Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit LanaD's column >>

LANAD

Can't we all just get a bong?
Articles Posted: 0  Links Seeded: 22
Member Since: 2/2009  Last Seen: 5/17/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Sterilizing Addicts for Cash

Seeded on Wed Apr 21, 2010 2:51 PM EDT
Read ArticleArticle Source: TIME
health, money, drugs, cash, birth-control, addicts, sterilization, drug-addicts, sterilize
Seeded by LanaD
Advertise | AdChoices

I was watching CNN earlier and saw a segment about drug addicts getting paid to be sterilized or be put on long term birth control. I think this is a good program and was wondering how others feel about this.

"Project Prevention, a North Carolina–based charity that gives drug addicts $300 if they go on long-term birth control or undergo sterilization. The aim of Barbara Harris, 57, the organization's controversial founder, is to prevent addicts from having children they can't care for and reduce the number of babies who are born exposed to drugs. "Even if their babies are fortunate enough not to have mental or physical disabilities, they're placed in the foster-care system and moved from home to home," she says. "What makes a woman's right to procreate more important than the right of a child to have a normal life?" It's an issue near and dear to Harris: she adopted four children born to the same crack-addicted woman in Los Angeles."

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

  • LanaD's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (50)
LanaD

I think this is a good step forward to stop a few abortions and keep some kids out of the foster system. This could also help break the welfare cycle. Not to mention save a few from debilitating conditions that can accompany being exposed to drugs in utero.

Yep, one step closer to making sure every child that is born is wanted and loved.

  • 2 votes
Reply#1 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 2:54 PM EDT
Rainbow Warrior

Lana, wrong approach! When we stop punishing people that already have problems and start helping them with medical treatment, education and opportunities that becomes a permanent solution with positive outcomes. By sterilizing someone you have only taken care of one potential problem that you have a high priority on. You certainly haven't changed anything! This whole idea seems rather sexist and directed more at women having kids... steralize a male druggy and you might be giving him a pass for rape!

Please use your critical thinking skills when you see stuff on TV these days, most of it is evil bad!

  • 3 votes
#1.1 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:03 PM EDT
sunnybunny1269

They aren't punishing anyone. They are offering them money. Big difference.

  • 1 vote
#1.2 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 5:59 PM EDT
River-239955

$300 ? It's a very cheap shot at anyone.

  • 4 votes
#1.3 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:05 PM EDT
sunnybunny1269

I agree there. it sould be a significant amount, enough to make a difference (maybe 5k-10k)but not enough that reasonable people would be rushing to do it just for the cash.

  • 2 votes
#1.4 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:09 PM EDT
River-239955

Oh wow..... Reasonable people.......of course..........

Has it ever occurred to you that a huge percentage of addicts are doing their best to stay stoned so that they don't simply explode and kill those who are so condescending to them? Do you really imagine that they "should" prefer your company?

  • 5 votes
#1.5 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:12 PM EDT
Rainbow Warrior

The US has a lovely prison industrial complex that feeds it's self through the incarceration of non-violent drug offenders... that's not punishment funny bunny? Loosing your ability to reproduce because you have an addiction and can get some quick cash for the next fix is a systematic way to perpetuate the problem and fix absolutely nothing, it's a waste of money. Most chemical dependencies don't start as criminal problems, but the way this country handles them they definitely end that way. Do a little research into how other countries handle drug issues as medical conditions and not criminal acts and you might get enlightened... just don't start in Mexico! Look to Europe.

  • 4 votes
#1.6 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:20 PM EDT
take2la

Eugenics.

  • 4 votes
#1.7 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:28 PM EDT
LanaD

Rainbow: The idea of this program is not to punish anyone. I agree that education, medical treatment and other resources are also a must. I see nothing wrong with putting these people on long term birth control until they utilize the resources they need to end their addiction. They do not need unwanted pregnancies while trying to get their lives on track. Also, I do not advocate anyone being sterilized or put on birth control against their will. The people who utilize this program are doing so because they want to. No one is forcing them. The sterilization part of the program is used mostly by women who already have more kids than they want or can handle. Others have the option of long term birth control.

This program is also for males too. Why would it be giving him a pass for rape?

