# The Ethics of States Raising Kids **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 4, 2000, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686 "2000-03-04T20:26:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/21 "2000-03-08T19:31:00Z")
> [@](#): > > What the government should force her to do is pay for someone who is a responsible citizen to raise it. It should throw her into prison and force her to work to pay for her room and board and for the baby’s support. I agree with you that if a mother doesn’t want a baby she shouldn’t be forced to raise it. I disagree about the prison part. What if the mother was raped or a victim of incest? What if the mother used a form of birth control that she thought was reliable and turned out to be defective? Also I don’t see how someone doing forced labour could earn enough to pay for a child’s upbringing. If the child needs special medical care that the mother can’t pay for, what happens then? What if the mother dies? Who pays for the child then? That’s when government needs to step in, to ensure that the baby has someone to raise it. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/22 "2000-03-08T19:39:00Z")
Good Lord. > [@](#): > > I am honestly shocked by some of the things you just posted. The only time a baby is a lost cause is if it’s already dead or irreparably ill/injured. To say anything else shows a callous disregard for human life that is directly in conflict with your stated values as a Christian. Callous disregard? You don’t think the animal that discarded the baby showed callous disregard? She _made_ the baby a lost cause, ruining its precious life, **depriving** it of what it deserves most — loving parents. > [@](#): > > I wonder how much you know of the cases and circumstances that would lead a woman to abandon her infant. Of all the news articles and analyses I’ve read, the vast majority of the cases involved women (or, in most cases, girls) pushed by emotional trauma or stress into lines of thinking that are considered irrational. Very, very few of them had any sort of malicious intent. Who **gives** a rat’s ass about the mother’s problems! If she had behaved responsibly, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. You know, **the baby** has a problem now. > [@](#): > > I really am surprised by the vehemency you show, Lib. I don’t see any arguments adhering to Libertarian ethics. It is the libertarian ethic of noncoercion. The child cannot give meaningful consent. It had no choice. It is the **only** victim here. The mother is not a victim if she abandons her child. She is a criminal. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/23 "2000-03-08T19:45:00Z")
> [@](#): > > What if the mother was raped or a victim of incest? Didn’t I say “unless she was raped”? Then her rapist is a criminal, and ought to be forced to care for the child. > [@](#): > > What if the mother used a form of birth control that she thought was reliable and turned out to be defective? Tough titty. Unless the manufacturer misrepresented it as 100% effective, she took a risk. > [@](#): > > Also I don’t see how someone doing forced labour could earn enough to pay for a child’s upbringing. She should pay what she can even if it means she has nothing left for herself. **Nothing matters but the child.** **If the child needs special medical care that the mother can’t pay for, what happens then?** Exactly my point! Did she consider _any_ of this when she was screwing? **What if the mother dies?** Well, that is hardly her fault. But it is certainly something to consider when deliberating whether to have a child. Make provisions for it in case disaster befalls you. And if you cannot care for a child, then don’t have one. > [@](#): > > That’s when government needs to step in, to ensure that the baby has someone to raise it. Well, that’s what I said. ---
**Author:** ![gEEk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ed8c4c/32.png) [@gEEk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gEEk)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/24 "2000-03-08T20:18:00Z")
Lib is completely correct here. The responsibility for raising a child lies with those who concieved it. If they fail to live up to that responsibility, then society can and must impose sanctions. If society chooses to take the child from the parent(s) then it seems resonable to try and recoup the costs from them. I find it disappointing that so many people are willing to absolve the parents of any responsibility. If they were using birth control and it failed, then “tough titty” to quote Lib. They should have known the risks and should live with the consequences. A child is not a “mistake” to be returned like some unwanted Christmas gift. It is a helpless human being and to abandon it is a heinous act that must be punished. gEEk ---
**Author:** ![Felice](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e4f/32.png) [@Felice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Felice)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/25 "2000-03-08T20:30:00Z")
Um… Can I inquire what happens to the FATHER of these kids? I mean, he made a decision too, didn’t he? Is he not EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE? Why are we blaming exclusively the mother? Let’s throw the fathers in jail too, make them work and pay for the children they produce. I am detecting a distinctly sexist slant to this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/26 "2000-03-08T20:52:00Z")
