oppose for the sake of this decision i don't believe including their occupations would be consistent with the de facto policies of this article as apparently established through consensus on a personal level i find the occupations of the parents interesting and don't see the harm in including them my philosophy is the more well sourced facts in the article the better but if prior suspensions prior arrests various audio recordings and the like are excluded for a lack of relevance then it would be impossible to argue that the occupations of either of their parents is relevant