Loosing your ability to reproduce because you have an addiction and can get some quick cash for the next fix is a systematic way to perpetuate the problem and fix absolutely nothing, it's a waste of money.

Hey at least they won't be bringing anymore kids into this world for us to support for the next 2 decades. And they don't have to give up their ability to reproduce completely. Really, I would gladly pay the $300 (that they will most likely blow in one night) to save the tax payers decades of welfare payments. Not to mention saving kids from the foster system or being born with debilitating conditions.

River: I would take $300 to get sterilized lol

sunnybunny: 1000's of dollars is way too much to pay to an addict. That will supply them with drugs for way too long and add to the problem. The $300 won't even last 2 days if spent on drugs.

    #1.8 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:54 PM EDT
    sunnybunny1269

    I meant to reply to this comment, but ended up putting it on the thread below.Please see #2.3.

    I think the problem is that you are targeting a narrow demographic of a certain type of individual rather than encouraging most people (yes, reasonable people - like you or me) to make what is very a prudent choice. At the same time if it's like 5k or 10k you give them (parents) a resource to do something significant for their family like buy a car, or relocate, whatever they need to do to. It's got to be enough to make a difference for anyone with sense to consider it. You're right about $300. - it will be enough to get high on if thats what you want to do.

    • 2 votes
    #1.9 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:52 AM EDT
    River-239955

    What else is there to do with nothing more than $300? It won't rent an apartment. It won't cover a ride to get to work for 2 months. It won't feed a family, if there is one.

    • 2 votes
    #1.10 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:01 AM EDT
    sunnybunny1269

    Exactly my point. One of them anyway.

    • 2 votes
    #1.11 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:12 AM EDT
    LanaD

    Well for one, by making the pay ($300.) You are targeting a certain desperate demographic which is a problem for me, also it is not enough to make a difference in their life which is another problem.

    Well what about the free and reduced cost birth control for low income women? Is that not targeting a certain desperate demographic? $300 is a lot when you have nothing. There have been times where I would have killed for less lol

    I think the problem is that you are targeting a narrow demographic of a certain type of individual rather than encouraging most people (yes, reasonable people - like you or me) to make what is very a prudent choice.

    Why can I not do both? Why can we not help those who are just a lay away from bringing another victim into their personal hell and help others access birth control?

    At the same time if it's like 5k or 10k you give them (parents) a resource to do something significant for their family like buy a car, or relocate, whatever they need to do to.

    These are drug addicts we are talking about here. They do not need behind the wheel of a car lol That is just wayyyy too much money. Here is how I would like to do it.

    Step one: Get them on birth control or sterilized (for those who already have kids) just so if they fail they don't drag an innocent person with them.

    Step two: Get the treatment, resources, counseling and so on to beat their addiction.

    Step three: Set them up with charities and government programs for housing, food, utilities and what ever else help they can get. Now give them the $300.

    Step four: Help them find a job

    River: I have never rented a place over $350 a month. If you have HUD you can pay next to nothing for rent. I have also never paid anyone over $20 a week to drive me to work.

    You guys are making me feel really poor lol

      #1.12 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:29 PM EDT
      sunnybunny1269

      These are drug addicts we are talking about here. They do not need behind the wheel of a car lol That is just wayyyy too much money.

      So these are "drug addicts" not normal folks like you and me. Therein lies the problem. You are talking about this group like they are different, undesirables and therefore not entitled to the same consideration as other people. If you are going to offer an incentive to get sterilized, it has to be fair - not exploitative of their condition.

      • 1 vote
      #1.13 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:28 PM EDT
      LanaD

      Yes, normal folks like you and me don't put others lives at risk by driving under the influence. Driving a car is not a right, it is a privilege.

      Low income women are given incentives to get on birth control, free or reduced cost. How is that not "exploitative" by your definition? I am sorry but drug addicts risk putting another person in danger which is why we should most certainly give incentives to keep that from happening until they get better.

        #1.14 - Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:47 PM EDT
        Reply
        JoulesBeef

        yeah More BS republicanism.

        The guy has a medical problem.. so screw @!$%#ing helping him.. lets make sure he doesnt have kids.

