Social Workers and Child Protection

[chveik]

There are no solutions. If you encourage people to "be vigilant" you'll end up with mob justice. If you encourage social workers to "be vigilant" you will there too get unacceptable false positives. If you trust the authorities accountability will be absent, because they are the only judges of their own accountability.

a robust welfare state would go a long way to reduce those risks. it's a bit of a cop out to blame 'human nature'.

[mothman]

I disagree with licences to have children (which sounds like James Bond is about to settle down and have kids), but I do wonder if some people are aware of how difficult and stressful being a parent really is. I don't have kids myself (and never will) so it's hard for me to comment too much, but I don't know if the BBC should make a documentary following new parents showing how exhausting it really is. Sometimes I walk past parents telling children they are going to slap them/punch them if they don't behave, and I do wonder how happy some of these people really are being parents.

To me being a parent seems like one of the hardest, most expensive, most tiring and most stressful things someone can do.

Won't lie, it's not easy. But we don't regret it. It's exhausting, it's frustrating, it's maddening - and it's the best thing in the world.

... in my opinion! I fully respect the choices of those who choose not to.

[Johnny Foreigner]

In the end, people think with their wallets; ergo, good parenting should be encouraged via a points-based reward system.

Your child is performing well at school, mentally stable and well-fed? Good on you: then you get extra child benefits, tax breaks, perhaps even a sponsored scholarship to a fancy school.
Your child is troubled, malnourished and in constant distress? None of the above.

That way, positive behaviour is furthered in a positive way. Awarding points for parenthood encourages competition and thereby drives down the price of having children. It's a win-win scenario.

[greenman]

In the end, people think with their wallets; ergo, good parenting should be encouraged via a points-based reward system.

Your child is performing well at school, mentally stable and well-fed? Good on you: then you get extra child benefits, tax breaks, perhaps even a sponsored scholarship to a fancy school.
Your child is troubled, malnourished and in constant distress? None of the above.

That way, positive behaviour is furthered in a positive way. Awarding points for parenthood encourages competition and thereby drives down the price of having children. It's a win-win scenario.

What if your child grows up to make very badly thought out forum posts?

[Porky]

In the end, people think with their wallets; ergo, good parenting should be encouraged via a points-based reward system.

Your child is performing well at school, mentally stable and well-fed? Good on you: then you get extra child benefits, tax breaks, perhaps even a sponsored scholarship to a fancy school.
Your child is troubled, malnourished and in constant distress? None of the above.

That way, positive behaviour is furthered in a positive way. Awarding points for parenthood encourages competition and thereby drives down the price of having children. It's a win-win scenario.

Inconvenient but true.

[Porky]

It's a Daily Mail Island view of socialisation: just make laws! That'll stop people doing it!

How do you enforce it?

That is the problem, in some UK towns seeing a police officer is unusual .. not because there is no crime, simply because the police choose not to attempt to engage.

[Paul Calf]

Even if you have 'enough' police, how do you enforce this?

[Kankurette]

Children being malnourished is not always the fault of the parents. What if the parents can barely afford to eat? Oh, let me guess, can't feed, don't breed?

[Wonderful Butternut]

That way, positive behaviour is furthered in a positive way. Awarding points for parenthood encourages competition and thereby drives down the price of having children. It's a win-win scenario.

No. That way generational social disadvantage will be compounded. You're about 3 steps away from suggesting we just kill the poor, mate. Dunno how you can't see that.

"Well-fed". What's the definition there? Should schools and doctors be able to monitor how many calories per day the child gets? How are they going to do that? If the child is a bit thin are they supposed to take money off the parents? And most importantly you know food poverty is a thing in the UK, right? So you're setting people on low incomes at a disadvantage straight away. Generational social disadvantage.

 Sounds like something the Conservative & Unionist Party would think is a great idea, perhaps you should suggest it to them?

Also, your initial posts were about requiring state permission to procreate, not about getting brownie points for raising good children. Don't weasel out.

[JaDanketies]

I thought Johnny Foreigner's proposal to financially penalise the parents of hungry children was so ludicrous as to be obvious satire in the true Swiftian sense. (fingers crossed)

[Wonderful Butternut]

I thought Johnny Foreigner's proposal to financially penalise the parents of hungry children was so ludicrous as to be obvious satire in the true Swiftian sense. (fingers crossed)

I don't think so, and even if he is going for satire now, I'm not sure pulling out "Lol I troll u" at this point will hold given that he expressed a genuine, unironic, (he specified this himself) belief in requiring state permission to have children on the first page of the thread.

