actually follow this law and ask the government for permission to have a child (pass whatever competency tests or whatever) are the same people who we would not have to worry about when it comes to raising children. The people that do raise their children poorly and end up raping the welfare system are the same people that wouldn't bother following the law anyways.
Therefore, this would be an unenforceable and useless law that really just gives the government far more power than they should be allowed to have. It sounds nice in theory and many people just shouldn't have children.
What I do support, however, is my tax dollars paying for free contraceptives. While I hate the idea of that because people should be responsible for paying for their own birth control, studies have shown that significantly less unplanned/teenage pregnancies happen when free contraceptives are given out without any hassle and so it ends up saving tax payer money.