CDZ Meth addict, 7 kids, all with developmental issues. Did 'The System' fail her?

[Toronado3800]

The child of a meth addict was tested at clinic where my wife works. The woman has 7 kids and all of them have varying degrees of mental and physical problems. The child tested at the clinic had a profound hearing loss in addition to being developmentally delayed. The woman has been in and out of drug treatment centers for at least 10 years. She has lost custody of the kids at this point, but that hardly solves anything. This woman and her kids will most likely be burdens on society and other people for there entire lives. Maybe a miracle will happen and they will all be fine but that is not the likely outcome. My question for debate is "What should our health care or legal system have done differently with this woman?" More aggressive drug abuse treatment? Cut off her welfare? Put her in a mental hospital? Put her in prison? Tie her tubes? Nothing? Something else?

I assume the treatment centers tried to help her, but that didn't work, obviously. Consider the human cost and millions of dollars in treatment and therapy this family will consume during their lifetimes. It's almost mind boggling what a bottomless pit of despair this woman has created. IMO after child number 2, her tubes should have been tied along with more aggressive drug treatment. In other words "either stay clean or go to prison". I don't see any other way to limit the damage. What would you do here? This is a tragedy and I'm sure there are women like her in every city.

She lost welfare, more than likely, after she lost her kids. She should have been sterilized after the first one.

Right now the mantra is not to lock these people up. There is no aggressive treatment. I don't care what you do or how much you do or how much you care there has to be desire to get clean and stay clean. If that doesn't exist then there is nothing that can be done until that individual finds it--and that is only if that individual had no other psychiatric needs. We don't know that. Treatment centers provide tools but they can't do that work for them and that is an inside thing.

There were the same issues when there was a crack epidemic. Then there was a study that said the "damage" done to the children was inconclusive. The rest of the world was like, how do you not see this? You could find a mom w/ 12 kids.

I see your point. But man, sterilization clinics ran by big government are a step further than I am willing to go.

Pay them to get sterilized. $300

What government agency would you like to put in charge of this?

Ever seen this?
Project Prevention - Children Requiring a Caring Community

Now she goes cross country.
Woman traveling country paying drug addicts to get vasectomies, tubes tied

Here is one that was back in '99
Cash-for-Sterilization Plan Draws Addicts and Critics

The second one I was familiar with or at least saw a snippet on tv about a similar thing.

I'll say if anyone voluntarily wants to get their tubs tied or whatever god bless them. I'll also say Idiocracy, Failure to Launch and Wallee all have large amounts of truth to them so I understand the motivation of deciding who should get their tubes tied.

Following is a trick question of sorts....maybe a loaded question.

In your opinion should the government have an agency of tube tying? If not Washington, maybe at the state or local level? Maybe under the State Department of Corrections where jails tie tubes?

 

[Disir]

She lost welfare, more than likely, after she lost her kids. She should have been sterilized after the first one.

Right now the mantra is not to lock these people up. There is no aggressive treatment. I don't care what you do or how much you do or how much you care there has to be desire to get clean and stay clean. If that doesn't exist then there is nothing that can be done until that individual finds it--and that is only if that individual had no other psychiatric needs. We don't know that. Treatment centers provide tools but they can't do that work for them and that is an inside thing.

There were the same issues when there was a crack epidemic. Then there was a study that said the "damage" done to the children was inconclusive. The rest of the world was like, how do you not see this? You could find a mom w/ 12 kids.

I see your point. But man, sterilization clinics ran by big government are a step further than I am willing to go.

Pay them to get sterilized. $300

What government agency would you like to put in charge of this?

Ever seen this?
Project Prevention - Children Requiring a Caring Community

Now she goes cross country.
Woman traveling country paying drug addicts to get vasectomies, tubes tied

Here is one that was back in '99
Cash-for-Sterilization Plan Draws Addicts and Critics

The second one I was familiar with or at least saw a snippet on tv about a similar thing.

I'll say if anyone voluntarily wants to get their tubs tied or whatever god bless them. I'll also say Idiocracy, Failure to Launch and Wallee all have large amounts of truth to them so I understand the motivation of deciding who should get their tubes tied.

Following is a trick question of sorts....maybe a loaded question.

In your opinion should the government have an agency of tube tying? If not Washington, maybe at the state or local level? Maybe under the State Department of Corrections where jails tie tubes?

I don't think you can do it at the State Department of Corrections.
Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535 (1942)

But, this is interesting:
Oklahoma woman gets shorter prison sentence because she got sterilized

Given the US history of eugenics, probably not or definitely not in any way, shape or form in the manner it was. Providing funding in the form of grants....something to look into. Even if the money was placed in a government agency say the health department and the surgery done at a local clinic might be acceptable.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them. In the case of this meth head, she not only was an unfit mother, the kids were born with irreversible defects. I have exactly the same opinion for 3rd world mothers, yet when I brought that up for discussion awhile I was attacked for being some sort of Nazi.
Is this just pure emotion over-riding logic and reason?

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them.

Do you believe (based on having soundly confirmed as much) existential unfitness to have/parent children is irrevocable? If so, I understand your having the lack of comprehension you attest to having.

 

[Disir]

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them. In the case of this meth head, she not only was an unfit mother, the kids were born with irreversible defects. I have exactly the same opinion for 3rd world mothers, yet when I brought that up for discussion awhile I was attacked for being some sort of Nazi.
Is this just pure emotion over-riding logic and reason?

