NSW Government to seize babies of mothers who use drugs

[shortly]

because a job and a few clean drug tests and they would have had there kid straight back.

LOL You've obviously never worked in grubbyment.

If you had you would know full well that these things are NEVER that simple!

Even with a sympathetic staff member its easy to go in one direction, but still very very very difficult to reverse.

[IndianDreaming]

Sub: The gov't taxes cigs heavily and makes billions of dollars - how can they make money off something that kills more people a year than car accidents, suicide and heroin babies all put together and still hide behind the statement "We're here for you, we're helping you be healthy and happy" - reminds me of TXH1138 - "Buy, Buy More and Be Happy"

Edited November 25, 2013 by IndianDreaming

[Anodyne]

OOh I like that, a gateway law. Can I use that somewhere else?

Please do. There seems to have been a bunch of them lately - it's making me nervous.

Also:

 

 

Sorry, but someone had to say it.

[Scrubby]

Well this will be my final post, given that i have been given a warning point for calling someone a fuckwit that believes smoking & drinking is acceptable when pregnant.

To all the great people i have met i wish you well. To the people that think drugs & pregnancy can coexist... well.. Fuck you, you selfish cunts, and the mods that agree.

ciao

I have spent thousands through shaman australis, and will not spend another red cent due to the "BIG BOYS" club that rules over average joes like me. I will take my hobby back to my shed and not share any of my knowledge or advances with you.

Such is Life

[Torsten]

Hi Scrubby,

As soon as I finish this I will ban you and lock you out of the account. We do not take threats to the forums or any members lightly and will not tolerate them.

It is a pity you decided to go down that path because I am sure the mods actually agree with your stance. It was the insults that had to be moderated. we can't take sides on the actual content of the issue, so all we can do is moderate the language. If you were careless enough to break the rules then you should wear the consequences. Just like other parties in this discussion have to wear the consequences of their actions.

I hope you grow up a bit because if you can't make a point that is backed up by science without becoming abusive, then you are not very good at educating people.

Also, if you can't make your point to the mods/admin without issuing threats of police then you are really not right for this forum.

For the record I do not know about cannabis, but there is plenty of evidence that fetuses should not be exposed to alcohol, opiates and stimulants. You could have stood your ground easily on the alcohol argument alone. So your idea that the 'big boys club' conspired against you is kinda moot when we are actually on your side. It just reinforces the fact that the warn point wasn't about the topic, but about the fact you were behaving like a dick.

edit: btw, that does not mean I am in favour of the proposed laws. I would go a very different route and make child rearing a privilege not a right and that all prospective parents should be required to complete an education and test before becoming eligible for government assistance of any type. It would solve a shitload of problems. The current system encourages poor breeding practices that will dilute the genepool and are anti-evolution.

[Foo]

Sounds fair enough

[Sonny Jim]

do you have a problem with "breeders" Torsten?

are you certain you know how best to raise a child and know how to set the test and course for the licence to breed?

or is there someone even smarter than you who knows best how to go about licencing the breeders?

or would maybe "science committee" best generate breeder licencing program?

edit:

question 1

have you had all your shots?

question 2

have you submitted bone and spinal fluid samples (from all parties in potential contact with potential new born) for substance abuse testing?

question 3

does your immediate family and neighbors have a genetic predisposition to excess sodium intake?

Edited November 28, 2013 by Sonny Jim

[Sonny Jim]

there is a growing problem with uneducated, poverty stricken masses but this is a result of IMO economic policy from the social engineers (deregulation of all important means of wealth generation for populace was a big one for aust) and the education policy of the social engineers dumbing down the increasingly poor masses.

I don't think nasty and picky social engineering making it harder to get access to dole money that parents have been forced onto by the direct result of economic and educational policy of said social engineers is going to help anyone except those who want us to suffer deep down.

in other words, the gov has no right nor is it logical to tell the populace to get of the dole and work at jobs that don't exist because the gov has been working hard for decades to remove those jobs.

in other other words, the dole money could actually be thought of as the peoples ransom, the gov must pay for their current/future/past trespasses. In practice i think this is actually accurate, if they didn't pay the ransom the people would quickly get hungry and wake up....the problem is if the gov slowly takes the dole money away, we don't get the wake up effect i.e. Fabian style gradual change

Edited November 28, 2013 by Sonny Jim

[Torsten]

do you have a problem with "breeders" Torsten?

not at all. I like kids too. I do however believe that we should discourage population growth.

are you certain you know how best to raise a child and know how to set the test and course for the licence to breed?