        NOW PEOPLE LIKE RUSH LIMBAUGH.. who was caught with more oxycotton than most dealers.. well he has enough money.. he wont be paid to be sterilized no matter how much it would help society.

        ISNT IT AMAZING THE SMALL GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVES.. YOU KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT FEAR THE GOVERNMENT.. HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM STERILIZING THE POPULATION.

        This could also help break the welfare cycle.

        really wish yall would learn that welfare was reform in 96 by clinton and you get 6 total years for life.. and your welfare usage is cummlative.. so use 4 when your 20 you get 2 when you are 60. @!$%#ing seriously talk about beating a dead horse..and many states have stricter laws than that..

        But according to the right.. they are black, crack addicts who stay on welfare for life and pump out babies.

        Doesnt matter most of them are actually single mothers.. YOU KNOW THE @!$%#ING PEOPLE WHO CHOOSE TO KEEP THEIR KIDS.. YOU KNOW LIKE YALL DEMAND.. So she is doing the right thing and yall condemn here.

        Of course a single @!$%#ing mother should be able to get by working 80 hours a week.. after all at min wage that is an entire 32k a year BEFORE TAXES.

        But of course the right would call someone working 80 hours a week and has to get food stamps to feed their kids.. as LAZY.

        how abotu dropping some of the talking points.
        how abotu dropping the draconian messures that only effect poor people(WHO ALSO CAN GET ADDICTED JUST LIKE RUSH>> UNDER A DOCTORS CARE... But they arent rich like rush.. so it is allllll their own faults right.

        How about lets get to what the GOP really want.

        Only the rich should be able to have kids.
        Only the rich should be able to vote.
        the rich should have no taxes.. everyone else should.
        small government means small gov on @!$%# i care about.. huge draconian gov on everything else.
        women shouldnt be able to vote rich or not and should STFU and get back into the kitchen


        SOrry if I sound angry.. but your idea is about an anti american as it can get and the only reason the right is all over this crap.. is cause IT WILL MAINLY AFFECT THE POOR AND BLACKS. and we have way way too many blacks for more republican tastes./

        • 5 votes
        Reply#2 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:30 PM EDT
        River-239955

        Great points, Joules.

        It is rather unfortunate that people devote their time to correcting others and seldom recognize their own imperfections, nor do they seem to care how repulsive they can be.

        • 5 votes
        #2.1 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:46 PM EDT
        LanaD

        Joules: I am sorry my seed angered you =(

        The guy has a medical problem.. so screw @!$%#ing helping him.. lets make sure he doesnt have kids

        NO NO NO. That is not at all what I am trying to point out. Why can we not help and ensure he doesn't burden himself or the tax payers with a kid, if he doesn't want that? I am in no way saying we should sterilize people against their will.

        I totally agree with you on your King Rush statements lol I think I am coming off as republican to you but I am actually very liberal. I also don't want to sterilize the population.

        I know people who have been collecting food stamps and living on HUD for more than 6 years. What welfare does the 6 years pertain to?

        YOU KNOW THE @!$%#ING PEOPLE WHO CHOOSE TO KEEP THEIR KIDS.. YOU KNOW LIKE YALL DEMAND.. So she is doing the right thing and yall condemn here.

        I am 100% Pro-Choice and I do not believe in guilt tripping women into having kids they neither want nor can afford. But I know exactly what you mean.

        I would agree that this would be anti-american if they were trying to forcibly sterilize and implant these people with birth control. Rich people can be addicts too and if they want the procedures I see nothing wrong with giving it to them. Rich addict, poor addict, black addict , white addict, male addict, female addict...I do not care. If they know they don't want to drag kids into this hell give them the procedure.

        Once agian, sorry I angered you and sorry I sounded like a republican

        • 3 votes
        #2.2 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:11 PM EDT
        sunnybunny1269

        Well for one, by making the pay ($300.) You are targeting a certain desperate demographic which is a problem for me, also it is not enough to make a difference in their life which is another problem. I also think in order to qualify the person in question should already have at least one child or have a valid reason that they feel they shouldn't have kids such as a genetic disorder or due to age - something that doesn't have the capacity to change over time such as economic or social status or curable disease (addiction is curable for example). This changes it from a eugenics program to a public campaign to encourage prudent reproductive choices. Thousands of dollars too much? Tax credits for having children are thousands every year. A one time payout is less overall. In other words, I think there are possible uses for this kind of thing, but exploiting addicts? Not good.

