Quote:
Oops, again. Twice in the same thread.  Only excuse is that I should not be doing business and typing posts at the same time.
As I said, this woman poses no threat to the public. Her children are more likely to be adversely affected by her absence than by her presence. There is nothing in any of the reports to suggest that she is likely to be a harm to the children. There is no indication, apart from the offences she has committed, that she is a bad parent and these children are not living in a loving relationship with their mother. There has been no blind eye, the courts have convicted her and it is highly unlikely she will be able to repeat her felony. What punishment do you think she should have received?
|
I'm not arguing the specific punishment she received and that's not the subject of this thread - I only referred to this woman as a result of your post about her crimes which had nothing to do with anything I'd previously written.
The topic of this thread is benefits and to what extent the state should be able to intervene in extreme cases such as the 2 which were the original subject of this thread. Your stance seems to be the state should never intervene in such cases, people on benefits should be allowed to have as many children as they like and the state should accomodate them all accordingly because it's not the fault of the children involved.
Given what you'd written, I simply asked whether you'd extend that concept to mothers who've committed serious crimes and, if so, at what point (if any) you would deem them so serious that the need for custodial punishment would override any harm which may be done to the children as a result of that punishment. If you agree that there are circumstances in which that must, sadly, happen then you also agree that the state should and must have the right to intervene EVEN if that results in some form of harm to innocent children.
I wish all children could be safe and well cared for but they're not and many would argue that a benefit system which SOMETIMES seems to encourage or reward having children without requiring responsibility or restraint isn't the best way to achieve that ambition.