I did not say that an education course and test has to form the basis of how the child is raised. I am saying that parents should be aware of what the issues are and what current scientific evidence is. For example, just because we know that even small amounts of alcohol during pregnancy can cause fetal development problems doesn't mean parents should be forced to stop drinking. The problem is that most mothers know they are not supposed to drink, but don't know the actual reasons and statistics. you can't expect people to take responsibility if they are unaware.

My perspective on this is personal resonsibility. The more personal responsibility you have in a society the less laws you need.

there is a growing problem with uneducated, poverty stricken masses but this is a result of IMO economic policy from the social engineers (deregulation of all important means of wealth generation for populace was a big one for aust) and the education policy of the social engineers dumbing down the increasingly poor masses.

I totally agree. I think it is also exacerbated by policies that strongly encourage exactly that demographic to have more kids. I am against encouraging more birth, but I am even more against encouraging more births of that demographic. Or to put it in plain english, we really don't need any more trailer trash popping out kids just so they can collect the baby bonus as this ultimately reinforces the poverty cycle and is a drain on society. That doesn't mean I want to see more kids from other demographics either. The point I am trying to make is that birthrates of educated & financially secure demographics is usually automatically considerably lower than that of the uneducated and poor. That is not good for society nor for the genepool. Countries only become stably wealthy when they address this discrepancy.

I don't think nasty and picky social engineering making it harder to get access to dole money that parents have been forced onto by the direct result of economic and educational policy of said social engineers is going to help anyone except those who want us to suffer deep down.

But we already do that social engineering - we just do it the wrong way round. Giving baby bonus to poor people drives them deeper into the cycle of poverty. The baby bonus is a short sighted benefit that many poor and uneducated simply do not calculate the long term consequences of. A kid costs at least 50K before you can kick him out, so the 2K baby bonus does nothing other than burden families with an extra 48K. The dole has a similar effect.

[in_spirit]

Yes and that would be the gov'ts plan right to get everyone so in debt they are virtual slaves to the system, that they created ( maybe not personally but all the politicians before them). If our current situation is evolution we need to devolve( anti evolution).

[Darklight]

Indentured servitude for most, just like the good old days

I'm totally with T on the zero population growth.

It appals me how *fast* and how easily the public mood can be shifted on the debate. Less than a year before the stupid baby bonus, there were Federal politicians actively enquiring as to exactly what the capacity of this country can hold in terms of sustainability and resources. Six months late some fool was calling for one baby for mum, one for dad and one for the country, and offering cash incentives

Now we have a religion-directed government it is extremely unlikely we will ever have a decent sustainability focus again. Every sperm is sacred, something something. And food security? Forget about that too. It was a great idea but would have involved upsetting too many industry paradigms, like selling the farm, mining what was left and putting CSG mines under the bits which didn't have holes coming down from the surface

I'm totally over moist-eye'd parents bleating some kind of biological imperative about how they 'had' to have children, how it's a right. I'm sure many of you are excellent parents. But if you want sustainability the question of how many people, and at what level of comfort can be supported for those people, needs to be answered first. Drippy fucking hippies complaining about my kid-free lifestyle while having more than two kids get very short shrift- there is nothing I do which will create the need for new homes, cars and infrastructure in 20 years, so all their claims of ecological sensitvity go right out the window

Once a child is born, it deserves exactly the same chances as every other human being, regardless of it's parentage. I firmly believe that. However if it takes a village to raise a child, perhaps people should ask the village before spitting out six

And before somebody says " Who is going to wipe your arse and pay for your nursing care in 20 years if no-one is around to pay tax"- think again. Overpopulation is one of the problems we are currently having, we won't be short of taxpayers. Whether or not the lifestyle will be there to afford comparative luxuries like aged care and socialised medicine in 20 years isn't so much going to relate to immigration or population density, I reckon it will hinge more on ideology and our willingness to be ruled completely by elected governments. Which frankly isn't improving. As I age we seem to be doing increasingly what we're told, or led to believe by the pre-paid media.

