Precious Metals Forum

Go Back   Precious Metals Forum > Bunker Talk > STS

Like Tree5Likes
  • 2 Post By ancona
  • 2 Post By DCFusor
  • 1 Post By Jay

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-02-2013, 08:35 AM   #1
Super Moderator
 
benjamen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Migratory
Posts: 1,620
Liked: 685 times
Freedom versus safety of children

This story has sparked some interesting discussion on another board I frequent:
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/ap/pennsyl...d-death/nXTTr/

This is a good example of how complex the freedom versus safety conflict is to discuss.

Do you have the freedom to refuse medical treatment for yourself on the basis of freewill and/or religeon?
Do you have the right to die from your own stupidity and/or religeous beliefs?

Do you have the freedom to refuse medical treatment for your children on the basis of freewill and/or religeon?
Do you have the right to cause your children to die due to your stupidity and/or religeous beliefs?

Who do your children belong to; you, society, themselves?

Who owns your children; you, society, themselves?
__________________
I drive men mad
For love of me,
Easily beaten,
Never free.

PMBug 101 *** Forum Rules
benjamen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 08:55 AM   #2
Yellow Jacket
 
ancona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Waaay south
Posts: 3,370
Liked: 2046 times
#1 Yes
#2 Yes
#3 Yes with a big caveat. I routinely refused antibiotics that were prescribed as a prophylactic measure for my kid, because I knew they would not help her, but I would never venture to think I was all knowing and refuse medical treatment for my kid when a real health crisis hit.
#4 No
#5 Themselves first, me second.
#6 Themselves first, and until they reach maturity, me.
PMBug and Jay like this.
__________________
All things being equal, the simplest answer is quite often the correct answer - Occam
ancona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 09:05 AM   #3
Ground Beetle
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 501
Liked: 304 times
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you?”

That's about all the rights that are left.
Aubuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 09:31 AM   #4
Golden Cockroach
 
PMBug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: In Scrooge McDuck's vault
Posts: 7,027
Liked: 2449 times
Obligatory (I laugh every time I hear this):

__________________
The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. - Lao Tzu

Important stuff: PMBug 101 * Forum Guidelines * Support PMBug
PMBug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 11:53 AM   #5
Big-eyed bug
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 416
Liked: 249 times
Good question, my

A mentally capable grown up has the freedom to do whatever he/she likes even if it kills them as long as it doesn't harm other people.
(So 1 & 2 is yes, unless they are actually proved to be mentally incapable.)

However until children reach maturity they are not mentally capable. Therefore it is the parents responsibility to make the key decisions regarding the health and well being of the child. Society assumes those decisions are in the best interests of the child but if they are proved not to be or worse will likely harm the child then society can step in.
(So the answer to 4 is no & for 3 it is no for religion but it depends for 'freewill' - you are free to seek a second/third opinion and where there are mulitple 'reasonable' options, you are free to weigh up the pros and cons of each and make the choice.)
If you choose an option which a doctor (who has responsibilty of care for his patients) believes is not medically reasonable then he has a duty to challenge that.

For 5 & 6, I think your children belong to themselves but until they reach maturity, you are responsible for them unless you are proved unfit to carry out that responsibility then society can step in.
Unbeatable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 12:26 PM   #6
Yellow Jacket
 
DCFusor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Floyd, Virginia
Posts: 1,682
Liked: 1233 times
The trouble here is who does the deciding, and where they are coming from, the devil as usual, is in the details. I know of one case where *adult* protective services was as guilty of malfeasance as any CPS has been - tossed a woman out of her home, and displaced (out of a job) the man who was living there (a distant relative, a good guy, and personal friend) who was taking care of her - the trigger? Her own frigging kids who wanted her declared incompetant so they could inherit her home and money - she was paying my friend pizza money and a room, he was taking good care of her - we talked frequently on G+ vid chats and she was fine and not incompetent - but kids with a lawyer and a paid doctor...

As far as kids go, I kinda was involved as a substitute parent for a couple of kids whose parents were pretty "out there" - one just a slob, the other a health-freak of the worst kind (eating nothing is better, eating stupid stuff to flush you out is good, and so on). You know what? They are grown now and are just fine, though one parent, the slob, wound up cooking meth and more or less killed himself with his own product (the man), while the woman, finally freed to live her dream, did kill herself with her weird ideas of nutrition. Kids are fine. You could have made a great case for CPS to take them, and what I've seen of that - the new "parents" ruin any kid with initiative who is a little wild.

I've also seen CPS take kids because of a fairly normal party behavior by parents. We all know drug users who merely chip away and do no harm, and those who are just doing the slow (or fast) suicide thing - I think we take kids from the latter, but sure as hell not the former, heck, they are practically a majority. The way it's going, if you smoke tobacco, they'll take your kids, that's totally, utterly, out of line with any idea of freedom, and I really object to that sort of thing. It's fucking none of their business. I do NOT believe in forcing everyone into a mold - diversity is a GOOD THING (tm). We don't know what new challenges the next generations will face, therefore it's merely our vanity that says we know best how to prepare them for the mess we've made, and the next messes.

Kids are in fact very resilient and adaptive. I say let them, they'll need the practice going forward.
Jay and Unbeatable like this.
DCFusor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 01:08 PM   #7
Big-eyed bug
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 416
Liked: 249 times
Yeah that's the thing. I think there should be a system that can step in and protect kids from violent and very abusive parents but yeah at the same time who defines what that it is and who is protecting the parents and the kids if that system becomes violent and abusive.
Unbeatable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 02:56 PM   #8
Jay
Yellow Jacket
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,511
Liked: 671 times
Originally Posted by ancona View Post:
#1 Yes
#2 Yes
#3 Yes with a big caveat. I routinely refused antibiotics that were prescribed as a prophylactic measure for my kid, because I knew they would not help her, but I would never venture to think I was all knowing and refuse medical treatment for my kid when a real health crisis hit.
#4 No
#5 Themselves first, me second.
#6 Themselves first, and until they reach maturity, me.
wow. Exactly the same page.
ancona likes this.
Jay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 02:58 PM   #9
Jay
Yellow Jacket
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,511
Liked: 671 times
Originally Posted by Aubuy View Post:
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you?”

That's about all the rights that are left.
the old man said "you're rights end at the end of your fingertips. You have the right to remain silent."
Jay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 03:06 PM   #10
Jay
Yellow Jacket
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,511
Liked: 671 times
Originally Posted by Unbeatable View Post:
Yeah that's the thing. I think there should be a system that can step in and protect kids from violent and very abusive parents but yeah at the same time who defines what that it is and who is protecting the parents and the kids if that system becomes violent and abusive.
the last conversation I had ten years ago with my ACORN employed Obama loving brother, he explained to me that he lived down the hall from a man who believed in stoning his children to death for disobedience. He told me this to help me to understand how tolerant he is. Since I have children (and he hates children) and his agenda is to promote homosexuality and fight family values and religion (both of which he says are used by the government in order to control people) we haven't talked in a while. He makes twice as much as me, though.
Jay is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Freedom Chart ancona STS 7 03-30-2013 12:34 AM
How does your country rank in Economic Freedom? benjamen STS 8 09-24-2012 01:14 AM
Freedom Munitions KMS BSTS 26 07-10-2012 08:18 PM
So simple, children understand it benjamen Fiat Ponzi 2 06-01-2012 08:22 AM
Private versus Public benjamen STS 4 05-15-2012 03:41 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® from Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Content of PMBug.com copyright © 2011 - 2019 Measuring Up. All Rights Reserved.