Should parenting require a license or parenting courses?

[Cutiepie]

Seeing as my best friend just got preggers with her BF of a year, I would absolutely recommend a course for them, as I would for all couples expecting that are un-married or newly-weds. I would probably still recommend it for couples who have been married for years, because even they have no idea what to expect with a newborn.

[christarp]

You can't regulate something completely natural. Nobody needs to drive a car, nobody needs to drink alcohol, people need to have sex, we wouldn't be here without it.

[Tricksterjim]

They make you take classes to be a foster parent. My parents who raised 5 kids, all of whom ended up going to college and graduating, signed up to be foster parents after we all were gone.

The class was led by a 22 year old social science major. They had to sit and watch a 30 year old movie about how to care for a child. The the 22 year old quizzed them on how to act in situations. They had to take 30 HOURS of that BS listening to a kid tell them how to be parents, when he had no clue himself.

The people this would help are the same people who would not go to the classes. Waste of time and tax payer money.

[Grizzly Willy]

I have no clue why a "license" would be needed, parenting responsibly is boiled down to the following easy steps;

- Don't give them crap to eat
- Homeschool.

Really, thats all you need.

While I think our public education system here in the U.S. is abysmal, I'm not sure if bad parents would be better off teaching their children themselves.

[Seezer]

http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ire-a-license/

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...icensed-parent

As the title says, should parenting require a license or parenting courses?

1. Parenting is one of the most important roles a human being can fill in their lives. A parent's behavior has a direct impact on not only a child's immediate physical and psychological well being, but also that child's ability to one day become a healthy, functioning adult member of society.

2. Bad parenting is very expensive to taxpayers. Neglected and abused children often end up as wards of the court, costing taxpayers millions of dollars each year due to the state being responsible for providing food and shelter for children who end up in the system. Children who develop psychological disorders become less productive members of society as adults as well--abused children are less likely to continue on to college and graduate school, make less income, and are less productive at work in comparison to their peers. The fiscal cost of lost productivity from American workers due to depression and depressive-related disorders alone is estimated to be in excess of $31 billion per year.

3. Bad parenting is arguably more dangerous than drinking, flying a plane or driving a car, yet all three have an age requirement and 2 out of 3 require licensure. Why not parenting?

4. Regulation of who can or cannot parent would potentially be extremely difficult to do and can be very expensive, and may be seen by some as invading upon our basic human rights.

Sure. As long as we can kill the "The right to bear arms is a god given right. 2 amendment!" argument. Can't have people against gun laws, but okay with something like this.

[prwraith]

Have your reproductive organs surgically / medically shut off at birth w/ a reversable procedure.

When you decide you want to have a kid, if you can stand in a room of people your age without setting off the douchebag or deadbeat flags you can have your sperm and eggs back

[Celista]

Have your reproductive organs surgically / medically shut off at birth w/ a reversable procedure.

When you decide you want to have a kid, if you can stand in a room of people your age without setting off the douchebag or deadbeat flags you can have your sperm and eggs back

But then we'd have a whole generation of hipsters who'd be sterile for life....

just teasing (sortof).

[Jeleh]

If people are actually concerned about such matters a place to start is the educational system. Schools can teach kids more than Maths, English and Science. You can't police who has the right to be a parent or not, it's too difficult and a basic human right.

[prwraith]

But then we'd have a whole generation of hipsters who'd be sterile for life....

just teasing (sortof).

Idk I think there's a generation of them we could do without reproducing

[dantian]

No.

Just no. It's a stupid fucking idea.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

I just have to say, the 81 people that said yes makes me sad. This another freedom that would be losing. Really I cannot comprehend WHY this was needed. This just sounds like something someone would say because they are tired of *idiots* roaming the world. THAT WILL ALWAYS happen no matter what the government or society does.

We shouldn't be trying to control that. We should accept it happens and try to change and prevent such things.

[Dragonix80]

You know what I just realized? In the old days, high school used to have home ed. classes. Now, that's one way to improve the real life education! Unfortunately, too many cool classes are cancelled due to "budget." We could use more of real life experience classes like that. Marriage classes, for example, then many people would really more knowledge and prepare to expect the unexpected. I missed the old wood/metal shop classes.

[poser765]

You know what I just realized? In the old days, high school used to have home ed. classes. Now, that's one way to improve the real life education! Unfortunately, too many cool classes are cancelled due to "budget." We could use more of real life experience classes like that. Marriage classes, for example, then many people would really more knowledge and prepare to expect the unexpected. I missed the old wood/metal shop classes.

Many MANY schools still have a domestic science class or classes. The problem with a mariage class that what's a good marriage is very subjective. Who's idea of marriage are you going to teach?

[Dragonix80]

Many MANY schools still have a domestic science class or classes. The problem with a mariage class that what's a good marriage is very subjective. Who's idea of marriage are you going to teach?

It's just an example of a real life situation that could have come in handy if kids knew what they were expecting. Just because you probably won't get marry doesn't mean you shouldn't take the class. Everyone isn't going to use every subject they learned in school in real life world but they do come in handy when you end up facing certain situation. For example, I love algebra but I rarely use it in real life world. Does that mean it's useless and a waste of my time? No. It still may play a vital part for me in the near future.

I've already posted my opinion in the earlier pages that I don't agree the idea of requiring a license in order to become parents. I'm just saying that courses in high school, such as home ed would have played a lot of vital role for students. If your school still have classes like those then you're in luck. I've found out my old high school have closed down many of vital real life experience classes due to "budget," (such as cutting fund to art and gym class. Closed down wood, metal, drafting, home ed, etc...) They opted to have math, science, history, and english classes more "important" than other real life classes. In other words, they see textbook > hand on experience classes. People learn more faster if it's hand on experiences than through textbooks.