[ballzac]

I would go a very different route and make child rearing a privilege not a right and that all prospective parents should be required to complete an education and test before becoming eligible for government assistance of any type. It would solve a shitload of problems. The current system encourages poor breeding practices that will dilute the genepool and are anti-evolution.

Is that a quote from "Mein Kampf"?

But in all seriousness, policies like those you propose cannot possibly lead to good. We all have ideas about what kind of people we should have in our society, and how do you determine who gets to decide what kind of people can procreate? Yes, we do it to some extent when we send people to prison for life, but the prime goal of that is to protect society from the individual, not to prevent their genes from propagating to the next generation.

 

The current system encourages poor breeding practices that will dilute the genepool and are anti-evolution.

I'm not sure what you mean by "dilute the genepool" or "anti-evolution". Nothing is really anti-evolution. Evolution is what occurs when there is diversity in a population and external pressures are imposed on that population. Under certain conditions there will be a certain set of pressures, and under another there will be another set of pressures. It all leads to changing genetic characteristics within populations.

[Sonny Jim]

Torsten, you can have the baby bonus, I think it’s totally fucked as well.

I want to start by saying that a few years ago I would have agreed with you if it came up in a thread but now that I have had the time in the past couple years to start looking for information that was not from state controlled sources I have built a picture of what’s gone/going down that is completely juxtaposed to the way I used to understand my relationship to the state. Maybe you have heard this story before but truly, in aust we have zero alternative media and wall to wall covertly owned or simply wilful-idiot owned media and only that type of media seems to be pushing depopulation. So definitely check the basis of anything people like that tell you.

Lets clear a couple things up

Australia’s birth rate is negative or close to negative, same with most other developed countries.

FERTILITY RATES

In 2011, Australia's total fertility rate (TFR) was 1.88 babies per woman, down very slightly from the 2010 TFR of 1.89 babies per woman. Since 1976, the total fertility rate for Australia has been below replacement level. That is, the average number of babies born to a woman throughout her reproductive life (measured by the TFR) has been insufficient to replace herself and her partner. The TFR required for replacement is currently considered to be around 2.1 babies per woman. The TFR reached a low of 1.73 babies per woman in 2001 before increasing to a thirty-year high of 1.96 babies per woman in 2008.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Products/3301.0~2011~Main+Features~Fertility+rates

I put it to y’all that the “over population problem” seems to be more about mind control than fact/reality. In terms of the problems we face this one doesn’t exist, unless of course we willingly adopt the planned austerity measure being cooked up by those who are certain they know best (how to hurt us bad).

Sure there’s not enough food/resources? In a county that should and could easily be a food bowl to the world and for its self…but the Fabian’s want the aust people kept at a distance from the aust’s ability to generate food and wealth so we appear to be poor but I don’t believe it. We are poor as the result of weaponised economic policy, not for lack of abundance.

So the lack of resources problems darklight’s talking about will probably continue to increase to drastic levels but this won’t be the fault of the birth rate. Or rather, reducing the birth rate couldn’t possibly have much impact because we are already at negative growth…you see, it’s a trick.

[Sonny Jim]

I'm totally over moist-eye'd parents bleating some kind of biological imperative about how they 'had' to have children, how it's a right

Really? because I have run in to so many of you lately and you scare me. Not much scares me and I wouldn't lie about something like this but the idea that so many people seem to agree with this type of sentiment sends a chill down my spine...like i sense danger.

i feel many people have lost faith in the innate ability of humanity to live in beauty and dignity without the gov to do it for them.

that can only be because many people have become completely ignorant of the fact that gov can never and has never created anything, all gov can do is regulate, the beauty, wealth, spirit etc is the people not the gov. not ever the gov.

