"Disagreeing has never been so much fun!"
Forced Sterilization is a Great Idea
Too Much Government Control. NO!
There is currently a petition to help pass legislation that forces mothers with multiple drug offenses to have their tubes tied (Laparoscopy) to prevent the conception and birth of drug babies. Good idea or too much power to the Government?
Neutral Fans: (0)
Side A Comment
mama kaz - 9/21/12 @ 8:18 PM:
I do not like govt control but as someone who has seen babies going through the effects of drug addiction during 20 years of working in pediatrics I think it might be a good idea in some cases. My sister adopted 3 children all born to the same drug addicted parents and it was particularly painful watching the youngest as a newborn screaming until he was hoarse because of the drugs in his birth mother's system. They had 3 other children that were adopted by other people. My sister's children have had life long struggles as a result of their parents lack of concern for anyone but themselves and so have their other 3 siblings.
Side B Comment
Jeff - 8/24/12 @ 3:40 PM:
i think most know how i feel about the government having their hands in our freedoms and here is just another example of it.
Side B Comment
DollyFan - 8/2/12 @ 4:25 AM:
Too much power to the government in letting them force this on women. That removes the woman's freedom and violates her rights. I agree that a woman who brings a baby into the world under said conditions should face jail time and/or other penalties. As for drug testing welfare recipients, that is totally different. That is something that is not forced upon anyone. They only have to do it if they choose to be tested. Of course, they may not get assistance if they do not get tested but they have the choice.
Side A Comment
cutie122403 - 7/31/12 @ 6:13 PM:
So we force drug testing on welfare but its wrong to force tubal ligation on drug mothers? These poor drug babies that are born to drug moms arent going to have much of a life and are most likely going to be taken away from their mothers and be in and out of foster care until they are 18 and possibly repeat the same pattern. Tubal ligation is not a major surgery and would insure that these mothers ( while hurting themselves on drugs) would not be killing and/or making it very difficult for their children to live normal lives.
LIBERAL - 7/31/12 @ 9:05 PM:
Rival | Side B
That's a good point Crystal, but you have to take certain situations into consideration. Deciding to accept government assistance is voluntary. Having to take a drug test for such assistance is nothing more than a regulation, and is not that invasive. It's just like getting your blood drawn. Being forced to submit to a surgery like tubal ligation may not be a major surgery, but the ramifications can be long standing, and in some cases irreversible. Let's say a drug addict is forced to get a tubal ligation. She does so. Five years later she has been clean and sober for over three years and can legally get a tubal reversal. She sees a fertility specialist, but is unfortunately informed that not only can the reversal not work, but that serious health risks could be involved. Oh, and by the way, it will only cost you several thousand dollars too. It's just not the right solution to the problem. Aside from the risks involved one also has to consider the legality as well. The government should not have the right to make this type of very personal decision for one of its own citizens.
I would hope any woman/mother would have enough respect for themselves and the life of their child not to take drugs during their pregnancy, but we don't have the right to make that decision for them.
I would hope any woman/mother would have enough respect for themselves and the life of their child not to take drugs during their pregnancy, but we don't have the right to make that decision for them.
cutie122403 - 8/1/12 @ 4:54 PM:
Ally | Side A
Rick some would argue though that just a simple blood test is invasive because the government knows what you are doing in your personal life, (I am all for drug testing welfare by the way). I actually agree with you if the woman on drugs gets cleaned up years later but I think for the most part once an addict always an addict (not in all cases but very few want to actually change). I have no sympathy for them and I'd rather see one hurt by not being able to have a child later in life than to see drug babies that will live a difficult life.
LIBERAL - 8/1/12 @ 6:21 PM:
Rival | Side B
I understand both what you mean and how you feel about the subject. I just think this is the wrong way to go about it. There has to be a better and safer way to deal with this issue than sterilizing women by force.
Side B Comment
LIBERAL - 7/30/12 @ 3:57 AM:
Hands down absolutely not. The government already has enough control over a woman's choice in many states. This is such an incredibly bad idea I can't even express it in words. I am in total agreement that a woman should face severe penalties should she use drugs during her pregnancy, but allowing the government to forcibly sterilize women under any circumstance is a clear violation of her rights and would be a slippery slope to travel down. If a non-profit organization chooses to advise and pay willing participants to get their tubes tied then that's great. That is a much more viable alternative to forced sterilization. I am in complete agreement with you Ryan. Wait, what did I just say? LOL.
Side B Comment
The Boss - 7/29/12 @ 5:51 PM:
While I'll be the first to admit this is one of those scenarios where the intentions are good but the method the outcome relies on to be reached is the government being given the authority to perform a surgical procedure on a US citizen. Nevermind there could complications with the procedure this would give the government a power I'm VERY uncomfortable with them having. Our government can't be trusted to balance a budget and you want them having the option to force sterilize a woman?
Now, with that being said I'm not against laws imposing STRICT penalties on woman who use drugs during pregnancy. In the event that a baby is born premature due to the drug use and or suffers birth defects, etc.. I would have no problem with laws requiring jail time. If we actually took these horrific failures seriously and had steep penalties I wouldn't be against reduced sentences or fines if the mother agreed to undergoing the procedure mentioned above. This has to be consensual not forced.
I remember seeing a news program covering a non-profit that was paying drug using mothers on the street to get their tubes tied; I support that as well.
Now, with that being said I'm not against laws imposing STRICT penalties on woman who use drugs during pregnancy. In the event that a baby is born premature due to the drug use and or suffers birth defects, etc.. I would have no problem with laws requiring jail time. If we actually took these horrific failures seriously and had steep penalties I wouldn't be against reduced sentences or fines if the mother agreed to undergoing the procedure mentioned above. This has to be consensual not forced.
I remember seeing a news program covering a non-profit that was paying drug using mothers on the street to get their tubes tied; I support that as well.