Because of the history of eugenics, forced sterilization is anathema. Hitler admired the US eugenics programs. Indiana passed the first law in 1907. People will never move beyond that, nor should they.

 

[MarathonMike]

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them. In the case of this meth head, she not only was an unfit mother, the kids were born with irreversible defects. I have exactly the same opinion for 3rd world mothers, yet when I brought that up for discussion awhile I was attacked for being some sort of Nazi.
Is this just pure emotion over-riding logic and reason?

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them.

Do you believe (based on having soundly confirmed as much) existential unfitness to have/parent children is irrevocable? If so, I understand your having the lack of comprehension you attest to having.

Like most things involving human behavior, there are no absolutes. Sure maybe some small fraction of self destructive people manage a complete turnaround in their life to the point where they would be responsible parents.

So for the promise of that one person in 10 (or 20 or 50?) that pulls off the miracle, let's do nothing and allow these people to have all the kids they want. Who cares about the consequences to the kids they have and the incredible burdens they create for the State. Two kids just isn't enough they have to be able to have as many as they want. That is your stance, correct?

 

[usmbguest5318]

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them. In the case of this meth head, she not only was an unfit mother, the kids were born with irreversible defects. I have exactly the same opinion for 3rd world mothers, yet when I brought that up for discussion awhile I was attacked for being some sort of Nazi.
Is this just pure emotion over-riding logic and reason?

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them.

Do you believe (based on having soundly confirmed as much) existential unfitness to have/parent children is irrevocable? If so, I understand your having the lack of comprehension you attest to having.

Like most things involving human behavior, there are no absolutes. Sure maybe some small fraction of self destructive people manage a complete turnaround in their life to the point where they would be responsible parents.

So for the promise of that one person in 10 (or 20 or 50?) that pulls off the miracle, let's do nothing and allow these people to have all the kids they want. Who cares about the consequences to the kids they have and the incredible burdens they create for the State. Two kids just isn't enough they have to be able to have as many as they want. That is your stance, correct?

I'm going to respond to a bit of your post above, but, frankly, would you please just directly answer the questions I asked earlier? CDZ - Meth addict, 7 kids, all with developmental issues. Did 'The System' fail her? It'd be far easier to discuss this matter were we both equipped with the answers. How substantive can a conversation be when you have pertinent information you've not shared with the rest of us? If you don't have the info, fine, you don't, but if you do, we don't, and you don't share the info, the contextual "playing field" isn't level, so to speak.

maybe some small fraction of self destructive people manage a complete turnaround in their life to the point where they would be responsible parents.

A "complete turnaround" and a turnaround "to the point where," aka enough of a turnaround, aren't the same things.

for the promise of that one person in 10 (or 20 or 50?) that pulls off the miracle, let's do nothing and allow these people to have all the kids they want.

I really don't know what be the effective recovery rate of meth addicts; I haven't sought any studies on the matter. It could as well be 1:2, 1:5, 1:10, 1:100, or any number of other rates. Do you?

 

[MarathonMike]

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them. In the case of this meth head, she not only was an unfit mother, the kids were born with irreversible defects. I have exactly the same opinion for 3rd world mothers, yet when I brought that up for discussion awhile I was attacked for being some sort of Nazi.
Is this just pure emotion over-riding logic and reason?

I will never understand why people are so aghast at the idea of sterilization for people who have ALREADY HAD KIDS and proven they are not fit to have them.

Do you believe (based on having soundly confirmed as much) existential unfitness to have/parent children is irrevocable? If so, I understand your having the lack of comprehension you attest to having.

Like most things involving human behavior, there are no absolutes. Sure maybe some small fraction of self destructive people manage a complete turnaround in their life to the point where they would be responsible parents.

So for the promise of that one person in 10 (or 20 or 50?) that pulls off the miracle, let's do nothing and allow these people to have all the kids they want. Who cares about the consequences to the kids they have and the incredible burdens they create for the State. Two kids just isn't enough they have to be able to have as many as they want. That is your stance, correct?

I'm going to respond to a bit of your post above, but, frankly, would you please just directly answer the questions I asked earlier? CDZ - Meth addict, 7 kids, all with developmental issues. Did 'The System' fail her? It'd be far easier to discuss this matter were we both equipped with the answers. How substantive can a conversation be when you have pertinent information you've not shared with the rest of us? If you don't have the info, fine, you don't, but if you do, we don't, and you don't share the info, the contextual "playing field" isn't level, so to speak.

maybe some small fraction of self destructive people manage a complete turnaround in their life to the point where they would be responsible parents.

A "complete turnaround" and a turnaround "to the point where," aka enough of a turnaround, aren't the same things.

for the promise of that one person in 10 (or 20 or 50?) that pulls off the miracle, let's do nothing and allow these people to have all the kids they want.

I really don't know what be the effective recovery rate of meth addicts; I haven't sought any studies on the matter. It could as well be 1:2, 1:5, 1:10, 1:100, or any number of other rates. Do you?

I didn't realize my OP was so confusing. Allow me to summarize it just to the key points.

1. The Meth Addict is the mother of the 7 kids all with mental and physical problems, not my wife.

2. Her 7 kids are in the custody of other people.

3. She has been through drug rehab several times over a period of 10 years during which time she had the six youngest kids.

You parsed my last response but did not answer the question, which was:

"Two kids just isn't enough, they (addicts) have to be able to have as many (kids) as they want. That is your stance, correct?"