[Sonny Jim]

I think it's basically a deep seated hatred for the things that make us human i.e. loving and caring for and having children is a big part of humanity but this really gets on a lot of people nerves, like it hurts them to see it. I remember what that felt like but I am glad I got passed it because it really is a form of self hatred.

that's why they are so eager to believe lies like over population or anything that normalizes their hurt feelings towards humanity. that's why it's so easy for them to ignore the facts when presented because they get a great deal of comfort out of these lies.

[Darklight]

I'm totally over moist-eye'd parents bleating some kind of biological imperative about how they 'had' to have children, how it's a right

Really? because I have run in to so many of you lately and you scare me. Not much scares me and I wouldn't lie about something like this but the idea that so many people seem to agree with this type of sentiment sends a chill down my spine...like i sense danger.

Good. I'm glad you're staying away from me cos I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, you seem to be drawing some kind of long bow and the steps between what I said and what you said don't seem to be logical ones. An explanation would be enchanting, if not enlightening

i feel many people have lost faith in the innate ability of humanity to live in beauty and dignity without the gov to do it for them.

Where was I involving the govt in the process except to say when politicians change their minds the rest of us seem to go along with it as though Oceania was always at war with Eastasia ( now there is an long-bow analogy for you )

The discussion about sustainability and food security is too important to be left to the government. But that's where we left it. It's not a safe place to leave it, but there it is

If you're looking at the birth rate you must also realise that it isn't directly related to population growth, even in .au. Our population has more than doubled since I was born, isn't showing signs of any lowering despite fewer people having kids. If you must quote sources, please do it with reference to the question at hand. This is not an anti-immigration stance by a long shot. People who are born need housing and safety. All of them.

I don't agree with some of the other people's stance on what type of people are having kids. It's blinkers. It's like saying alcoholics are poor and disgusting because they saw a couple of old blokes who haven't showered for a day sharing a bottle out of a brown paper bag. A lot of dodgy parenting is done by people who are well resourced and educated and just plain spiteful crazy shitheads. A stackful of people I love and admire come from backgrounds where there wasn't much cash, but education and social priorities and contribution were higher than normal. And quite a few people I love and admire had their kids when they weren't financially well off, and they're doing a brilliant job from what I can see

I'm not sure what the answer is to population control, nationally and worldwide. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have the discussion. If we sit back and ignore it and stay all sooky la-la about the addition of more people like us to the planet we're going to get a rude shock at some point

that can only be because many people have become completely ignorant of the fact that gov can never and has never created anything, all gov can do is regulate, the beauty, wealth, spirit etc is the people not the gov. not ever the gov.

Sweet of you and sounds noble, but makes no sense as a response to my input

I think it's basically a deep seated hatred for the things that make us human i.e. loving and caring for and having children is a big part of humanity but this really gets on a lot of people nerves, like it hurts them to see it. I remember what that felt like but I am glad I got passed it because it really is a form of self hatred.

Wow, now that you're all better and have evolved beyond youself, I'm happy for you. Your statements about my beliefs aren't accurate, but it's touching you went to the trouble to interpret them for me. I would never have come to those conclusions left to my own devices

that's why they are so eager to believe lies like over population or anything that normalizes their hurt feelings towards humanity. that's why it's so easy for them to ignore the facts when presented because they get a great deal of comfort out of these lies.

Bwahahahaha ok right bwahahahaha

[Sonny Jim]

well i don't know how else to explain why you have decided to attack our right to have children. My point is you have no real world reason to attack that right (because overpopulation is not real) but yet you attack it. If it's not because you have no respect for the thing you attack then what is it? and don't say because you are simply ignorant as ignorance about something is kind of that same as not having respect for that thing.

[Sonny Jim]

However if it takes a village to raise a child, perhaps people should ask the village before spitting out six

another chilling statement, again I don't like to tell you that you scare the heck out of me but you do.

If you're looking at the birth rate you must also realise that it isn't directly related to population growth, even in .au.

you are the one who wants to lower the birth rate. I am the one showing that we already have a negative birth rate. but obviously believing the lie is very useful for you or you wouldn't be trying so hard to believe it. That's the point I made before but you laughed at it. I was serious.

