Single Moms- the root of all our problems..............

[crustylicious]

Wisconsin Bill Claims Single Moms Cause Child Abuse by Not Being Married
http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/wisconsin-bill-claims-single-moms-cause-child-abuse-011200419.html
 
A state senator in Wisconsin says being single causes child abuse and neglect.In Wisconsin, a state senator has introduced a bill aimed at penalizing single mothers by calling their unmarried status a contributing factor in  and neglect.

Senate Bill 507, introduced by Republican Senator Glenn Grothman, moves to amend existing state law by "requiring the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize nonmarital parenthood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect."

The bill would require educational and public awareness campaigns held by the board to emphasize that not being married is abusive and neglectful of children, and to underscore "the role of fathers in the primary prevention of child abuse and neglect."

Saying that people "make fun of old-fashioned families," Grothman -- who has never been married and has no children -- criticized social workers for not agreeing that children should only be raised by two married biological parents, and told a state Senate committee that he hopes the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention board, of which he's a member, could "publicize something that's politically incorrect but has to be said in our society."

"Whether that leads to more people paying attention and having children after they're married or whether that leads to some others making a choice for adoptions," he said.

A third of all parents in Wisconsin are single. Given that single mothers far outnumber single fathers in the state and in the rest of the country, and given the emphasis on fathers being part of the solution rather than part of the problem, many people feel that the bill is tantamount to an attack on single moms.

At Tuesday's meeting of the state Senate Committee on Public Health, Human Services, and Revenue, lawmakers and members of the public spoke out against the proposal.

"This bill is going to do nothing to help children avoid abuse. It's going to do nothing to help families," Democratic state Representative Chris Taylor said at the meeting. "What this bill does is call out and chastise women who have babies who are unmarried."

Grothman has advanced and supported other policies "that make it harder to access prevention-based health services so that they can prevent pregnancy, so that they're not in a situations here they have an unintended or unwanted pregnancy," Taylor added.

Grothman is also the sponsor of Wisconsin State Bill 202, which would repeal the state's Equal Pay Enforcement Act. Last year he claimed in an essay that the "Left and the social welfare establishment want children born out of wedlock because they are far more likely to be dependent on the government."

In "How The United States and The State of Wisconsin Are Working to Encourage Single Motherhood and Discouraging Children in 2-Parent Families," he wrote that the government urges women not to get married by making programs like low-income housing assistance, school choice, WIC, tax credits, and food stamps more attractive than marriage.

His solution? Restrict the types of foods that can be purchased with food stamps, make Section 8 housing more cramped and limit the value of assets owned living there to $2,000, and eliminate school choice, among other things. "It is inexcusable that a single mother making $15,000 gets her kid out of the Milwaukee Public Schools but a married couple earning $50,000 is stuck in the public schools," he wrote. "It is also somewhat outrageous that some married couples feel they can only afford one or two children in part because they are paying excessive taxes to provide programs for someone else to have four or five children.

Edward Kuharski of Madison, Wisconsin, spoke out against the bill, calling it "off target."

"I don't understand a bill that's just about stating an opinion," he said, "and that appears to be the entire purpose of this bill, simply to assert an opinion and impose it upon an expert body that knows perfectly well how to do its business."

"Senator Grothman has no experience in parenting," Kuharski pointed out. "The contribution of institutional increase in neglect and abuse of children … has nothing to do with what you learned in Sunday school. Nothing. Before you put a larger target on the back of the people that you have attacked through many other bills, stop and take some responsibility for it."

[Swift One]

While I agree that both parents should be present in the rearing of a child, getting that passed would be not only wrong, but would open a whole host of nasty doors that the welfare dept could play with single moms.  It's not always the woman's fault why she is a single mom.

[guzzijohn]

This bill would mostly be a "Feel Good" bit of legislation and would not be effective. The courts would probably have a field day with it. A case in point. Last year at one of the high schools I work at a young school counselor lost her husband to a sudden medical condition when she was about six months pregnant. Should she have gave her child up for adoption?
GuzziJohn

[Dixie Dude]

While studies have shown that children raised by both biological parents do better in school and achieve more in life.  They get into less trouble, etc.  However, this is a bad bill.  Making the biological father take more responsibility, like getting the kids more often and spending time with them, etc would be more beneficial.  Boys raised without fathers like in the welfare neighborhoods, don't really know how to be men and take care of their woman, children, etc.  They do not have role models, other than sports figures, pimps, or drug dealers.  Two out of three being bad.  Requiring DNA testing, identifying fathers, and making them pay child support and be a father to the kids, might make them use condoms and cut down on some of this. 
 
My ex left me for another, and I was left to raise my children.  I took them to church, and tried to do both jobs for 8 years until I met my current wife.  My mother helped when she could, as well as church friends and neighbors, especially when I was working.  My oldest two girls got married real quick after high school.  I sometimes think to keep from being a mother to the younger ones.  My oldest is 32 and will finish college this May to be a teacher.  I had 7 kids.  My youngest 4 do not want any kids because they see how hard it was for me.  The younger ones will not have anything to do with their mother.  Hmmm. 

[guzzijohn]

Quote from Dixie Dude:
"They do not have role models, other than sports figures, pimps, or drug dealers.  Two out of three being bad."


In some cases above it is three out of three.
GuzziJohn

[Dixie Dude]

Yep, you're right.  Some get into all kinds of trouble.

[Lon371]

While I agree that both parents should be present in the rearing of a child, getting that passed would be not only wrong, but would open a whole host of nasty doors that the welfare dept could play with single moms.  It's not always the woman's fault why she is a single mom.

Agreed.
 

[blind ear]

While I agree that both parents should be present in the rearing of a child, getting that passed would be not only wrong, but would open a whole host of nasty doors that the welfare dept could play with single moms.  It's not always the woman's fault why she is a single mom.

Agreed.

For all those that are not married at the time of conception or have never been married, BS! If she won't use birth control she should practice abstinence. I would be willing to bet the greatest percentage would fall into the "not married at the time" catagory. ear 

[BBF]

That Bill won't even come out of the hangar.

[DDZ]

Since when has a government bill fixed any social problem? With the socialists creating the entitlement society, instead of supporting the traditional family, they have created their ticket to power. What other better way to get more people dependent on government than to attack the traditional family. Works out great for government when 7 out of 10 black babies are born to single parents out of wedlock, and 4 in 10 white babies. There is a list of ways the socialists have broke this country down, and the big one is attacking the traditional family, because the traditional family is the foundation of this country.
 Even the idea of a introducing a bill by government to fix a social problem is a joke. The problem is that government created the problem in the first place. Its what our government has become good at.

[Swift One]

abstinence

I thought this word was removed from the english dictionary due to lack of use and or practice.....LOL.  Come on man.  I agree if you are going to play, then use protection if you are not trying to have a kid.  But, people are going to bump uglies.  And there shouldnt be some bill out dmaning people for doing it.  What's next? Passing out chastity belts and applying for a sex permit so it can be unlocked by the sex police?

[blind ear]

While I agree that both parents should be present in the rearing of a child, getting that passed would be not only wrong, but would open a whole host of nasty doors that the welfare dept could play with single moms.  It's not always the woman's fault why she is a single mom.

No government money for her or for the child.  If SHE weren't guaranteed free government money she might suddenly get a lot smarter.
Just like Mexican workers that don't understand English. Tell them the dammage is comeing out of thier check and they suddenly understand.
I feel the same way about farmers getting paid "not to grow crops". ear