Guardians of the unborn[Netherlands][Forced contraception for 'unfit' mothers]

Guardian ^ | 04 Nov 2008 | Khaled Diab

[BGHater]

The Dutch parliament is considering whether protecting unborn children should supersede the rights of parents to procreate

Women in the Netherlands who are deemed by the state to be unfit mothers should be sentenced to take contraception for a prescribed period of two years, according to a draft bill before the Dutch parliament.

The proposed legislation would further punish parents who defied it by taking away their newborn infant. "It targets people who have been the subject of judicial intervention because of their bad parenting," explained the author of the bill Marjo Van Dijken of the socialist PvDA. "If someone refuses the contraception and becomes pregnant, the child must be taken away directly after birth."

When I see how some parents treat their children and come across adults who wish they'd never been born because of the abuse they endured as kids, I get some idea of where Van Dijken is coming from, but her proposed solution strikes me as far too draconian.

In fact, I have serious misgivings about the implications of this proposed law, and it raises a torrent of questions in my mind. Is it really the state's role to protect the unborn and does it have the right to control people's bodies in such a way and to deprive them of the basic right to procreate? Whatever happened to the presumption of innocence? Just because a parent was bad with one child, does it mean (s)he will repeat the offence?

Have we got the right to exercise pre-emptive "justice" – and could this be the first step towards a "minority report" approach to parental "precrime"?

[utherdoul]

the dutch aren’t having babies anyway (unless you count the immigrants) so I don’t see what good this does.

[Pete]

Google "eugenics" for it's flowery past, including 50 million dead (counting abortion and the death camps).

Planned Parenthood was started by that crowd. The same crowd that got into trouble after WWII for complementing the Nazis.

[nina0113]

Are we SURE we beat the Nazis?

[CondorFlight]

“Are we SURE we beat the Nazis?”

Technically the USA has the right to protest against this law, in the same way it would protest against a law discriminating against Jews and making them second-class citizens, as a revival of nazism.

But I won’t hold my breath waiting for Washington to say something...

[Soothesayer]

The state cannot be trusted with power over reproduction. Who is to stop them from saying that morally upright (rather than relativist) parents are ‘unfit’ for breeding while psychotic druggies of a liberal disposition are A-ok?

[Soothesayer]

We beat the Nazi regime but we did not beat their ideology. We can look forward to countless more nightmares for the rest of human existence.

[ncpatriot]

I bet the State will force abortion for babies who are determined to be disabled including those who test positive in the womb for Down’s Syndrome. The State will not want to take care of these babies with disability check or medical care. State wants to spend “their money” on the young and healthy. Just my thoughts.

[Madam Theophilus]

We used to live in the Netherlands and two of our children were born there. The Dutch government has a very intensive child care system where you must bring your kids in for regular medical check ups and be lectured to as to how to raise your kids. This law would appear to give the system more teeth. By what standard are you going to be judged a “bad parent?” For instance, when the nurse demands you stop breast feeding and give the baby tea in a bottle? Or how about when a preemie is below the normal growth charts because she was only three and a half pounds at birth. Is that doctor’s belief there is something wrong with how you are feeding the child to be legal grounds you are a bad parent?

Social control is the real goal of all national health care and here we can see it for what it is.

[happygrl]

Something like this was considered, and perhaps even implemented during the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s.

There was, at least, talk of inserting Norplant, a contraceptive drug, into the arms of female addicts who had produced a crack baby.

Considering the effects of crack on babies, the idea had a fair amount of support, although I don't think it was implemented.

[nina0113]

Something like this was considered, and perhaps even implemented during the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s.

There was, at least, talk of inserting Norplant, a contraceptive drug, into the arms of female addicts who had produced a crack baby.

Considering the effects of crack on babies, the idea had a fair amount of support, although I don't think it was implemented.

It wasn't mandatory, but one of my sibs worked in an emergency room at the time, and one of the post-delivery questions was "WHEN do you want to schedule your Norplant?" not "Would you like..."? I don't think it was restricted to crack, I think it was offered, with strong encouragement, to all welfare patients.