Thursday, 19 September 2013
How much control should the government have over the family?
If we agree that the family is of fundamental importance to the rearing of children and the stability of adults, how much control should society be able to exercise over it? Can we step in if they are not raising their children properly? If adults are thinking about getting divorced can society act to prevent this? What if a couple want to have children but are not suitable, could we stop it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The governments should have sparse control over family's as it is now. as if government controlled it to an extent where people would find it unacceptable and a breach of human rights, adults wanting a divorce must have severe disruption within the family unit (e.g Arguing, physical violence in some cases) therefore a divorce can be of a benefit to the family as it will stop this in some cases.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the government can get involved with families if they are not contributing to their children's emotional and economical needs. If a child is not being taught the norms and values, I think it is essential for the government to form some sort of involvement in creating the best possible chance for a child's future.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daisy, I think that the government should be able to get involved with families if norms and values aren't being taught properly; if this is the case, then due to family being a large part of society functioning properly, the government should get involved. It is also important that families give the children and adults emotional support, so if this is also not being fulfilled, then the government stepping in isn't a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Tom that if adults want a divorce, then the government shouldn't get involved. I think that if the government got involved with this area of families and possibly made parents stay together, then, as Tom as said, there will be negative consequences of this such as possible violence, arguments and just a negative atmosphere at the home and between the family. Even if the parents are separated, then the emotional support can still be there for the children. The only problem with divorce may be that the economical support may not be there, as the income of one parent may not be enough unless the other helps out. This is when governments step in and help with benefits.
I agree with the government intervening when children run the risk of not becoming 'properly' socialised and their economic needs not being met. But how would the government do this while not breaching the family sphere? If we deem a family needing help, how far can the government go before its considered too far?
ReplyDeleteThe reasons why government wants to intervene and take children from parents is because:
ReplyDelete1.More jobs for social workers,councilers and the rest of almost useless jobs which will find the most ridiculous reasons to take the children away from the parents in order to make extra ca$h.
2.Goverment brings up children taken from their original families.
This means growing up in environment where everything is controlled by obviously the goverment.They will be taught everything ridiculous that government sets up.This means another well behaved slaves which will pay taxes to the goverment,working manually or in shops "to help run the economy" .
When it comes to children, I believe it is beneficial to intervene in the family, both for the short term and the long term benefits. If a child is not being socialised properly, it not only affects them when they are young but for the rest of their lives (for example, if a child is not taught to value work, they are much more likely to be content with unemployment). However, this being said, how do you really monitor this? Physical neglect or poverty can be physically seen in a way that a lack of socialisation cannot. Perhaps in school, this may be picked up on, but then is it too late?
ReplyDeleteIn this incidence it's more of 'how?' than 'should they?'
In the case of divorce, I don't believe it's the governments place to intervene. Forcing a couple to remain married may cause more problems than in solves (such as domestic abuse) and so on is point I agree with Tom.
I agree with Tom about divorces, I mean you cannot force someone to be in love with someone, imagine how miserable that would make society if people had to stay with someone that might be a danger to them or the children.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Mia with how it would be possible to monitor family behaviours and how children are being socialised. I guess this is where education would come in and if children were not following the norms in education then you could assume they are not being socialised at home, or not to the acceptable standard. You could introduce sanctions to parents who are not socialising their children but would this then make society very dictatorship and a bit too over the top?