        • 1 vote
        #2.3 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:37 AM EDT
        LanaD

        I also think in order to qualify the person in question should already have at least one child or have a valid reason that they feel they shouldn't have kids such as a genetic disorder or due to age - something that doesn't have the capacity to change over time such as economic or social status or curable disease (addiction is curable for example).

        Oh now that is bull. Its people who think like this that keep people like me from being able to get sterilized. I know I do not want kids. I want no part of parenthood. But since I don't already have a kid or a genetic disorder and because I am not in my late twenties I can't get one. However, I do agree that when it comes to the addicts that they should not be able to get sterilized unless they fit that criteria you mentioned. But they should be able to opt for the long term birth control instead.

        Tax credits for having children are thousands every year.

        Good point. I know people who got back over $3,000 for their kid. I would definitely support the thousands of dollars for reasonable people and addicts who have completed treatment.

        I am by no means trying to exploit addicts. I am trying to keep them from taking down an innocent human being with them and help them set up for success.

          #2.4 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:44 PM EDT
          Reply
          JoulesBeef

          I get a bit touchy on this subject but it is sickening how we blame the poor for their plight but people like rush are victims.

          and I also get so sick of hearing about generational welfare when that ended over a decade ago.

          one stat you will never hear on fox.. MOST PEOPLE USE WELFARE FOR A YEAR OR LESS.

          People dont want to be on welfare.. it's not something to brag about.

          • 4 votes
          Reply#3 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:35 PM EDT
          LanaD

          I swear I am not blaming the poor for anything. I am also sorry that I know women who were on welfare whosekids are now on welfare with their own kids. My husbands grandmother was on welfare. So was his mom. And now so is his sister. That is 3 generations right there. If my niece follows this path she will be 4th.

          Where I live people don't seem to have any shame about living in the projects or getting foodstamps. I have worked at a grocery store for 3 years and I always recognize the same people around the 1st. When I was in school girls would get pregnant on purpose so they could get a free apartment in the projects with their boyfriend and get free food.

          I could have done that too but I didn't want to. I have always wanted better than that life. I know it is hard to believe but there really are people who are perfectly content with living a second rate life. Some of these people weren't always poor either.

          MOST PEOPLE USE WELFARE FOR A YEAR OR LESS.

          This I know. But there is always that percentage who do take as much as they can get for as long as they can get. Out of all the customers I ring out I would honestly say less than 10% are "welfare queens".

          I bet its sounding like I am against welfare. I am in by no means against it. I know there are people who abuse it and people who are perfectly content with not changing their lives to get off the welfare but that does not mean we punish everyone because of these people. We just can't pretend these people do not exist. It will not help our cause.

            #3.1 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:29 PM EDT
            Reply
            Darreth01

            FLAT OUT FREAKING AMAZING! So... what this boils down to is that there are SOME people that are more IMPORTANT than OTHERS... TYPICAL!!! See... this is the kind of SH** that those guys... YOU KNOW... the guys about 70 years ago were trying... you know... they were led by the guy with the FUNNY MUSTACHE!!! You know... THOSE GUYS! But it's OK though right... cause they're just ADDICTS... it's not like they're actually FU**ING HUMAN (You know Lana... not like you and your friends are!!!)

            WOW!!!

            THIS IS SICKENING!!! PERIOD!

            • 3 votes
            Reply#4 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:06 PM EDT
            take2la

            Right Darreth-

            it was called Eugenics in the 1880's (it failed then)

            it was called the Master Race during the Nazi's promotional event (it failed then)

            its still called Eugenics now. (its still failing)

            Why does it FAIL?

            Because at its core, people know that excluding ANY group from procreating is GENOCIDE.

            Which is rather UN-popular- no matter who promotes it.

            • 1 vote
            #4.1 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:35 PM EDT
            Darreth01

            Take2la: Thanks... I guess I should have put a "Sarcasm" tag there... *GRIN*

            I just didn't want to be accused of actually SAYING the word NAZI PLOT!!!

