"BIOLOGICAL" AND "EMOTIONAL" PARENTING: three bits from Reason magazine comment thread

1. Vache Folle: The concept of "parental rights" has been eroding steadily for several decades and is giving way to the concept of "best interests of the child". Formerly, children were analogous to property in which parents had rights, and now children are seen as having their own rights and interests to which the parents' rights are subservient. In a way, the state is becoming the parent of every child, and the biological or adoptive parents are simply permitted to care for the child by sufferance. If this trend continues, it may be possible for anyone to seek custody of or visitation with any child where it can be argued that the child's interests are at stake.

The problematic aspect of this trend is the increased power of the state to intervene in the parent child relationship and what were traditionally private domestic affairs. The cost of doing justice to this woman and this child in cases like the one cited may be too high in terms of the erosion of privacy and individual liberty.

2. joe: The need to have bright line between a non-biological parent, and everyone else, is yet another reason why the states need to recognize some kind of legal status for gay couples.

3. RC Dean [excerpt]: ... [quoting the original post:] We know that "being a parent" isn't about the biological relationship, but the emotional relationship.

Tell that to all the fathers out there who are being stuck with child support for children who they have no contact with, many times because the court prohibits them from having any contact. Of course, this is the mirror image of the above situation, because the man is charged with parental responsibilities without having parental rights.

thread is here
posted by Eve at 6:36 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home