[Theremin]

Look lads, calm down.

Surely we can agree the best approach is just to kill absolutely everyone and give another species a chance.

[Theremin]

I've never seen a vole beat its kids

[bgmnts]

Children being malnourished is not always the fault of the parents. What if the parents can barely afford to eat? Oh, let me guess, can't feed, don't breed?

As callous as it sounds, it is one of those things that boggles my mind. If you can't afford to even fully nourish yourself why have a child? Just wear protection.

[jobotic]

For one thing, people's circumstances change.

[JaDanketies]

A guy I know with six kids off four women doesn't seem to have much going on in that frontal lobe that makes you think about consequences. (the doctors wouldn't give him a vasectomy because he was too young).

[Kankurette]

As callous as it sounds, it is one of those things that boggles my mind. If you can't afford to even fully nourish yourself why have a child? Just wear protection.

Because sometimes you might have money when you do have a kid, but then you might lose your job or get defrauded or become seriously ill or whatever.

[Johnny Foreigner]

We need to curb the tide of children coming (to existence) into this country uninvited.

[Bernice]

people are bad so they shouldn't be allowed, read neeche for god sake

[Johnny Foreigner]

You're a slave. Why are you a slave? Stop being a slave.
Zarathustra's ape does not fool me; I can see right through him.
'Good' used to mean 'strong'. Weakness is bad. Why are you weak? Stop being weak.

[shoulders]

people's circumstances change.

I think this might be worth printing out and sending around , maybe 30 or 40 million copies.

[shoulders]

This story and its implications are doing my head in and making me depressed. I keep coming back to the fact that sadistic and abusive parents exist, they will always exist and they will always be able to evade detection. They aren't of one race, religion, or income bracket. They aren't so stupid as to reveal their evil inclinations in public. They are manipulative and slippery by nature. There are no solutions. If you encourage people to "be vigilant" you'll end up with mob justice. If you encourage social workers to "be vigilant" you will there too get unacceptable false positives. If you trust the authorities accountability will be absent, because they are the only judges of their own accountability.

What about the fact that more functional societies have lower instances and rather than child abuse being a phenomena, it is a by product of the societies we create?

No one is proposing we can create a society where the numbers of abused children is less than one, so at least we should set off on the discussion talking about what factors create or exacerbate conditions and how do we improve our societies so that doesn't happen as often.

[Johnny Foreigner]

Financial incentives for good parenting. Universal basic income, subject to the condition that spending on children is to be prioritised. Ending childhood poverty by topping up the income where required. All children registered in the points-based reward system at birth, with at least yearly check-ups to follow.
I would set up a Department for Children to implement these measures.

[shoulders]

Let children run the department too. Who knows what being a child is like anymore than a child?*


*yeah, yeah, I know, Ronnie Moran

[bgmnts]

Because sometimes you might have money when you do have a kid, but then you might lose your job or get defrauded or become seriously ill or whatever.

That does sometimes happen yes. But surely for every one of those instances, there are plenty of instances of people who just are careless? Why do we automatically think of the one and not the other?

[Goldentony]

all of these shit problems begin and end with tories and people with money, start there first

[mothman]

That is the problem, in some UK towns seeing a police officer is unusual .. not because there is no crime, simply because the police choose not to attempt to engage.

"And some of them are Sharia Law no-go zones for whites!"

[Bernice]

Financial incentives for good parenting. Universal basic income, subject to the condition that spending on children is to be prioritised. Ending childhood poverty by topping up the income where required. All children registered in the points-based reward system at birth, with at least yearly check-ups to follow.
I would set up a Department for Children to implement these measures.

Is this play you're writing one of those Ben Elton style ones, where a barely credible dystopia is disrupted by the music of Queen the works of a dashing playwright with access to spark notes?

[Gurke and Hare]

Universal basic income, subject to the condition that spending on children is to be prioritised.

I dont have children. Whose children should I be spending my UBI on? Won't it look a bit weird?

[Johnny Foreigner]

I dont have children. Whose children should I be spending my UBI on? Won't it look a bit weird?

What I mean is: an individual living alone would just get a UBI. Families with children would get more money, until the child(ren) is/are old enough to receive its/their own UBI. A cut-off date would have to be established for that; I'd say fifteen would be a reasonable age. This would also encourage independence; youngsters wanting to go to uni might save it up towards their fees, others could save for property, et cetera.
The UBI for any household with children would be subject to prioritising expenditure for children. Just keep the receipts for anything you buy.