            (But that's not REALLY what they're doing right????)

            This sort of posting makes me SHIVER and want to THROW UP!!! But then I'm one of those "Whining LIBERAL" types that just doesn't understand how the world REALLY WORKS (You know... there are those that are MORE IMPORTANT and those that are only on the PLANET to use up RESOURCES)

            YES there was a LOT OF SARCASM there... because if I ACTUALLY SAY what I think of this idea it will make the screens of all those reading my response BURST INTO FLAMES!!!

            • 3 votes
            #4.2 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:41 PM EDT
            LanaD

            what this boils down to is that there are SOME people that are more IMPORTANT than OTHERS... TYPICAL!!!

            You know who is the most important here? The poor kids who never ask to be born into the foster system or born with debilitating defects thanks to an addict mother.

            cause they're just ADDICTS... it's not like they're actually FU**ING HUMAN (You know Lana... not like you and your friends are!!!)

            I am in no way advocating for sterilizing people against their will. If myself or my friends were addicts I would want us to make sure we do not produce anymore casualties of our addiction.

            Jeez with all the nazi stuff. Do you guys know how to over react or what? In case you didn't notice there is an option for long term birth control as well. How is this trying to create a master race? Anyone of any race can become an addict

            Oh by the way...I am a whiny liberal too lol

              #4.3 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:39 PM EDT
              Darreth01

              RE: #4.3

              I am in no way advocating for sterilizing people against their will.

              NO... what you're doing is EVEN WORSE... you're ADVOCATING sterilizing someone who is NOT in their right MIND! (If you were saying "HEY... let's take them and wait until they sober up and then give them this OPTION!" But this article says let's give the addicts $300 to make sure there are no MORE of these "DEGENERATES" That way those of us in NORMAL society don't have to DEAL with them! *GAG*

              • 1 vote
              #4.4 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:20 PM EDT
              LanaD

              If the person isn't even in their right mind to make the CHOICE to get on long term birth control or sterilization how can you possibly trust them with a child? How could you trust them to carry a child inside their bodies where it has no escape from the drugs being put straight into its blood as well?

              I do not think sterilization should be an option for childless addicts. I see nothing wrong with putting them on long term birth control (if they want) until they get the treatment they need.

              But this article says let's give the addicts $300 to make sure there are no MORE of these "DEGENERATES" That way those of us in NORMAL society don't have to DEAL with them! *GAG*

              No, lets give the addicts $300 to make sure they don't drag an innocent child down with them. This stops addicts from getting abortions, poisoning their fetuses, selling their children, and adding more kids to the foster/welfare systems. What can be better than making sure people who don't want and can't afford kids don't have until they are ready?

                #4.5 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:57 PM EDT
                Reply
                Megidoloan

                If they ever did something like this where I live, I'd pretend to be an addict so I could finally get the sterilization (and money, woo-hoo!) I've been begging for since the day I turned 18. Funny how they'll volunteer to sterilize drug addicts, but perfectly straight, reasonable people without kids are deemed too stupid to know what they want to do with their lives ("You'll change your mind!"), so no sterilizations for us!

                If they were truly worried about reducing abortions and unwanted children, they'd freakin' sterilize people who don't want kids! But no. Despite us knowing full and well that we don't want kids and would be terrible parents, they want us to breed anyway. It's ridiculous.

                • 4 votes
                Reply#5 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:14 PM EDT
                River-239955

                Right? I know exactly what you are saying.

                • 3 votes
                #5.1 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:33 PM EDT
                LanaD

                If they ever did something like this where I live, I'd pretend to be an addict so I could finally get the sterilization (and money, woo-hoo!) I've been begging for since the day I turned 18.

                LMAO I thought the same thing at first. From the article:

                prospective participants must mail in arrest records or official letters from social workers to confirm that they have a drug problem.

                Funny how they'll volunteer to sterilize drug addicts, but perfectly straight, reasonable people without kids are deemed too stupid to know what they want to do with their lives ("You'll change your mind!"), so no sterilizations for us!

                They brought this up on the CNN segment. They will not sterilize you if you don't already have kids. But they can still get the long term birth control.

