Forums > Social Discussion > Junkies given money to sterilise themselves

Login/Join to Participate

DeepSoulSheep
DeepSoulSheep

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Berlin
Member Since: 25th Sep 2002
Total posts: 2617
Posted:Found this on the news this morning. Anybody else find this disturbing. Freewill to make life changing decisions while addicted to a substance. What if a person cleaned up there act to find themselves sterlised....

have a quick look


I live in a world of infinite possibilities.

Delete Topic

Pink...?
Pink...?

Mistress of Pink...Multicoloured
Location: Over There
Member Since: 6th Apr 2002
Total posts: 6140
Posted:That is awful

She compared the woman to dogs saying that they have litters of children and so on.

People need to help those woman get clean not stop then having children.



Never pick up a duck in a dungeon...

Delete

Kat
Kat

Pooh-Bah
Location: London
Member Since: 13th Dec 2000
Total posts: 2211
Posted:Offering them contraceptive implants is a good idea but its not for the benefit of the user or the unborn child.

quote: "If they spend the $200 on drugs, they spend it on drugs. It's none of our business what they do with the money we give them." Wow - harsh!! How on earth are these people allowed to get away with it


Come faeries, take me out of this dull world, for I would ride with you upon the wind and dance upon the mountains like a flame.

- W B Yeats

Delete

Raymund Phule (Fireproof)
Raymund Phule (Fireproof)

Enter a "Title" here:
Location: San Diego California
Member Since: 31st Dec 2001
Total posts: 2905
Posted:This woman... damn I think she is on crack. The sad part is, there is nothing illeagle about a program like this. If she wants to throw $200 away to get drug addicts not to have children then she is well within her rights.

I dont agree with drugs and I feel her $200 would be better spent on trying to help these woman clean up their lives, but who am I to say what she does with her own money?


On a side note, this should really be moved to a differnt area of discussion, it has nothing to do with war.


Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"

Delete

Dio
Dio

HoP Mechanical Engineer
Location: OK, USA
Member Since: 11th Jul 2002
Total posts: 729
Posted:Wow, prickly issue for sure!

I'll play Devil's Advocate here and say the idea's a good one. Why? Because the criticisms are way out of line in the way they portray the program.

These people are not being tranquilized and dragged to a doctor, nor are they dragged kicking and screaming. They are made aware of the choice, and go of their own accord.

Critics blast the program as "eugenics" and "racist," (implying genocide) but is it really? The ad on the article mentioned 4 different forms of birth control, 3 of which were reversible (IUD, Depo-Provera, and Norplant) or, at the very least, temporary. Hardly what I would call "sterilization." Someone at that point in their life could arguably use the temporary birth control methods until they are past their addiction and ready for children, and the situation is much better off for both parent and child.

People, please realize this is not bribing a desperate, drug-addicted woman to give up her ability to bear children permanently. While some may make that particular choice, there exist options that are nowhere near as permanent (Norplant lasts around 5 years, Depo Provera lasts about 3 months, an IUD can be removed at any time).

Having a child while you're trying to get through addiction only makes it that much harder and adds stress to your life that you don't need. The child could have to endure birth defects the rest of its life if the mother uses substances while pregnant. If the mother doesn't want the child and puts it up for adoption, that's one more kid without a home or a family, and no kid deserves that.

And honestly... $200? Most of those procedures cost significant amounts of money - I can't see any gain in that.


What hits the fan is not evenly distributed.

Delete

Kat
Kat

Pooh-Bah
Location: London
Member Since: 13th Dec 2000
Total posts: 2211
Posted:Dio - agree that offering choice of long term contraceptives is a good idea. I suppose I'm not one to preach about ideals as I think people should have to apply for a license before they have a child. Clearly a drug addict is not going to make a fit parent. Its a shame though that there are no efforts there to help the addict too The founder shows a disgust towards all drug users and their offspring. What next - offering money for sterilisation to knackers, football hooligans, essex girls

Hmmm.. maybe that would not be such a bad idea


Come faeries, take me out of this dull world, for I would ride with you upon the wind and dance upon the mountains like a flame.

- W B Yeats

Delete

Spanner
Spanner

remembers when it was all fields round here
Location: in the works... somewhere...
Member Since: 27th Feb 2003
Total posts: 2790
Posted:Long term birth control I would agree with. But sterilisation?

What happens to those women who clean themselves up to the extent that they otherwise could have considered supporting their own children?



"I thought you are man, but
you are nice woman.

yay,

:R"

Delete

Dom
Dom

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Bristol, UK
Member Since: 19th Dec 2001
Total posts: 3009
Posted:I'm wit Dio. The theory of long term contraception is good - if you're a drug addict desperate for $200, then having a child is not a good thing to be doing.

But it is a shame that she proves no help to those she's giving $200 to. Like a lot of ultra conservatives, cares little for someone in a bad situation as they see it as one of their own making.

A quote: "Probation officers, social workers and those who work on drug treatment programmes are increasingly referring their clients to us."
So hopefully some of these people are also getting proper help with their addiction.


Delete

onewheeldave
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield
Member Since: 28th Aug 2002
Total posts: 3252
Posted:Dio's made some perceptive observations, particularly the fact that the majority of forms of contraception offered are not permanant.

It's a real shame that a biased article can rally such support by simply mentioning words like 'Nazi Germany' and 'eugenics'.

Where sympathy for crack addicts is concerned, I feel a lot more of it for the thousands of children who have no choice whatsoever about their formative years spent in a filthy, dangerous and uncaring environment.

Undoubtably a large percentage of the next generation of crack addicts will come from just such a background.

As for spending the money to help the addicts, anyone is able to form a group to help addicts if they wish; clearly Ms Harris (who runs the service) has her own ideas of the best way to help the problem and has put in the effort necessary to carry it out.

She seems to sum up the issue here: -

"It's just nonsense. Nobody is forcing these people to do anything - it's their own decision. What infuriates me is that if my critics don't think these people are capable of making their mind up on an issue like this, why on earth do they think they are capable of bringing up a child?"

Has anyone considered that the addicts who have made use of this service may have done it because they genuinly don't want to have children?


"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Delete

onewheeldave
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield
Member Since: 28th Aug 2002
Total posts: 3252
Posted:Dio's made some perceptive observations, particularly the fact that the majority of forms of contraception offered are not permanant.

It's a real shame that a biased article can rally such support by simply mentioning words like 'Nazi Germany' and 'eugenics'.

Where sympathy for crack addicts is concerned, I feel a lot more of it for the thousands of children who have no choice whatsoever about their formative years spent in a filthy, dangerous and uncaring environment.

Undoubtably a large percentage of the next generation of crack addicts will come from just such a background.

As for spending the money to help the addicts, anyone is able to form a group to help addicts if they wish; clearly Ms Harris (who runs the service) has her own ideas of the best way to help the problem and has put in the effort necessary to carry it out.

She seems to sum up the issue here: -

"It's just nonsense. Nobody is forcing these people to do anything - it's their own decision. What infuriates me is that if my critics don't think these people are capable of making their mind up on an issue like this, why on earth do they think they are capable of bringing up a child?"

Has anyone considered that the addicts who have made use of this service may have done it because they genuinly don't want to have children?


"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Delete