Why isn't giving birth more heavily regulated?

[Wilfire]

https://www.childtrends.org/indicato...en-in-poverty/
http://www.aaets.org/article230.htm

22% of children are born into poverty. That's pretty high and those parents obviously can't ensure a standard of living worthy of human dignity for those kids. Moreover they're more likely to become a drag on society just like their deadbeat parents. Now before people get triggered and start talking about their wonderful friends that come from drug addict families, remember that exceptions just prove the rule.

It's pretty obvious that middle class families are way better for children than poverty-stricken families. Even the UN has a set of rights and freedoms that children must have (and those deadbeat families obviously aren't ensuring them). So why isn't procreation regulated by the government? Say a minimum set of standards that people must pass before procreating (e.g. a special course designed to teach them how to be a good parent, how to feed their children properly, how to educate them, how to develop their hobbies. Both parents being steadily employed and having good incomes is also a must).

Everyone talks about how terrible it is when children are born to 16 year old girls, single parents, drug addicts and criminals but no one does anything about it. "But Wilfire, it's her body and her choice, the government can't force women to abort if they don't have a certificate!". Right and wrong, it's her right but remember, rights come with obligations. Even the UN says that rights and freedoms may be limited by law to prevent people from abusing said rights to harm other people. Forcing kids to live in poverty is a pretty grievous violation of human rights. Obviously dragging people kicking and screaming into Planned Parenthood will cause outrage so there's no need to do that. If someone decides that they're above the law and give birth to children without having previously obtained a certificate, teach them a lesson. Put those kids up for adoption and slap the deadbeat parents with a lengthy jail sentence.

Making kids suffer because their parents are selfish is plain wrong.

[Endus]

Standing up for the rights of children while directly and explicitly attacking the rights of adults really isn't the winning argument you think it is.

Rather than complaining that people are having kids, maybe ensure that society provides sufficient support for its working class and poor so that those children don't suffer?

[Deleted]

You're right, moving back to middle-class societies would be a lot better for us.

[Medusa Cascade]

Make abortion cheaper.
Not serious

[nycnyc88]

Why do you people always want to regulate everything? Who is going to pay for it? The taxpayer is already broke paying for it all.
As someone once said every single government regulation ever invented was to limit competition through legal channels (ie special favors).
Oh and yes - "we do it for your safety and for your children". That one never fails for people to give up their individual freedoms.

[Brubear]

https://www.childtrends.org/indicato...en-in-poverty/
http://www.aaets.org/article230.htm

22% of children are born into poverty. That's pretty high and those parents obviously can't ensure a standard of living worthy of human dignity for those kids. Moreover they're more likely to become a drag on society just like their deadbeat parents. Now before people get triggered and start talking about their wonderful friends that come from drug addict families, remember that exceptions just prove the rule.

It's pretty obvious that middle class families are way better for children than poverty-stricken families. Even the UN has a set of rights and freedoms that children must have (and those deadbeat families obviously aren't ensuring them). So why isn't procreation regulated by the government? Say a minimum set of standards that people must pass before procreating (e.g. a special course designed to teach them how to be a good parent, how to feed their children properly, how to educate them, how to develop their hobbies. Both parents being steadily employed and having good incomes is also a must).

Everyone talks about how terrible it is when children are born to 16 year old girls, single parents, drug addicts and criminals but no one does anything about it. "But Wilfire, it's her body and her choice, the government can't force women to abort if they don't have a certificate!". Right and wrong, it's her right but remember, rights come with obligations. Even the UN says that rights and freedoms may be limited by law to prevent people from abusing said rights to harm other people. Forcing kids to live in poverty is a pretty grievous violation of human rights. Obviously dragging people kicking and screaming into Planned Parenthood will cause outrage so there's no need to do that. If someone decides that they're above the law and give birth to children without having previously obtained a certificate, teach them a lesson. Put those kids up for adoption and slap the deadbeat parents with a lengthy jail sentence.

Making kids suffer because their parents are selfish is plain wrong.

Simple.

Eugenics.

Once you get into regulating who can and can't give birth (you can only have kids if you make $X a year, you can only have kids if you are married, you can only have a kid if you've never worked Y jobs, you can only have a kid if you aren't a carry of Z gene), you're pretty much in the area of eugenics, which isn't a good thing, unless you just do what China did and make it a blanket rule for everyone (You can only have 1/2 kids), which wouldn't fix the problem.