                I am happily childfree like you as well. I wish with all my heart the restrictions on sterilization for reasonable people who just don't want kids would be lifted. If I were to get pregnant I would most certainly get an abortion and I have told the doctors who deny me my tubal litigation this. To which they say "Well, once you find out you are pregnant you will probably change your mind when you hear that little heart beat." or "At least after an abortion you can still have kids when your ready"


                  #5.2 - Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:54 PM EDT
                  sunnybunny1269

                  That's ridiculous! Why won't they do a tubal on you? There are some serious issues at play here. The woman in this article has 5 kids! That is a good reason to get a tubal right there forget the drugs. My mother drilled into my head the 0 population and responsible parenting thing since I was a little girl. She always used to tell me that most people aren't capable of taking proper care of more than 2 kids (one for each parent to spend one on one time with).

                    #5.3 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:43 PM EDT
                    LanaD

                    You want to know why they won't do a tubal on me?

                    in order to qualify the person in question should already have at least one child or have a valid reason that they feel they shouldn't have kids such as a genetic disorder or due to age - something that doesn't have the capacity to change over time such as economic or social status

                    Sound familiar? lol

                    I agree with the 2 kids statement. Sometimes honestly, there are people like me that can't even tolerate one let alone two. And if there isn't two parents that number can go down. But there are also people who seem to be born to just raise kids.

                      #5.4 - Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:09 PM EDT
                      sunnybunny1269

                      I was talking about getting paid to get one - as in I think they should be widely encouraged, but it should not be exploited to the point that people end up childless out of desperation for money. If someone ends up having no more than 1 or 2 kids because of desperate financial situations, I don't think that is bad at all (since I tend to think that is sensible to begin with). What you get paid to do and what you CAN do are 2 different things.

                      I don't completely agree about the two kids thing (some people have NO kids and that makes up for others who have 3 or 4). I do think people need to limit their families and if there aren't 2 parents it would be wise not to have any more kids at all until the situation changes. True there are people who are born to raise kids - but not as many as have a bunch. I think they are rare.

                        #5.5 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:03 AM EDT
                        LanaD

                        Oh well I see nothing wrong with paying people to make a responsible choice to keep an innocent human out of their hell.

                        I don't completely agree about the two kids thing (some people have NO kids and that makes up for others who have 3 or 4).

                        Lmao well I completely disagree with this statement. How is my having no kids going to make it possible for others to handle 3 or 4? I just don't get it.

                          #5.6 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:34 AM EDT
                          sunnybunny1269

                          Lmao well I completely disagree with this statement. How is my having no kids going to make it possible for others to handle 3 or 4? I just don't get it.

                          I guess you aren't familiar with the 0 population growth theory that was popular in the late 60s early 70s. I thought it was well known even if it isn't very PC (I once saw an episode of "All in the Family" where it was discussed and of course Gloria and Mike advocated it). Couples were encouraged to have no more than 2 children to replace them in the population because THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE IN THE WORLD. But since there are people who don't want kids or can't have kids and some people do desire or just end up with larger families, it balance out somewhat. I never hear anyone talk about 0 population growth anymore. has it been abandoned as a theory?

                          • 2 votes
                          #5.7 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:35 PM EDT
                          LanaD

                          I was not familiar with the 0 population growth theory. Thank you for educating me on the subject =)

                          I wonder if it actually worked, or if we even followed it?

                            #5.8 - Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:52 PM EDT
                            Reply
                            tdk022755

                            I am all for it. And while you are at it, when you have kids that are taken away from you and put in foster care because of abuse and neglect, the same should go as well. And while you are at it, if you have a baby born with a positive durg screen, no more babies for you. And if you can't pay your child support, it's clip-clip. I am tired of seeing abused, sick, sexually assaulted kids in the ER. I am sick of these parents who won't pay their child support. If you cannot be a responsible, loving parent, then you don't deserve to have children. You don't have to be rich. You just have to love and care for your children, keep them safe, nuture them and foster a positive future for them. We need to help parents who work and try to be good parents by having after school programs and day care for working parents. It is ok to be a single parent. As long as you are a good parent. But it takes two to have a child and both have a responsibility. And if you don't hold up your end of the job, then no more kids for you. Your out of the game.