**Felice** You are absolutely right. It is a grave omission. Thank you for correcting it. ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/27 "2000-03-08T21:09:00Z")
From **Libertarian** : > [@](#): > > {What the government} should do is throw her into prison and force her to work to pay for her room and board and for the baby’s support. Faced with prison, I’m sure some of these young mothers would have an abortion instead. Even if she’s in her eighth month. (Mind you, I see nothing wrong with abortion as long as it’s done early in the pregnancy. I have yet to make up my mind how late is too late.) What’s your opinion on abortion? * * * When all else fails, ask Cecil. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/28 "2000-03-08T23:32:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by Felice: > \*\*I am detecting a distinctly sexist slant to this thread. > \*\* You are right, **Felice**. Fathers should be held equally responsible for the children they help create _in all cases_. Of course, it’s a lot easier to hold the mother responsible, as she’s the one carrying the kid around for 9 months, and the father could well be 9 months gone. So hypothetically, the State holds both parents responsible, and if the father isn’t around the mother needs to put the finger on him and make sure the State knows to hold him responsible as well. -andros- ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2000, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/29 "2000-03-08T23:37:00Z")
> [@](#): > > What’s your opinion on abortion? I don’t hold one as a general ethical principle. Edlyn and I are against it for ourselves, but science has not yet determined whether a human being begins at conception, and so we cannot in good conscience force our own value judgements on others. That said, I **do** oppose, on principle, forcing anyone to pay for someone else’s abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/30 "2000-03-09T01:11:00Z")
Libertarian, I emphasize with your desire to make people more responsible, but I still see in your judgmental attitude the consequence that the child will suffer from the fault of the parents. > [@](#): > > Q:If the child needs special medical care that the mother can’t pay for, what happens then? > Libertarian’s A:Exactly my point! Did she consider any of this when she was screwing? > > Q:What if the mother dies? > Libertarian’s A:Well, that is hardly her fault. But it is certainly something to consider when deliberating whether to have a child. Make provisions for it in case disaster befalls you. I don’t see any proposed solution here. My proposed solution: the government takes care of those children from the money raised by taxes. It seems to me your solutions are heavily geared towards punishment. I personally believe that with compassion and education you can produce much better results. Same thing as with drugs (to take another example.) Instead of imprisoning people that do drugs, try to educate them that drug addiction can ruin your life. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/31 "2000-03-09T01:13:00Z")
Oh, and I forgot, to go back to the OP: If a law that allows mothers to leave their children anonymously somewhere helps save some baby’s lives with the consequence that some irresponsible people go “unpunished”, I’m all for it. (as said by other posters.) ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/32 "2000-03-09T01:28:00Z")
My main concern here is for the safety and well being of the child. If that means I have to put aside any feelings of vengance toward the mother **or** the father, so be it. Tossing a baby into a dumpster is criminal abandonment, and should be prosecuted. But how is giving a baby up for adoption at birth so different from bringing a baby to a hospital to give it up? You can’t force parents to love an unwanted child. _Most_ children raised in orphanages and foster homes do ok. Better, I think, than those raised by unloving and neglectful parents. And no, I don’t mind a bit that my taxes are used to pay for that care. Not one bit. If someone else does mind, well, that’s “tough titty”. Peace, mangeorge ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/33 "2000-03-09T01:55:00Z")
