Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Definitely some tough questions...
Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:35am

IMO there are a lot of subjective standards that COULD be badly applied. But I think that there ARE some objective standards that possibly SHOULD be applied.

I'll touch on a few of our comments and then end with a question that has been asked a couple of times, but I would REALLY like to see answered.

IMO while there are a range of ways to raise a child, at least understanding the LAW should be mandatory. Whether or not a parent feels that physical discipline is warranted or not, they should be able to at least understand the LEGAL difference between discipline and abuse. Where do we draw the line? At the law.

I would certainly say that such a system/agency would be subject to an appeals process, probably first an administrative one, and if not then certainly the civil court system would be available to seek remedy.

IMO the penalties for any couple who violates the law would be no different then than the penalties for any couple who violates the law today. It's just that if the couple has signed a licensing agreement, then there is no misunderstanding as to what the law requires or prohibits.

I would say that resources ABSOLUTELY should play a role in licensing. Why would society license someone to care for a child that they cannot afford to care for? We don't place children for adoption with parents who cannot afford the child. We don't place foster kids into homes that cannot afford to feed and care for them. What makes biological parents different?

As to physical health. Yes, we do apply those standards to prospective adoptive parents as well. If you and your spouse are unable to handle the physical demands of raising a child, we, as a society, will generally not allow you to adopt a child. What makes biological parents different?

And to close, as you probably have already figured out my final question? What makes biological parents different from adoptive parents?

  • No thank youEnnui, Thu Oct 26 4:04pm
    I understand what you are saying but this has the danger of entering the realm of social engineering. Who would be trustworthy enough to be the licensing agency? Surely NOT the government! Who gets... more
    • Definitely some tough questions... — Sprout, Fri Oct 27 5:35am
      • Sorry about the slow responseEnnui, Sat Oct 28 8:40am
        I have house guests this weekend and planned activities with them. This may not be the best time to respond to you, as I am essentially posting and running, but I don't want to be rude and ignore... more
        • when we, as a society, have already decided that we are going to PAY the costs of bad decisions, I am willing to acknowledge that authority comes with that responsibility. IMO if you can be held 100% ... more
          • In our society, for some strange reason,Ennui, Mon Oct 30 8:42am
            responsibility of the individual's decision and subsequent actions has been shifted to a plethora of what I consider to be 'acceptable' excuses. There is always someone, something, or some... more
            • ooopsEnnui, Mon Oct 30 8:48am
              it is my personal belief that it is the limited individual who can not love and care for a child that is not biologically born to them with the same depth than a child that is. ..... that should have ... more
        • typoEnnui, Sat Oct 28 8:42am
          or that they are have no intention of behaving in a responsible manner That should have been 'irresponsible'.
Click here to receive daily updates

Religion and Ethics BBS