                            • 1 vote
                            Reply#6 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:15 AM EDT
                            River-239955

                            Your out of the game.

                            Game?

                            As long as you are a good parent. But it takes two to have a child and both have a responsibility.

                            Of course, as long as your standards are met........ How respectable....... Your wishes are all that matters, of course, of course.....

                            /sarc and gag......

                            • 2 votes
                            #6.1 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:44 AM EDT
                            LanaD

                            tdk: Are you as surprised as I am at how people are reacting to this? I have asked co-workers, friends and family their opinions and all but one supports the idea. I did not expect to be called hitler or a eugenics supporter. I am sorry that I want to protect innocent children from being put into a horrible situation.

                            If you cannot be a responsible, loving parent, then you don't deserve to have children.

                            Its true. God forbid we feel this way right? I am sorry I want every child to be wanted and loved and not be constantly helplessly poisoned by their mothers drug habit.

                            You just have to love and care for your children, keep them safe, nuture them and foster a positive future for them.

                            Funny how you need a license to drive a car and go through screening before adopting a dog but you can just make new people all willy nilly. When you have kids it not about YOU its about the kid. I am sorry that I look out for whats best for the kid and not just some womans right to procreate who doesn't even want to! If she doesn't want to procreate we should get her on long term birth control asap. From the article:

                            "What makes a woman's right to procreate more important than the right of a child to have a normal life?"

                            Game?

                            Yeah the "game" of reproducing which is exactly how drug addicts can treat their pregnancies.

                              #6.2 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:48 AM EDT
                              River-239955

                              Yeah the "game" of reproducing which is exactly how drug addicts can treat their pregnancies.

                              And you, of course, being the fine young mother that you are, certainly know exactly how to go about telling someone else how to cope with their pregnancy and their environment, as well as telling them they are unworthy.

                              It's no wonder at all this country is in the shape it is. What a disappointment.

                              I am mother, for the record. And there's not any way at all that I would ever allow this backwoods, bigoted, selfish, controlling mindset into my home or my childrens' lives.

                              • 2 votes
                              #6.3 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:51 AM EDT
                              LanaD

                              I am not a "fine young mother" and I don't know why I have to be to state the obvious. You know certainly well that drug addicts will not let a pregnancy stand in the way of their addiction. I am sorry that I expect them not to subject their fetuses to their drug use. Anyone who will intentially harm their child and let it become a casulty of their addiction is not worthy of having children. And if these people KNOW they do not want to make a child to drag into this situation we should make every effort to keep it from happening.

                              River, you are acting ridiculous. And being a mother doesn't excuse it. This is not some evil intented program. This is a program keeping addicts from reproducing (until they get their lives on track) and exposing children to their drug laden bodies from which they have no escape. No one is trying to control anyone. They are trying to save children from horrible situations for christs sake. How is this selfish? The whole purpose is to PROTECT THE KIDS!

                              Come on now...lets have a reasonable discussion. You sound like those Pro-Life nuts screaming that abortion targets black babies. geez

                              • 1 vote
                              #6.4 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:19 PM EDT
                              Darreth01

                              RE: #6: And then NEXT year there will be those who are advocating sterilizing those that have a chance of having a child with DOWN'S SYNDROME! SEE HOW THIS WORKS??? WHERE DOES IT STOP?

                              I KNOW... I KNOW... "THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU SAID!" RIGHT?!?!?

                                #6.5 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:37 PM EDT
                                LanaD

                                Come on now... Just like how if gays can get married they are going to allow people to marry animals, right?

                                • 1 vote
                                #6.6 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:48 PM EDT
                                River-239955

                                LanaD,

                                You are not a "reasonable" person, and I care for your company at all. We will not be discussing anything else.

                                Ever.

                                • 2 votes
                                #6.7 - Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:14 PM EDT
                                LanaD

                                Obviously you are the one who is not reasonable. What a way to have a civil discussion =) I hope to see you around the vine. I bet you will see I am more reasonable than you think.

