NationStates Jolt Archive


Children & The state

Montacanos
22-07-2006, 23:29
Children & The State.

I started off with a long ideological rant, but instead I worked it down to this. Which of the above options (You can vote for more than one) Should the state have higher control or right of than the parents. For your convenience I explain some of the debates around the arguments and threads that have dealt with them below

Education
Home Schooling (Should it be legal)
Vouchers (whether or not implemented)
Nutrition (Whether the school should be responsible)

Health
Home Remedies (See Thread: The right to be wrong)
National Healthcare (largest beneficiaries?)
Religious withholding (Amish, et all.)

Lifestyle
Public funding of entertainment
Discipline (See Thread: To spank or...)
Public Childcare
Montacanos
22-07-2006, 23:40
*Any other issues deemed important to the subject at hand will be added.
Eutrusca
22-07-2006, 23:53
I favor the least interference of the state in private and family affairs as possible, consonant with the safety and general welfare of the child. Abuse should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as should neglect, but other than that the state should stay the hell out.
Posi
23-07-2006, 00:04
The only two that I think the State should have more control of is the School Nutrition and the Home Remedies one.

Reasonings:
At least in Canada, the State is considered a legal gardian of the child from the time the child leaves home (or the car if their parent drives them) until they get home (or picked up by parents). If you were home all day you would not allow your child to have a bag of chips and a pop for lunch, so why should it be the norm at school. Also, the better diet could help the child focus in school, somehow causing better grades.

If Home Remedies worked at all, why don't any non-TV doctors prescribe them? Though, I live in a country with national healthcare, so the issue is much simpler. If the patient refuses due to religious beliefs, they should try to find a alternate medical treatment.
Unlucky_and_unbiddable
23-07-2006, 00:13
Education.
Andaluciae
23-07-2006, 00:20
Only education, and only K-12.
Quaon
23-07-2006, 00:24
Children & The State.

I started off with a long ideological rant, but instead I worked it down to this. Which of the above options (You can vote for more than one) Should the state have higher control or right of than the parents. For your convenience I explain some of the debates around the arguments and threads that have dealt with them below

Education
Home Schooling (Should it be legal)
Vouchers (whether or not implemented)
Nutrition (Whether the school should be responsible)

Health
Home Remedies (See Thread: The right to be wrong)
National Healthcare (largest beneficiaries?)
Religious withholding (Amish, et all.)

Lifestyle
Public funding of entertainment
Discipline (See Thread: To spank or...)
Public Childcare
Health. Parents shouldn't be able to withhold medical care from them because of religion.
Unlucky_and_unbiddable
23-07-2006, 00:27
Health. Parents shouldn't be able to withhold medical care from them because of religion.

I agree if the child wants treatment the shouldn't be able to stop it but, if it doesn't want treatment (and is old enough) that should be keept between the parents and the child.
Smunkeeville
23-07-2006, 00:52
I favor the least interference of the state in private and family affairs as possible, consonant with the safety and general welfare of the child. Abuse should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as should neglect, but other than that the state should stay the hell out.
I agree, and would like to add that any laws about neglect and abuse should be clearly defined and evenly upheld.
Posi
23-07-2006, 00:53
I agree, and would like to add that any laws about neglect and abuse should be clearly defined and evenly upheld.
:eek: No way!
Smunkeeville
23-07-2006, 00:56
:eek: No way!
what?
Posi
23-07-2006, 00:56
what?
You taking the small govt view on this issue.
Smunkeeville
23-07-2006, 00:57
You taking the small govt view on this issue.
that's shocking?

I am all about small government, I thought that was well known.
Posi
23-07-2006, 01:01
that's shocking?

I am all about small government, I thought that was well known.
It is well known. I was just being a tit.

Also, I thought you were all about raising college-smart four-year-olds?
Posi
23-07-2006, 01:01
Why haven't I ruined this multiple choice poll yet?
Smunkeeville
23-07-2006, 01:09
It is well known. I was just being a tit.
oh, I was confused....LOL, I need a nap

Also, I thought you were all about raising college-smart four-year-olds?
achieved through homeschooling!
Posi
23-07-2006, 01:14
oh, I was confused....LOL, I need a nap
As do I, but it is much too hot.

Achieved through homeschooling!
Well, as your sig explains, you know everything. Sounds like good teacher material to me.
Tech-gnosis
23-07-2006, 01:14
I favor the least interference of the state in private and family affairs as possible, consonant with the safety and general welfare of the child. Abuse should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as should neglect, but other than that the state should stay the hell out.

Eut I think most people here would agree with you, but since whats constitutes safety, general welfare, abuse, and neglect. I know its rather easy for the most part to explain what is what, but not always. Some people would see spanking as abusive behavior. Most don't. Are mandatory vaccinations good for children or state interference in parental choices?
Scotmerica
23-07-2006, 05:53
I agree if the child wants treatment the shouldn't be able to stop it but, if it doesn't want treatment (and is old enough) that should be keept between the parents and the child.



I completely agree here in the US I was watching CNN and the govt was actually trying to take away this kid who was 16 that had cancer from his parents and force chemo therapy on him and HE tried chemo therapy and it was hurting him and not helping him and he tried some other kind of treatment and it was working and his parents allowed it and he wanted it and the govt is trying to say that the parents were negelecting him. For people that dont live in the US the country is more screwed up than you think the govt has turned into a joke and the politicians use it as there personal playground to get laws that they want passed. And if anyone has heard of this case can you please tell if the child was taken away or his parents got to keep him



Here is the full story of how bad the Govt is getting
http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/07/21/sick.teen.ap/index.html
Anti-Social Darwinism
23-07-2006, 06:33
I favor the least interference of the state in private and family affairs as possible, consonant with the safety and general welfare of the child. Abuse should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as should neglect, but other than that the state should stay the hell out.

You have it right. Abuse and neglect aside, the government needs to stay out of our lives.

Those who denounce parental "indoctrination" of their children, should be doubly wary of governmental "indoctrination" and interference.
Tech-gnosis
23-07-2006, 08:33
You have it right. Abuse and neglect aside, the government needs to stay out of our lives.

You need to define abuse and neglect. If a parent doesn't vaccinate their child against various diseases is that neglect? If a couple chooses prayer instead of medecine to some deadly disease that is easily treated is that neglect? Is a spanking physical abuse? At what age should minors have the ability to consent to medical procedures?
Tech-gnosis
23-07-2006, 22:19
Bump
DesignatedMarksman
23-07-2006, 22:32
oh, I was confused....LOL, I need a nap


achieved through homeschooling!

Hehe, Smunkee, I was homeschooled through 5th grade and now I'm a college senior.

Rock on!