I’ve read both sides of this argument carefully, and would like to make a modest proposal. I will move in a Swift fashion, so try and stay with me. Obviously a callous woman can’t be bothered to bring her baby to the hospital to give it away if she cares so little for it that she can’t bother to put it up for adoption. Why should the tax payers carry the burden for this unwanted child? What is needed is an economic solution. I suggest that we open a free market in newborns. Woman can bring their babies to market and have them appraised and purchased by interested parties. With that much of an economic incentive who would leave a valuable baby in a dumpster? Good uses can be found for these newborns, too! Let’s say the average newborn weighs 8 pounds, and the meat is of equivalent quality to fine veal. At $11.00 a pound unbutchered live weight, that puts the average newborns worth at $88.00! The price will probably be higher since the meat of newborn babies is sure to be very very tender, and in great demand by chefs everywhere! On top of the that the skin of a newborn is so soft! From the skin of a newborn child one can make a pair of leather gloves so soft and supple they are bound to be the envy of discriminating folk everywhere. A whole industry could grow up around what has previously been treated as refuse. The poor can use the proceeds from their newborn children to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and escape from welfare saving taxes for everybody. What a win win situation. Thank you for your attention ---
**Author:** ![Hardwood\_Paneling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hardwood\_Paneling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hardwood_Paneling)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/34 "2000-03-09T20:27:00Z")
Hi! Please forgive my newbie screw-ups, I’m, well, a newbie. I have been lurking in GD for months now, and for some reason this topic prompts me to post. It seems everyone can agree the parent that abandons his/her child is bad/a monster/criminal. And also that criminals, of course, should be punished. The rub is pragmatism. Parents determined to rid themselves of their children are very quickly going to realize that they can either “formally” abandon them, e.g., at the Georgia hospital, and invoke certain punishment, **OR** can murder their children, or simply dump them somewhere, and hope to get away with it. They will choose the latter with increasing frequency. Does anyone disagree with this? ## To me, at least, it comes down to this question: should society abstain from punishing a criminal in order to protect a victim? Sincerely, Hardwood Paneling ---
**Author:** ![Hardwood\_Paneling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hardwood\_Paneling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hardwood_Paneling)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/35 "2000-03-09T20:35:00Z")
Hi! Please forgive my newbie screw-ups, I’m, well, a newbie. I have been lurking in GD for months now, and for some reason this topic prompts me to post. It seems everyone can agree the parent that abandons his/her child is bad/a monster/criminal. And also that criminals, of course, should be punished. The rub is pragmatism. Parents determined to rid themselves of their children are very quickly going to realize that they can either “formally” abandon them, e.g., at the Georgia hospital, and invoke certain punishment, **OR** can murder their children, or simply dump them somewhere, and hope to get away with it. They will choose the latter with increasing frequency. Does anyone disagree with this? ## To me, at least, it comes down to this question: should society abstain from punishing a criminal in order to protect a victim? Sincerely, Hardwood Paneling ---
**Author:** ![Hardwood\_Paneling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hardwood\_Paneling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hardwood_Paneling)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/36 "2000-03-09T20:43:00Z")
Something else is bothering me about this topic, and I’ll tell you what it is! What counts as abandonment, anyway? Consider the following scenarios: [ul][li]Parent A leaves Baby A by the side of the road, in a cardboard box, in rural Kansas.[/li][li]Parent B leaves Baby B on the doorstep of a loving home; one in which he/she _knows_ that Baby B will be cared for.[/li][li]Parent C leaves Baby C in the hospital drop-box, where he/she can be reasonably sure the child’s physical needs, at least, will be met.[/li][li]Parent D puts Baby D up for adoption.[/ul][/li] Parents B, C, and D, in ensuring at least that the baby will survive, did not abandon (at least in the strictest sense of that word.) What is the moral difference between Parent D and Parent C? By the way, does anyone know whether the Georgia babies are put up for adoption, or raised in orphanages, or what? * * * Sincerely, Hardwood Paneling ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/37 "2000-03-09T20:45:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by Hardwood Paneling: > **Hi!** Hello. Welcome to _The Straight Dope_. Hope you stick around. > [@](#): > > **Please forgive my newbie screw-ups, I’m, well, a newbie.** You’re doing better than some veterans I could name. > [@](#): > > **The rub is pragmatism.** I agree. However… > [@](#): > > **Parents… can either “formally” abandon them, e.g., at the Georgia hospital, and invoke certain punishment** Actually, according to the new law, they would face NO punishment, which is what got **Libertarian** so hot and bothered. And I pointed out that being faced with punishment is what caused so many mothers to abandon their infants in the first place, or to get late-term abortions. Without the threat of punishment, there is no incentive to “get away with it.” If eliminating punishment means MORE children are saved, then that’s what we should do, I think. * * * When all else fails, ask Cecil. ---
