3 ms·

> do you think parents are going to give up their children willingly? No, they won't want to lose their kids. But if they have no means to support them then th

> do you think parents are going to give up their children willingly? No, they won't want to lose their kids. But if they have no means to support them then they will. So because they aren't receiving any financial assistance for shelter, food, and clothing then they will rely on having a partner. We have now incentivized that type of behavior. Failing that, if they can't provide a safe environment for their kids then we will take the kids out of the home. We do this today. We could altar the civil rights act to include children in these situations. > children growing up without their own parents is only going to make things worse. Adopted kids do great. It's about structure and predictability. > your ideas work under the assumption that these parents are not capable of raising their kids. Correct. All the evidence says they are not capable. > the problem is that they have to raise their kids and make a living in an environment that is not supportive. Correct - as stated above we incentivize them to create a supportive environment or we will create one for their kids. > the big factor that you are missing is that we don't know if those children will be capable to have families of their own. We will teach them how. They will be so removed from their environment of shattering poverty, drugs, abuse, etc. They won't even recognize that world and will be disgusted by it. They will learn how to be productive people that can not only take care of themselves but can care for others. These are learned behaviors. One of the reasons we have generational poverty is because bad habits are passed down. The cycle never gets broken. > children in institutions is not children with parents. Institutions are a surrogate. > it smacks of hubris and arrogance. the assumption that people should be able to take good care of their kids without help and anyone who isn't is simply incapable and should not have had kids in the first place. that you know better than they do, and they should just submit to your authority. Or we can continue to double down on the same bad ideas we've been trying for the last 60 or 70 years. Talk about hubris and arrogance! The main difference is I'm actually trying to help the kids. Not create government dependent parents that will vote for me because I get scraps sent their way.

archagon 4y ago
This is the same kind of thinking that lead to the abduction of Native kids, forced sterilizations, etc.: https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2019/10/14/20913408/us-stole-thousands-of-native-american-children https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2019/10/14/20913408/us-stol...
- nemo44x 4y ago
  Not really. What happened there was an attempt to destroy Native cultures and even reproduction. It's based on a racial trait. My ideas are to help kids from mothers that can't or won't provide an acceptable environment to grow up in have a chance to grow up in a caring, non-abusive environment that gives them the best chance to have a life. And hopefully reproduce and pass those values on to their own kids! :) I'm not saying it would be the best implementation, but the idea is to help kids. Not create a client of the state that will vote for a certain political party because they are helpless and dependent. I want to help people. Not hurt them and lie to myself and others and pretend I'm helping when I'm only serving my own agenda.
  - archagon 4y ago
    Why do you think the people who stole Native kids didn't want the best for those kids? It's just that in their case, they assumed that Native upbringing == bad parenting. (And I'm sure that the poverty/crime rate/etc. of those communities were also part of that rationalization.) > Not create a client of the state that will vote for a certain political party because they are helpless and dependent. I'm pretty sure there's no evidence bearing out that this happens to any significant degree. Moreover, people generally don't enjoy staying on welfare.
    - nemo44x 4y ago
      I mean, we already pull a ton of kids out of abusive homes today. The difference is there has to be a case that the child is in an unsafe environment. In the case of Native kids it was simply their race. The problem today is the kids stay in or close to the negative environment. There’s no one to teach them. My idea is to simply close the loop and give them essentially boarding school. People may not enjoy being on welfare but the data shows that generational welfare is a thing.
em-bee 4y ago
But if they have no means to support them then they will. and as a result you traumatize everyone in that family for life. So because they aren't receiving any financial assistance for shelter, food, and clothing then they will rely on having a partner. We have now incentivized that type of behavior. no, you haven't. how do you think this works? all you are doing is forcing people to stay in relationships that are not healthy. do you think people separate because they got bored? they separate because they can't support each other. but you are forcing them to stay together, which creates environments ripe for abuse. Adopted kids do great. you were talking about an institution. and where are you going to find all these adoptive parents? already now there are not enough of those. we incentivize them to create a supportive environment that's not what i meant by a supportive environment. a supportive environment is a community that helps families who can't make it on their own. We will teach them how. They will be so removed from their environment of shattering poverty, drugs, abuse, etc. they will also be removed from the love of their parents, which is the most important thing that they need. Or we can continue to double down on the same bad ideas we've been trying for the last 60 or 70 years we could also look at how other countries do it, and listen to people and learn what they actually need to make this work for them. The main difference is I'm actually trying to help the kids. and i am trying to help the parents. so that they can actually take care of their kids themselves.
- nemo44x 4y ago
  I think all your ideas are great and I’d be all for them if they weren’t just completely unrealistic and ineffective. I grew up around those environments and was immersed in them. My experience as well as analyzing what we have done to “fix it” have led me to believe that a radical breaking of the wheel is necessary. And not only necessary but moral. It’s time to put kids first.
  - em-bee 4y ago
    It’s time to put kids first. this is where i have a problem. taking away kids from their parents is not putting kids first. unless the parents are outright abusive, in which case there are already mechanisms in place. what you are suggesting is not helpful. we do not need better individual academic performance but we need better relationships, so that people care more for each other and we can build stronger communities that can work together to improve everyones lives. taking away children from their parents hurts the ability of those children (and of the parents too) to make friends and form trusting relationships. which in the long term hurts the very fabric of society. already individualism is very strong, and it's becoming a problem. only as a united community can we solve our problems and build a better future.