[ONCHEhap]

Breeding should be heavily regulated,at least 60% of people with children I meet shouldn't be allowed to reproduce and made sterile,having that many unfit children is slowing our progress as a species

This may seem harsh,but Mankind won't go much further without culling the stupid and the people who refuse progress

Eugenics is the next step for our evolution,and the only people rejecting it are those who would be its victims

[Release]

Why do you people always want to regulate everything? Who is going to pay for it? The taxpayer is already broke paying for it all.
As someone once said every single government regulation ever invented was to limit competition through legal channels (ie special favors).
Oh and yes - "we do it for your safety and for your children". That one never fails for people to give up their individual freedoms.

I'm pretty sure environmental regulation was created because companies as a general rule don't give a damn about the environment where profit is concerned so unless we put regulations on them the situation would be worse than it is currently. I really don't see how that is limiting competition through legal channels but I acknowledge that exists also.

[tehealadin]

Rather than complaining that people are having kids, maybe ensure that society provides sufficient support for its working class and poor so that those children don't suffer?

Whilst I agree that society has an obligation to remove barriers to a child's progress, it is also true that not all kids born into a bad situation, are there because the parents had bad luck/things outside of the parents control. Some simply made really bad life choices. Some people are scum, and no one is going to "help" them not to be.

Though I fail to see how this could be regulated in an effective way. By all means encourage people to be responsible, I think this is important, but other than that, the idea of certificates and jail doesn't seem like it would be an effective solution, and it stinks of being a slippery slope.

[PLS]

I think the argument of my right to life will outweigh someones "right" to have children very soon. Accidents happen, but it is plain and simple completely irresponsible, to have children when you can't support them. We shouldn't all suffer, by paying for all the social services subsidized day care etc. because you couldn't do simple math and realize you couldn't afford it. And don't even try and say "so rich people get children and we don't?" the wealthier aka. better educated (this is a proven correlation) are already have substantially fewer children. I'm a "left" wing supporter btw and actively participate in community improvement projects. But time to wake up and smarten up...

[Swalload]

Both parents being steadily employed and having good incomes is also a must

In what world do you even live? lol
I'm sure your standard of "good income" is fucking ridiculous as well.

[durenas]

Because to the vast majority of devout Christians, interfering with the natural procreation process is taboo. Contraception and abortion are a thing in direct defiance of the Church, and in western countries, there is no political will to force people to be responsible.

[Total Crica]

Why isn't giving birth more heavily regulated?

Because there are not enough police signing up to prevent sex from occurring, I suppose.

[Nihilist74]

I agree with you. Everyone should have their tubes sniped as soon as they hit puberty. Later on if they can prove they are good parents, they can have their tubes reconnected. I say that when you have a child, you are not just affecting you but the whole world. It is a drain on the worlds resources and i want all those resources for myself. Not for some bratty kid! I am also tire of paying higher taxes than people who have children!
When you have a child, you are yanking that child out of a peaceful non-existence into the suffering and struggle of this world.

- - - Updated - - -

Because to the vast majority of devout Christians, interfering with the natural procreation process is taboo. Contraception and abortion are a thing in direct defiance of the Church, and in western countries, there is no political will to force people to be responsible.

Also Muslims.

[cubby]

Standing up for the rights of children while directly and explicitly attacking the rights of adults really isn't the winning argument you think it is.

Rather than complaining that people are having kids, maybe ensure that society provides sufficient support for its working class and poor so that those children don't suffer?

Agreed. People will always have kids. Providing the support for those parents with kids is the key to making the children have happier lives.

[smiteme12]

Fix everyone at birth so they are unable to have children until they pass a free exam to determine their ability to raise a kid. Once it is determined the kid will have a reasonably good life unfix the people allow them to have one kid fix them again/repeat. >

[Celista]

It's a fairly recent (last half-century) phenomenon that cost of living is so high that you could not support a family with a single breadwinner+ high school diploma. Also socioeconomic status is not static.

Also in the US you'll simply never see people being OK with government regulating births.

[Deleted]

What's next? Eugenics? Aborting every fetus with diseases and disorders? Sounds like some real spooky nazi shit right there. Wouldn't surprise me these days since America voted Trump into the office... Nazis need a reminder that they are not welcome anywhere.

[Total Crica]

What's next? Eugenics? Aborting every fetus with diseases and disorders?

Rich people already do this, if you believe the internet.

[Deleted]

I read once that poor people get a lot of kids because they experience it as the only way to get a feeling of happiness from life, being aware that they wil have little to no chance to get anything else from life.

If they would just have one I don't think the problem(s) would be so bad, but they never seem to stop at one and prefer to have more children that people with higher incomes.