[prwraith]

If you can find a way to educate parents and have some sort of competency exam. I'd be all for it. I see far to many people who shouldn't be allowed to reproduce. And yet they do anyway.

[Spoiler]

Choosing to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem is self righteous? Now that's a new one. You can think whatever you want about their parents but those kids have just as much value as whatever pops out of your wife/girlfriend except they are already here. Besides, why can't you do both? Why not have biological children AND adopt? There's a clear need for adoption (Russia alone has 700,000 orphans), so why couldn't you save one spot on your roster and give a family to someone who will otherwise grow up alone?

Looking down on people who choose to have their own children when they should be adopting is self-righteous. That's your position right? Or maybe you have changed your position, because now your advocating parents being just a little bit selfish and having a few of their own kids while also adopting.

It's not senseless, it's the truth. The mentality is I want a son. I want a daughter. You're creating things out of thin air to add value to your own life. It's very much like playing god. And for your final thought..fortunate for you maybe.

This statement illustrates such an utter incompetence on this subject its unbelievable. Having children is one of the most unselfish acts one can do. You give up your time, money, sleep, etc, all for someone else. Having a son may add value to my life, but it adds value through the incredible sacrifice that is required to raise them to be an upstanding person. Adopting children is also very unselfish, and as I stated earlier, I have great respect for people who decide to adopt.

Where the hell is this coming from? It's sad when you look at taking a desperate human child into your home as punishment.

You're advocating "good parents" forgo having kids of their own to adopt someone else's children. The punishment is not in asking people to care for a "desperate human child," but in saying they should not have kids of their own. As you said earlier, "I'd like people to stop pumping out babies while we still have world-wide orphan problems." You're more than welcome to adopt children, but to tell other people to do it is unreasonable, especially if one understands the time and energy that is spent raising children.

[Letmesleep]

Looking down on people who choose to have their own children when they should be adopting is self-righteous. That's your position right? Or maybe you have changed your position, because now your advocating parents being just a little bit selfish and having a few of their own kids while also adopting.

My position is and has always been that I believe adoption is a moral obligation and a real problem that needs to be addressed. That doesn't mean that you can't have biological children, but I think everyone should help pick up the slack of a very broken world. One of my best friends' parents had 4 biological and adopted 3 from Rwanda. I respect them greatly.

This statement illustrates such an utter incompetence on this subject its unbelievable. Having children is one of the most unselfish acts one can do. You give up your time, money, sleep, etc, all for someone else. Having a son may add value to my life, but it adds value through the incredible sacrifice that is required to raise them to be an upstanding person. Adopting children is also very unselfish, and as I stated earlier, I have great respect for people who decide to adopt.

You can toss around insults all you like, but it doesn't stop it from being true. Raising a child does take sacrifice but in the end it's still creating life for your own satisfaction. If you weren't going to get anything out of it you wouldn't do it. That's how most relationships work, but the difference is you're bringing new life into the world which doesn't have any say in the matter. You hope it'll be happy, but what if it's not?

There's no doubt a lifetime of suffering has led me to want to make others aware of the darker side of life, but most people just pretend that when they have a baby it's going to be all sunshine and rainbows. Many people have kids when they aren't ready for them, or they pass down screwy biochemistry that makes the child suffer to the day they die. I don't personally believe it's yours or anyone else's right to procreate no matter what. There are some people that simply shouldn't procreate because of the disadvantages certain parents may pass down. Am I going to stop others? Am I going to advocate for laws trying to stop them? No, of course not, but I'm going to advocate for adoption instead. There are children already here that need families and I think it's selfish to ignore them.

In any case the sacrifice of raising a child is the same no matter where you get it from. I'd argue adopting is an even greater sacrifice, but the amount of sacrifice to raise a child wasn't a point I was ever debating.

You're advocating "good parents" forgo having kids of their own to adopt someone else's children. The punishment is not in asking people to care for a "desperate human child," but in saying they should not have kids of their own. As you said earlier, "I'd like people to stop pumping out babies while we still have world-wide orphan problems." You're more than welcome to adopt children, but to tell other people to do it is unreasonable, especially if one understands the time and energy that is spent raising children.

Being a "good parent" has nothing to do with how you came upon your children. You can have biological children and still be an awful parent and you can also adopt while still being awful. I never suggested otherwise. I think it's perfectly fine to both adopt and have biological. I simply think people need to slow down and realize that outside of their bubble people are suffering. The time and energy spent raising a child is totally irrelevant to this conversation. I never suggested it didn't take time and energy. It's not unreasonable to advocate for adoption at all.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

No, but I think that they should have a class in school related to parenting and other social things. Would be great if more people learned how to deal with others in a more intelligent way.

[obdigore]

No, but I think that they should have a class in school related to parenting and other social things. Would be great if more people learned how to deal with others in a more intelligent way.

^ Implying the people who pay attention in high school are the same as those who end up hating their lives and everyone around them...

I'm not sure I agree with that Implication. People who peaked in high school are the same ones who didn't pay attention and who end up being angry about their lives and take it out on everyone around them at a later date, in my experience.

[vindicatorx]

My position is and has always been that I believe adoption is a moral obligation and a real problem that needs to be addressed. That doesn't mean that you can't have biological children, but I think everyone should help pick up the slack of a very broken world. One of my best friends' parents had 4 biological and adopted 3 from Rwanda.

You can think this all you want, and it's great you do. I however do not agree with this. People should take responsibility for themselves and whatever kids they have unless the parents died, they should be raising their kids, if they are unable to raise those kids they shouldn't have had them in the first place. I didn't get to enjoy the act that caused the effect ergo I should not have to pay for it. I do not owe you or your offspring anything and I'm sorry but people should not be entitled to having shit handed out to them because they are not doing what it takes to earn the shit on their own.