I would never have come to those conclusions left to my own devices

well?

Edited November 29, 2013 by Sonny Jim

[Subaeruginosin]

Australia’s birth rate is negative or close to negative, same with most other developed countries.

I think that’s the whole put dude, the rich and educated aren't breeding anywhere near as much as the poor and uneducated. Why don’t you try telling people living in the slums of India or china that overpopulation is just a myth, or even the countries that have land borders with these countries for that matter. How long do you think it will be till the problem over their spills over to us? Even if you look closer to home, you have a trailer trash mother (or a hippy for that matter) popping out six kids who will raise them poorly and keep them uneducated so that each of those kids will start popping out multiple kids of there own as soon as they are sexually viable, then within two generations this original female is now grandmother to 20 semi-literate drug addict dole bludgers. It’s ridiculous!

i feel many people have lost faith in the innate ability of humanity to live in beauty and dignity without the gov to do it for them.

Yet you have bitched and moaned several times about the danger of having your dole check taken from you, how ironic! Dude, people like to idealise how perfect it was back when humans roamed around like wild animals without a centralised power. But in reality it was a brutal dog eat dog world, only the strongest survived and just living though the day was a stressful struggle. A centralised power is vital to our way of life, of course we need to keep nipping at their heels to ensure they remain fair and working towards what is best for the people, but that hippy shit about not needing a government is deluded. Go try living out bush only surviving on tubers and kangaroo meat, without the luxury of government funded medical care, wiping your arse with dried leaves, then come back and tell us how beautiful and dignified reality is without government.

God, I hate hippies!!!!!

[Darklight]

I don't like to tell you that you scare the heck out of me but you do.

Good grief. Have you been reading the graffiti on the toilet doors? Are you bleeding out from a laceration caused by my scathing wit? Did I accidentally cut you off in traffic? How on earth could I be scaring you?

If this is true, once you leave your parent's basement the real world will be full of complete terror for you before you even reach the post box. I am the least scary thing out there, and I am on the other end of a keyboard FFS. Get a grip.

I would never have come to those conclusions left to my own devices

well?

Well what?

well i don't know how else to explain why you have decided to attack our right to have children. My point is you have no real world reason to attack that right (because overpopulation is not real) but yet you attack it. If it's not because you have no respect for the thing you attack then what is it? and don't say because you are simply ignorant as ignorance about something is kind of that same as not having respect for that thing.

Ah, you don't believe overpopulation is real. That explains your ability to stick your head back in the bucket and attribute strange motivations to me. Delusion. I'm attacking your argument because I believe you are delusional. And because I believe overpopulation is real.

I don't believe having kids is a right in an overpopulated environment. I don't know how to navigate away from that without causing more harm to other's rights, but I am interested in the debate, because it may result in real world solutions.

Fertility is a responsibility, not a right. It's something we can do, an ability, which carries repercussions both for individuals and the people affected by that choice. It's not just about how doey-eye'd someone is feeling about having kids at that particular moment in time. A responsible choice is one that considers the environment and factors larger than their own desires IMO

So here are some scary things I am not advocating. I am not advocating murder, genocide, infanticide, eugenics, a higer rate of infant mortality, taking your kids off you, forced sterilisation or abortion, or the Pies winning a premiership

I am saying- hey you know all that environmental stuff that's on right now, like the increasing amount of plastic shit in the ocean and a decreasing ability to catch decent sized fish on the weekend? People do that. That's not sustainable. It is going to have some serious repercussions. The increasing gap between the richest and poorest people is largely possible IMO because on a crowded planet it is easier to avoid coming into contact with other groups if there are lots of us. Empathy diminishes because it is never learned in practice. Social mobility is stifled in large groups

In theory it would be possible to teach everyone on the planet to do with much less. But the only places that has been tried have ended in a shitfight of misery.

I mean it's lovely that you don't believe in overpopulation at all, really, it warms me. But since you don't believe in it, and you believe popping out endless numbers of kids and expecting someone will take care of that for you somehow ( which is the end result of fertility being a right ) you are totally going to be in conflict with me on this. If the end result of fertility being an apparent right is *not* the right to pop out as many kids as you feel like, then what is it? A limited right, whatever that is? Who limits it? You? Me? The Catholic church? The State?

