1984

[lord of flies]

Are you suggesting that sloth doesn't exist?

Ah, of course, equivocation. "The vast majority of poor people don't sit around on their asses all day and chew on the public cud" is equivalent to "there is no such thing as sloth."

[213374U]

Are you suggesting that sloth doesn't exist?

Ah, of course, equivocation. "The vast majority of poor people don't sit around on their asses all day and chew on the public cud" is equivalent to "there is no such thing as sloth."

Nope. The equivocation was yours to begin with. "Efforts are made so lazy hobos get no state subsidies" is equivalent to "everyone in a hard financial spot is assumed to be lazy and therefore, should get no money".

[Gfted1]

Wait , wait, the guys name is Mr. Balls?

 

Sin bin projects operate in half of council areas already but Mr Balls wants every local authority to fund them.

 

Bwahahahahaha. I wonder if his first name is Harry.

[Wrath of Dagon]

These families are probably already involved with Child Protective Services, or whatever it's called in the UK, so I don't see what the big deal is. The government has an obligation to protect children from bad parents. If adults want to mess up their own lives, that's a different story.

[Walsingham]

I'm not an expert, but I'm just going to put my perspective out there and you can shoot me down as necessary.

 

1. I agree with the central logic at work in the proposal

 

2. I have zero confidence in this government being able to implement the solution implied by the logic

 

By point 1 I mean that I've read a lot of reviews behind recent large scale screw ups. I keep tabs on murder cases, multiple rape cases etc etc. A common feature is 'problem families'. Such families are criminal factories, and abuse mills at worst and watery-faced ne'erdowell generators at best. I back that persecptive up by talking to friends who work in psychiatric care and the social services.

 

With such families the one-size-fits-all approach of social support does nothing. It merely funds their failure.

 

I'm engineer-minded, and to my mind it seems logical to do SOMETHING about the problem. Like cleaning out and stitching up an infected wound.*

 

 

*An engineer with an interest in medicine.

[Humodour]

These families are probably already involved with Child Protective Services, or whatever it's called in the UK, so I don't see what the big deal is. The government has an obligation to protect children from bad parents. If adults want to mess up their own lives, that's a different story.

 

If the families are THAT bad, put the children in foster homes.

[Lare Kikkeli]

Foster care isn't really a solution to the problem; it's like using medication instead of therapy for depression. The British goverment (looking things through their capitalist glasses) seem to want to go to the root of the problem and try to fix the cause of the rise of youth crime, bad parenting. I have no idea if it has any chance of working, certainly seems like a bad idea to me. But then again I'm not a sociologist.

 

Must be hard being one of the upper class. Give the poor too much freedom and they cause trouble, use force to keep them in their place and they still cause trouble. Damn peasants.

Edited August 4, 2009 by Lare Kikkeli

[Slowtrain]

These families are probably already involved with Child Protective Services, or whatever it's called in the UK, so I don't see what the big deal is. The government has an obligation to protect children from bad parents. If adults want to mess up their own lives, that's a different story.

 

If the families are THAT bad, put the children in foster homes.

 

 

Trade off though. If the children are removed from the parents then the government has to fund their ongoing support while at the same time funding the effort to relocate them to a new home, assuming they can even find a new home and that the new home is actually good.

 

Plus I think having the government force the breakup of a family unit is equally unpleasant as far as government getting involved in people's live.

 

 

I think sometimes people become parents without really understanding the consequences and responsibilities of being a parent. Forcing them to confront those responsilbities seems preferable than just simply removing the children from their care.

[cronicler]

Crashgirl; people do understand what being a parent means. You put your organ into your wife and... well who cares about the rest.

 

Just be thankful that you have at least a handle on the problems. Here we have clans with 6+ children per family as the clan patriach needs muscle (ie votes) to subvert the friggin system....

[Wrath of Dagon]

The current thinking is to keep the families together if at all possible, in some cases they've gone too far with that idea.

[Hurlshort]

Foster Care in the US is notoriously bad, so I wouldn't even call it medication in a lot of situations.

[Walsingham]

I don't think foster care is the solution. If a family can be 'fixed' in toto and in situ then surely that's to the good?

 

I agree with Monte over there about this being a feckless media stunt, but I do think the underpinning logic is sound. Far too often we sweep the toughest cases under the carpet when we should orient on them and not quit until they're resolved. I mean we're talking about families who are as adrift in life as a normal joe would be on a desert island. We need a multi-disciplinary team to head on in there and give them a full life makeover.

 

I may be being swayed by my experiences in the last few years with my mum. Everything is stovepiped, and no single authority takes responsiblity for the problem, and doesn't get to go home until its fixed. This is something General Jack Horner gets pissed about and i agree with him.