**Author:** ![Hardwood\_Paneling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hardwood\_Paneling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hardwood_Paneling)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2000, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/38 "2000-03-09T20:56:00Z")
Sorry I was unclear. I _like_, I think, the Georgia system. ## I was trying to show what I see as a flaw in Lib’s Punish-the-Bastard-Parent proposal. Sincerely, Hardwood Paneling ---
**Author:** ![nebuli](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/0ea827/32.png) [@nebuli](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nebuli)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/39 "2000-03-10T00:17:00Z")
> [@](#): > > By the way, does anyone know whether the Georgia babies are put up for adoption, or raised in orphanages, or what? I’m not sure of the Georgia law, but the NY Times article I linked earlier in this thread said most babies abandoned in hospitals in Texas were adopted. Another article appeared today in Newsday, a Long Island paper, describing how a similar system is being implemented in Hamburg, Germany, and that other German cities may follow. It also said that such programs have already been successful in Budapest, Hungary and Johannesburg, South Africa. The link to the article is [www.newsday.com/coverage/current/news/thursday/nd4792.htm](http://www.newsday.com/coverage/current/news/thursday/nd4792.htm) And my own 2 cents- if we really wish to reduce the expense for taxpayers we should make it easy for parents who aren’t up to proper parenting to give their kids up for adoption. Otherwise, as adults those kids will probably cost society (the taxpayers) much more than would have been spent finding them loving homes as infants. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686/40 "2000-03-10T01:10:00Z")
I just want to state that there should be _no problem_ placing infants in good homes, regardless of race and almost regardless of health, as long as two conditions are met: 1. The state allows interracial adoptions and adoptions by non-traditional groups as long as they meet sensible requirements. I am not even talking aboput gay adoption here. I won’t touch it with a ten foot pole and I think it is moot in this discussion–there are plenty of people ready to adopt either way. I mean letting non-church attending families adopt, and people who were convicted of a minor drug charge 25 years ago, and who havn’t been in trouble since. State adoption agencies (unlike private agancies, where most adoptions take place) sometimes have archaic rules. and 1. The law clearly states and parents are completly sure that the abandoning parents have **no rights** to the baby. This could be problematic. If I was a man and I found out after the fact I had been decieved about a pregnancy and that the child had been abandoned and placed with strangers it would probably kill me. But that’s the way it would have to be. The man would have to be SOL, because adoptive parents need to know that the baby is _theirs_, and that they don’t need to fear a knock in the night and someone come to take it away. Most adoption agencies go to great lenghs to find the father and get a release statement–most adoptive parents insist on it. That is not possible in this senario. Nor could the mother change her mind because she was drunk when she did it, or crazy, or forced at gunpoint–even if any sob story were true, she would have to be denied parental rights, fair or not. The adoptive parents deserve that. To change the subject slightly, there have been a couple “unless she was raped” comments made. I just want to make sure that we are all in agreement that whether or not one was raped makes no differeance in the type of scum you are if you abandon a baby to die. Is it unfair to be raped and get pregnant? Sure is, but that dosn’t make any difference at all. You are still responsible for doing the right thing, and killing a baby is not right. Allowing it to grow up in a loving family that wants it–whether you do thins through a formal adoption process or Georgia’s more casual system, is. Lastly, I think we should all keep using words like “Skank” and “Spawn of Satan” and “Reprehsible, dosen’t deserve to live c^%$” to describe girls/women who abandon babies to die. I say this not because I am filled with rightous anger, but because I believe that peer presure, societal opinion, controls people a lot more effectivly than laws–especially when people are emotionally charged. Girls who throw babies in dumpsters do so because somewhere in thier head they have the idea that an unwed teenage mother is a worse person than a person who commits infanticide. If they grow up with the idea that killing a baby is EVIL, that it makes you evil past hope of redemption, while an unplanned early pregnancy is merely bad and very, very, very stupid, they might choose better options. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-states-raising-kids/17686.md?page=3)