                                • 1 vote
                                #6.8 - Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:54 PM EDT
                                Reply
                                tdk022755

                                I tell you what. The next time I get a child in the ER who has been sexually abused by mon's boyfriend or a child who has been beaten to death by his parents when they are high on meth (he was 12 years old, and they had been beating him for years. When the police went to the home, they found the parents trying to clean up all the blood before the police got there), I will give you guys a call. When I have the woman come into the ER who is having baby number 6 that is also positive for cocaine and that child will ALSO be taken from her and placed into foster care, perhaps one of you can come and take the baby for us. When the 8 year old comes in with a suicide attempt and we finally find his mother, who has just been released from prison, who comes to the ER telling me her sad story about her heroin addiction, I will let you sit by her son and make sure he does not try to harm himself again. If you think that I am making this stuff up, you are wrong. I have been a nurse for 32 years I have seen just about every horrible thing that can be done to a child. So don't talk to me about how to be a good parent.

                                • 1 vote
                                Reply#7 - Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:03 AM EDT
                                LanaD

                                Well said. I think this is where we differ in our views from the other posters. To us, keeping innocent children from these situations is whats our highest priority. If we can't even trust the addict to make the choice to get on long term birth control until they get their lives together how in the world can we trust them with a kid?

                                I was watching cops one day and they tackled this crack buying prostitute. She started screaming "I'm pregnant! I'm pregnant!" Of course only to get off the ground. They cops quickly helped her up and asked her how far along she was. She said "I don't know... 6 or 7 months" Since they found crack and a crack pipe on her they asked her Why she was doing this to her baby and she straight up said "I do not care about this *bleep* kid! I wish it just die! I didn't want to get pregnant!" The cop asked her why she didn't just get an abortion and she said she couldn't afford it. Luckily, this woman went to jail where her crack supply was obviously cut off. I hope her child is ok.

                                • 1 vote
                                #7.1 - Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:02 AM EDT
                                Reply
                                tdk022755

                                Well her child will not be OK and that is the sad part. In addition to this, this is not her first child nor will it be her last. When people are addicted to a substance, getting that substance is more important that anything else and they will sell their soul to the devil to get what every they need to curb their cravings. I have seen it over and over, thousands of times. Addiction kiils people.... not just the addict but everyone around them. I am all for getting people help to remain clean and sober and I have seen people who have been successful at this.. but often it was too little.. too late. After their children had already sufferend through years of neglect and abuse. And please understand, I am not just talking about the poor street hooker here or the guy who sleeps with a different woman every night. I have seen a lot of rich, high browed people who were just as addicted to substances as anyone else. Deadbeat dads and moms at all levels who refuse to stop drinking and using drugs, refuse to pay child support. This is not just a "poor persons" disease, I guarantee you. Addiction is a horrible thing and when you have an addiction that takes over your life to a degree where you cannot take care of your responsibilites such as raising your children, then you should not be allowed to have children. When people are on meth, all they want is meth... nothing else. When people want a herion fix, that is what they want... not milk for the baby. You cannot train people to have better decision making when they are in the middle of addiction. You cannot train some irresponsible guy who sleeps around, who has children by 7 different women that he needs to use a condom. He is not going to do that. He can't pay all that child support. He needs to get the snip and b done with it.

                                • 1 vote
                                Reply#8 - Sun Apr 25, 2010 6:45 PM EDT
                                LanaD

                                Thank you, very good points.

                                You are correct when you say addiction isn't just a poor persons disease. It bares repeating. If there is a rich addict who comes wanting put on long term birth control or sterilized, heck I wouldn't have a problem giving them the $300 too!

                                  #8.1 - Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:42 PM EDT
                                  Reply
                                  Leave a Comment:
                                  You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                  You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                                  (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                                  Newsvine Privacy Statement
                                  As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                  FUN STUFF:
                                  • Leaderboard |
                                  • E-Mail Alerts |
                                  • Top of the Vine |
                                  • Newsvine Live |
                                  • Newsvine Archives |
                                  • The Greenhouse |
                                  COMPANY STUFF:
                                  • Code of Honor |
                                  • Company Info |
                                  • Contact Us |
                                  • Jobs |
                                  • User Agreement |
                                  • Privacy Policy |
                                  • About our ads
                                  LEGAL STUFF:
                                  • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                                  • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                                  • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com