 

you are the one who wants to lower the birth rate. I am the one showing that we already have a negative birth rate. but obviously believing the lie is very useful for you or you wouldn't be trying so hard to believe it. That's the point I made before but you laughed at it. I was serious.

Of course I laughed at it, you've derived some serious nonsense and ignored a good point.

The population of Australia ( as an example ) is not in decline, despite declining birth rates. Did you miss that bit? And as we were discussing overpopulation, as a nation, prior to whichever idiot it was changing the debate almost overnight and encouraging us to spit 'em out as fast as we can, cut the placenta and take the cash for the good of the nation. I'm not talking about the number of people born here, I'm talking about the number who live here overall. And as long as we believe in a growth economy, the population is going to, of a corresponding necessity, increase.

And I don't believe this is environmentally sustainable. Or socially

[Darklight]

Not sure I like this class warfare thing going on about trailer trash multi-parents vs nice white people who have two kids quietly in the suburbs. That scares me. Welll, OK not scares, but I'm not comfortable with it

You sometimes can't beat suburbia for a life of quiet, sadistic deprivation. All the things that are bad for a kid to be around can still be happening, but very very quietly. There are lawyers to cover it up, and a code of ' that wouldn't happen here'

Additionally, people who are poorer have fewer fertility choices, sometimes for social reasons, sometimes environmental or financial. Slamming poor people for having more kids is pretty unfair- it's also a function of a lack of education

[rahli]

Society should be reducing the number of dogs too. The sole function of those protien munching shit bags is to stroke their masters ego, extending from this, harrass any creature and member of wider society that happen upon them.

And cats should just be outright exterminated.

[Darklight]

And spiders. They should go too. Now we have insecticides and spray packs for the bugs, we don't need spiders

Bug munching multi-eyed sneaky little fuckers can re-grow their own legs too

[rahli]

If spiders harrased me, set on attacking my being at near every encounter, they would be dead for sure. Lucky for them its not in the intrest of their surival to act in this manner. Same can't be said about a dog. It is what those little shit bags were bred for.

I think its good to discuss the benfits and drawbacks of every member of societies personal choices.

I have 2 kids and raise them in the knowledge that they will have an impact (either good or bad) on the world. My best efforts will be towards a good impact but I'm sure there will be some bad.

Some peoples choices just have very little good impacts on the wider world, being outweighed with the bad.

I think we are on the same page (maybe just reading a different book).

Edited November 29, 2013 by rahli

[gtarman]

I don't believe having kids is a right in an overpopulated environment. I don't know how to navigate away from that without causing more harm to other's rights, but I am interested in the debate, because it may result in real world solutions.

Overpopulation is absolutely real, and I think it's been the singlemost damaging thing about the human species - that there are just so many of us. And so every negative thing we do every day is multiplied by 6 or 7 billion and counting.

I don't know if "rights" is really the way to approach the question...I think it's more about responsibilities. And I think with the way the world is at the moment that it's generally irresponsible for a couple to have more than two kids (assuming they never have kids with any other partners before or after that). Any more creates population growth.

And I think that rather than enforcing something like the one child policy, we can probably make an effective difference just by educating people and by not rewarding irresponsible behaviour, instead we need to discourage irresponsible behaviour. Which is the point that you, Torsten and I'm sure a few others have made.

The problem with population expansion has been that agriculture has increased the security of our food supply since its advent thousands of years back and has lead to an artificially increased carrying capacity of our environment, coupled with our advances in medicine and hygiene has seen a decline in death rates so that whereas previously on average only two human children survived into adulthood for every productive couple, these days the brakes have been removed and there are no limiting factors in the short-term for the individual to having many children - though we will find out (in the next few decades more starkly, but already now), that it will have serious effects for us as a species.

One of my favourite documentaries is actually this one about population by David Attenborough, it's really good:

http://youtu.be/dN06tLRE4WE

Edited November 29, 2013 by gtarman