Thursday, March 3, 2011

Why would you ask THAT question?

On the ninemsn home page there was a poll asking this question:

Should the number of kids removed from at-risk homes be capped?

My first thought was "why on earth would anyone even ask the question" so I went looking.

A quick google turned up the following:

Burney slams Liberal's `cap' for vulnerable children

COMMUNITY Services minister Linda Burney has slammed the Liberal Party’s plan to cap the number of children taken into care.

She said the policy would place the most vulnerable children in society in extreme danger.

``Barry O’Farrell is putting kids lives at risk to save a buck,’’ Ms Burney said.

``It is one thing to talk about savings through job cuts, but to attempt to save money by returning children to where they have been abused or neglected beggars belief.

``When I heard of the Liberals plan it sickened me.’‘

This morning, it was revealed the NSW Liberals plan to cap the number of children taken into care for the next four years.

After which, they plan to reduce the number of children in care by 20 per cent.

``Keeping children safe should be the first consideration of any policy on child protection.

``At present, trained and experienced caseworkers and the court system make the decisions regarding the removal of kids based on what is in the best interests of the child.’‘

Under the Liberals for former abusive parents to get their child back, they would have to sign a contract saying they no longer have a drug or alcohol problem and have not committed an act of domestic violence for two years.




While I have issues with people wanting the .gov to parent their (or others) children I have even greater problems with a proposal to "cap the number of children taken into care".

One would hope that they're are only taking children who need to be "rescued" into care and if this is the case then how do you "cap" it?

I also think that asking parents to sign a contract is just ridiculous.

I'm not sure what the intent of the proposal is. If it is to "save money" then I could think of a lot of other things that should be considered before this. If it is to bring about some social change then I don't think it will achieve anything at all.

What do you think?


jon spencer said...

Here in the states to cap means to shoot them.

Old NFO said...

I think it's unbelievable... When money becomes the driver, the children are truly the losers!!!

Aileen said...

Like you I can't believe you'd need to ask the question!

AnniesArtifacting said...

Sounds like a money saving scheme by the government to me, but I live in PA the one state that is advertised as "THE BEST WELFARE BENEFITS IN the US" in the Airport in Peurto Rico, in English and I'm not sure of anything that the government runs anymore... Ours is so corrupt, it's scary... It's come down to voting for the least scummy candidate in our elections.....ugh...