archagon 4y ago

This is the same kind of thinking that lead to the abduction of Native kids, forced sterilizations, etc.: https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2019/10/14/20913408/us-stole-thousands-of-native-american-children https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2019/10/14/20913408/us-stol...

nemo44x 4y ago
Not really. What happened there was an attempt to destroy Native cultures and even reproduction. It's based on a racial trait. My ideas are to help kids from mothers that can't or won't provide an acceptable environment to grow up in have a chance to grow up in a caring, non-abusive environment that gives them the best chance to have a life. And hopefully reproduce and pass those values on to their own kids! :) I'm not saying it would be the best implementation, but the idea is to help kids. Not create a client of the state that will vote for a certain political party because they are helpless and dependent. I want to help people. Not hurt them and lie to myself and others and pretend I'm helping when I'm only serving my own agenda.
- archagon 4y ago
  Why do you think the people who stole Native kids didn't want the best for those kids? It's just that in their case, they assumed that Native upbringing == bad parenting. (And I'm sure that the poverty/crime rate/etc. of those communities were also part of that rationalization.) > Not create a client of the state that will vote for a certain political party because they are helpless and dependent. I'm pretty sure there's no evidence bearing out that this happens to any significant degree. Moreover, people generally don't enjoy staying on welfare.
  - nemo44x 4y ago
    I mean, we already pull a ton of kids out of abusive homes today. The difference is there has to be a case that the child is in an unsafe environment. In the case of Native kids it was simply their race. The problem today is the kids stay in or close to the negative environment. There’s no one to teach them. My idea is to simply close the loop and give them essentially boarding school. People may not enjoy being on welfare but the data shows that generational welfare is a thing.

em-bee 4y ago

But if they have no means to support them then they will. and as a result you traumatize everyone in that family for life. So because they aren't receiving any financial assistance for shelter, food, and clothing then they will rely on having a partner. We have now incentivized that type of behavior. no, you haven't. how do you think this works? all you are doing is forcing people to stay in relationships that are not healthy. do you think people separate because they got bored? they separate because they can't support each other. but you are forcing them to stay together, which creates environments ripe for abuse. Adopted kids do great. you were talking about an institution. and where are you going to find all these adoptive parents? already now there are not enough of those. we incentivize them to create a supportive environment that's not what i meant by a supportive environment. a supportive environment is a community that helps families who can't make it on their own. We will teach them how. They will be so removed from their environment of shattering poverty, drugs, abuse, etc. they will also be removed from the love of their parents, which is the most important thing that they need. Or we can continue to double down on the same bad ideas we've been trying for the last 60 or 70 years we could also look at how other countries do it, and listen to people and learn what they actually need to make this work for them. The main difference is I'm actually trying to help the kids. and i am trying to help the parents. so that they can actually take care of their kids themselves.

nemo44x 4y ago
I think all your ideas are great and I’d be all for them if they weren’t just completely unrealistic and ineffective. I grew up around those environments and was immersed in them. My experience as well as analyzing what we have done to “fix it” have led me to believe that a radical breaking of the wheel is necessary. And not only necessary but moral. It’s time to put kids first.
- em-bee 4y ago
  It’s time to put kids first. this is where i have a problem. taking away kids from their parents is not putting kids first. unless the parents are outright abusive, in which case there are already mechanisms in place. what you are suggesting is not helpful. we do not need better individual academic performance but we need better relationships, so that people care more for each other and we can build stronger communities that can work together to improve everyones lives. taking away children from their parents hurts the ability of those children (and of the parents too) to make friends and form trusting relationships. which in the long term hurts the very fabric of society. already individualism is very strong, and it's becoming a problem. only as a united community can we solve our problems and build a better future.