A Parenting License as a preventive Measure ahould be required

[Radrook]

DI'd I say anything about throwing up our hands and leaving the innocent to fend for themselves? I would argue, however, when we see a modest amount of government power resulting in a significant abuse of that power, it would be unwise to cede even more power to government at the expense of fundamental liberties.

Please explain how ruining innocent, helpless lives is our fundamental right.
My father had absolutely no right to threaten me with throwing me out into the NYC streets without any parental support at age three and a half if I did not IMMEDIATELY divest myself of the natural love I felt for the woman I had grown to view as my mother but who was actually my aunt to whom I had been entrusted at age one. Was that his fundamental liberty? Was it his fundamental liberty to never call me son, never pat me on the head, or give me a hug or tell me that at least he liked me during my whole childhood and adolescence as well? Or never as much as look at me when he came home from work? Were those his fundamental liberties?

 

[brinny]

Why do we demand a license for driving? To prevent people from getting hurt.
People, children , get seriously hurt by unqualified parents. So a license which can be attained only after meeting stringent criteria should also be required of those who want to be parents. If we don't have a right to endanger others with poor driving skills, then the same should apply here.

Awwwww...i think i know where you're coming from, but there are soooo many, myself included (i was very naive), who might not have gotten a license to be a parent. There are so many variables to consider. For instance back in the earlier part of the 19th century, a mother might not be able to afford a crib or a cradle, and may have used a "drawer" for her newborn to sleep in, and bathed her newborn in a sink, and just "made do" with what little she had. In today's standards, she might be reported as an unfit mother, based on the "values" of this society, which, many times, have nothing to do with the well being of babies and/or children.

We could go on and on, but i hope you can sorta' see where i'm headed with this brother.

Good topic and thread. I hope that it opens up more thinking on what can become very subjective viewpoints about what being a good mommy (or dad) is all about.

 

[pgp_protector]

How did the human race ever survive this long without parenting classes and government mandate test.

 

[Radrook]

Awwwww...i think i know where you're coming from, but there are soooo many, myself included (i was very naive), who might not have gotten a license to be a parent. There are so many variables to consider. For instance back in the earlier part of the 19th century, a mother might not be able to afford a crib or a cradle, and may have used a "drawer" for her newborn to sleep in, and bathed her newborn in a sink, and just "made do" with what little she had. In today's standards, she might be reported as an unfit mother, based on the "values" of this society, which, many times, have nothing to do with the well being of babies and/or children.

We could go on and on, but i hope you can sorta' see where i'm headed with this brother.

Good topic and thread. I hope that it opens up more thinking on what can become very subjective viewpoints about what being a good mommy (or dad) is all about.

Good parenting doesn't depend on being well-to-do or rich. It has to do with far more important things than merely the material things that we might be able to provide. A hug, a pat on the head, an approving look, and encouraging word, words of wisdom to guide the child, a show of empathy when the child is trouble, a demonstration of concern with his future well being, a trust in his ability to succeed. All these are priceless and they do not require material richness. A rich parent might actually be a terrible parent who is unfit to raise children. If a parent is rich and provides the child with material goods but always tells the child that he will fail in anything the child attempts to do, as my father always did with me-does the material goods he provides compensate?

Please note that persons who are in charge of sociological departments having to do with children's welfare are required to have an educational background which prevents them from making the decisions which you are claiming that they are making. Such policies are not approved by the agencies in charge of children's welfare. So your claims are starting to come across as rather weird.

 

[Radrook]

Awwwww...i think i know where you're coming from, but there are soooo many, myself included (i was very naive), who might not have gotten a license to be a parent. There are so many variables to consider. For instance back in the earlier part of the 19th century, a mother might not be able to afford a crib or a cradle, and may have used a "drawer" for her newborn to sleep in, and bathed her newborn in a sink, and just "made do" with what little she had. In today's standards, she might be reported as an unfit mother, based on the "values" of this society, which, many times, have nothing to do with the well being of babies and/or children.

