Assessment of Parental Ability Should Be Compulsive For All Expectant Parents

I concur with my opponents assertion that my stance on corporal punishment may have been seen as misleading. Please allow me to clarify. I personally don't believe that corporal punishment is the correct way to discipline a child. Discipline should be intended to educate, not punish for the sake of punishment. I believe it is confusing for a child to be told it is bad to strike others, then receive a physical strike from the very person who is trying to instill this lesson. In my country, smacking a child can be illegal. Parents have been charged and convicted of child abuse for administering a smack on the bottom for the childs misbehaviour - www.telegraph.co.uk/.../Father-arrested-and-locked-in-a-cell-for-smacking-son.html - (interesting to note here that the father asserts that he thought it would have been more reasonable to remove the child from the household, but not to arrest him! Fatherly concern indeed!). But to report every such case is to involve the child in an incredibly traumatic episode, causing more damage than the smack itself, and detracting from cases where child abuse is actually taking place. So I do not support anyone, even my friends, who smacks, and I think there is always a better method, but where there will be more damage to the child by taking action, and the parents seem caring, nurturing, people who are providing that child with the best upbringing they can provide, I would leave well enough alone. Smacking is covered by British law, I appreciate this may not be the case in other countries, and is considered acceptable by law if in the course of "reasonable chastisement". So allowances for this form of punishment are already in place, whether we agree with it or not. In any case where a mark is left, it should be investigated, and this is very clear. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/.../Smacking-the-rules.html Opinion is definitely split on the effectiveness of parenting classes. A group setting does not seem to be ideal, but success has been seen when professionals have worked on a one to one basis with parents - blog.cleveland.com/pdextra/.../theres_little_proof_parenting.html I apologise to my opponent for the lack of a link regarding the case of Fritzl. Information can be found here news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7371959.stm Neighbours and friends were aware that Fritzl had a daughter, Elizabeth, with whom he had his other children, but were told she had run away when in fact she had been incarcerated by her father. Allegedly even her own mother was unaware of her daughters imprisonment in their basement. My opponent is correct in his assertion that psychological illnesses are notoriously difficult to diagnose, although the techniques for diagnosis are improving as more is becoming known about the nature of these illnesses and disorders. And, of course the nature of psychological disorders can be that the person afflicted has had a lifetime to practise lying, which makes it more problematic to identify them. But does this mean we should simply not even try? And I can do nothing but agree with my opponents assertion about government failings. I wouldn't have a leg to stand on! I believe that, in setting up any kind of social agency, it should be run by people who have an idea of what it is like to live without the protection most politicians have been afforded in their affluent upbringing. In an ideal world, if this kind of scheme were to be put into operation, it would be manned by compassionate, empathic individuals who were dedicated to protecting potential abuse victims. My opponent makes a very good point regarding assessment of expectant parents. The alternative, which would be licensing conception, would be impossible to implement. People have sex. People have sex recklessly. Imposing some kind of penalty for conceiving a child "illegally" would result in an upswing of back street abortions, putting many lives at risk, or in concealed pregnancies and births, where a sick baby would not receive the assistance it needs. So I feel this could not even be considered. I don't believe that abortion should be enforced. I do, however, feel that the care system for children needs improvement, and that age should not be a barrier to adoption. There are plenty of very good homes for children, where the parents are simply deemed to be too old, at the age of 35, to adopt. However, in many cases, adoption would not be necessary, where only one parent is potentially abusive, and this could be monitored with the assistance of family members, the partner, doctors, and health visitors. I stated previously that I believe punishment should be intended to educate, and it is no different in the case of someone who exhibits potentially abusive character traits. Behaviours can be learned and unlearned, it is identification of psychological disorders that remains unaddressed. In conclusion, I would like to assert that I am fully aware that to have something as basic as conceiving, giving birth to, and raising a child under scrutiny by a government department is something that makes people - including myself - uncomfortable. I believe in a humans right to live freely. I also believe, however, that we all have a duty to send a clear message that we will not tolerate the abuse of vulnerable people. I have witnessed neighbours being interviewed on television news after the latest victim of abuse is removed from the house next door in a hearse, stating that "someone should have done something". Yet these same people scream about their rights when it comes to any new legislation, with blatant disregard for the rights of the children who are suffering in this way. My idea, I am fully aware, needs scrutiny, adaptation, clarification, if it were ever to be seriously considered. It would not be a solve-all solution, but simply a beginning. I simply believe we need to try to prevent this as far as possible. In cases like these, closing the stable door after the horse has bolted means burying another child.