NationStates Jolt Archive

I would appreciate some input from those that have been around and submitted some of their own. This is based on a real occurrence so I am not taking credit for the headline. Thanks for your help!


Name
To Be Or Not To Be? Procreation Is The Question.

Description
Increasing reports of babies born to drug addicted parents in @@NAME@@ have alarmed family advocacy groups who want to force contraception or sterilization.

Validity
Any nation

Options
[option] "Children are being born testing positive for drugs," says angry health care worker, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "they don’t meet parental responsibilities and in sometimes five or six children are in foster care at the expense of @@NAME@@. These addicts should not be allowed to conceive any more children! More funds should be spent on Healthcare to allow contraception, sterilization or should they become pregnant… abortion. That is the answer!"
[effect] healthcare costs are on the rise
[stats] tax increases, healthcare increases, civil rights decreases

[option] "This is deeply troubling problem," says @RANDOMNAME@@, a Civil Liberties Lawyer. "but you cannot deny people the right to procreate. The government cannot order someone under a threat of jail not to have any more babies; it tramples on a fundamental right – the right to procreate. Social Welfare has long been neglected, people need to be educated and addicts need to be rehabilitated.”
[effect] the number crack babies born are on the rise
[stats] tax increases, social welfare increases, civil rights increases

[option] "The answer to this problem is obvious," says Catholic Archbishop @@RANDOMNAME@@ "the church opposes any form of contraception, sterilization or even abortion. The answer is God, more funding should be spent on Religion & Spirituality, bringing the stray sheep of @@NAME@@ back to the flock!”
[effect] the number of addicts having babies decreases
[stats] tax increases, religion and spirituality increases

Hail, Henrytopia. Another issue to check off my list, as you got to it first.

I would like to see the first option broken down, as in RL programs that pay addicted mothers to receive Depo-Provera shots in order to ensure they will not produce more crack-babies. I understand this is part of what you're proposing, but many people would stop short of government-funded abortions. (Not all, but some...)

In the second option, your Civil Rights lawyer says "the right to procreate" in two adjacent sentences. Just redundant.

In option three, when a Catholic refers to the Mother Church, it is Capitalized. Thirteen years of Catholic school will do that to you.

A style suggestion for option one:
"They don’t meet parental responsibilities and sometimes have five or six children in foster care at the expense of this @@TYPE@@."

(would return "at the expense of this Anarcho-Syndicalist Commune" for me)

Suggestion for effects:

Option 1 effect - social workers are issued tranquilizer-gun style rifles for administering contraceptive shots to drug-addicted mothers at long range

You know, something a little off-the-wall and unexpected.

There is an issue that you can chose to have people take tests to meet the parenting standard. I think chosing that option would invaldiate people for this issue.

Upon reading the issue itself I think some work is needed.

In the second option I don't think civil rights should increase, becasue we are assuming that people already have the right to have babies freely in this country, so no new rights are being granted here.

In the third option, I wonder what your precedent is for a 'return to God' limiting the number of crack babies. A return to God usually simply means abortions aren't performed and the number of crack babies would go up dramatically as a result.

See my post in the other thread for why you shouldn't say 'This @@TYPE@@.' rather say 'Our @@TYPE@@'

I think a fourth option should be added. Something along the lines of...

"This is natural selection at work. The weak will die off leaving only the strong to survive. Why should we interfere? Let's cut off all welfare and force people to fend for themselves."

Stats - something like Social Welfare funding drops to almost zero, public apathy increases dramatically, cynicism increases dramatically
Effects - Victims of child abuse are seen as weak genetic material that would have died sooner or later anyways."

I didn't polish it or anything since it's your issue and I would let you chose the words if you want to ad such an option. But issues with only three options sort of leave an unstatisfied feeling with me. I would encourage you to think of more ways of looking at this, either expand to look at the big picture, or get more specific with the options.

There is an issue that you can chose to have people take tests to meet the parenting standard. I think chosing that option would invaldiate people for this issue.

That issue is more geared towards a planned parenting by individuals that want to have children. In this case, it was more of a drug addict who habitually had sex for money to buy drugs, unplanned pregnancies ensued etc etc. This is loosely interpreted from an article on CNN last week if my memory serves me correctly.

Thank you both for taking the time to read the issue and comment on it. It allows me to get a different spin on what I have written and rationalizes some things for me I have overlooked. I have made some changes according to both suggestions and will post the new draft soon.


In the third option, I wonder what your precedent is for a 'return to God' limiting the number of crack babies. A return to God usually simply means abortions aren't performed and the number of crack babies would go up dramatically as a result.
Return to God is more of a.. "Hey, I have found XYZ religion.. I have all I need in the Church and God." There would be an increase in spirituality, decreasing the use of drugs and the unplanned parenthood would decrease as well. Ideally of course. :) For that matter the occurrence of STDS may be lower as well but that is all speculation. Very good point though. Its just hard to clarify with such little room to write I guess.


I didn't polish it or anything since it's your issue and I would let you chose the words if you want to ad such an option. But issues with only three options sort of leave an unstatisfied feeling with me. I would encourage you to think of more ways of looking at this, either expand to look at the big picture, or get more specific with the options.

I was debating the fourth option but they are so uncommon I did not know how well it would be received?

Thanks again for all your help. I will throw V2 on here soon.