We could go on and on, but i hope you can sorta' see where i'm headed with this brother.

Good topic and thread. I hope that it opens up more thinking on what can become very subjective viewpoints about what being a good mommy (or dad) is all about.

Good parenting doesn't depend on being well-to-do or rich. It has to do with far more important things than merely the material things that we might be able to provide. A hug, a pat on the head, an approving look, and encouraging word, words of wisdom to guide the child, a show of empathy when the child is trouble, a demonstration of concern with his future well being, a trust in his ability to succeed. All these are priceless and they do not require material richness. A rich parent might actually be a terrible parent who is unfit to raise children. If a parent is rich and provides the child with material goods but always tells the child that he will fail in anything the child attempts to do, as my father always did with me-does the material goods he provides compensate?

 

[brinny]

Good parenting doesn't depend on being well-to-do or rich. It has to do with far more important things than merely the material things that we might be able to provide. A hug, a pat on the head, an approving look, and encouraging word, words of wisdom to guide the child, a show of empathy when the child is trouble, a demonstration of concern with his future well being, a trust in his ability to succeed. All these are priceless and they do not require material richness. A rich parent might actually be a terrible parent who is unfit to raise children. If a parent is rich and provides the child with material goods but always tells the child that he will fail in anything the child attempts to do, as my father always did with me-does the material goods he provides compensate?

I wasn't attempting to make a point about material goods, etc.

Perhaps i wasn't clear.

 

[Radrook]

I wasn't attempting to make a point about material goods, etc.

Perhaps i wasn't clear.

What I'm trying to illustrate is that the criterion of rich is better than poor at all costs and therefor the rich gain custody and the poor lose, it which you claim is being followed by certain government agencies, cannot be the official criterion of such agencies. If indeed such is happening then it is a violation of the statutes of such agencies by unscrupulous individuals who are perhaps taking monetary bribes.

 

[Kersh]

Please explain how ruining innocent, helpless lives is our fundamental right.
My father had absolutely no right to threaten me with throwing me out into the NYC streets without any parental support at age three and a half if I did not IMMEDIATELY divest myself of the natural love I felt for the woman I had grown to view as my mother but who was actually my aunt to whom I had been entrusted at age one. Was that his fundamental liberty? Was it his fundamental liberty to never call me son, never pat me on the head, or give me a hug or tell me that at least he liked me during my whole childhood and adolescence as well? Or never as much as look at me when he came home from work? Were those his fundamental liberties?

Raising one's own children as one sees fit, within reasonable bounds, is a fundamental right. Like all liberties, it is a right that can be forfeited when it's abused. I'm sorry that your father, it seems, we'll exceeded those reasonable boundaries and abused his right to parent. That sounds awful. But, I have no reason to believe that a "parenting license" would have prevented that. OTOH, I have every reason to believe that a policy requiring a "parenting license" would inevitably interfere with thousands or millions of parents who are not abusive to their kids.

 

[Radrook]

Raising one's own children as one sees fit, within reasonable bounds, is a fundamental right. Like all liberties, it is a right that can be forfeited when it's abused. I'm sorry that your father, it seems, we'll exceeded those reasonable boundaries and abused his right to parent. That sounds awful. But, I have no reason to believe that a "parenting license" would have prevented that. OTOH, I have every reason to believe that a policy requiring a "parenting license" would inevitably interfere with thousands or millions of parents who are not abusive to their kids.

A parenting license would have represented that he had acquired the knowledge needed to parent properly. Had he been provided with such knowledge, then he would not have died at age 85 still vehemently insisting that he had done absolutely nothing wrong in reference to me, not only during my childhood but during my adulthood as well when his ignorance-based parenting policy continued viciously unabated. As to a license which represents knowledge of proper parenting drastically negatively interfering with proper parenting? That is a rather quaint concept which I am afraid is wayyy beyond my comprehension.