Wednesday, October 05, 2005
A Reason to Fear Indiana
I know my husband will be annoyed with me for dissing his home state, but COME ON, Scratch, you've gotta agree with me on this one. What is this craziness? Is it 'craziness on purpose' to ensure that the entire bill will not pass? Or are some elected representatives of the people in Indiana that nosey and prejudiced that this seems reasonable? Here are my favorite excerpts of the news story:
A doctor can’t begin an assisted reproduction technology procedure that may result in a child’s being born until the intended parents of the child have received a certificate of satisfactory completion of an assessment required under the bill. Wait, what? So, if you go to the doctor, and you pay with your own money, your doctor cannot help you? Oh, this must be only if you want to use federal funding to help you procreate... no? So you're basically just legislating peoples' private business. WOW.
The assessment is very similar to what is required for infant adoption and would be conducted by a licensed child placing agency in Indiana. Just the idea that single people or homosexuals cannot adopt in Indiana makes my skin crawl. So many children NEED HOMES. Why not help them get nice loving homes? WHY NOT?
Some of the required information includes the fertility history of the parents, education and employment information, hobbies, personality descriptions, verification of marital status, child care plans, letter of reference and criminal history checks. A description of the family lifestyle of the intended parents is also required, including individual participation in faith-based or church activities. So... is going to church enough, or do you also have to volunteer for Market Day?
The thing that bothers me most about this type of legislation is that the people who go to the trouble, time, pain (sometimes), expense, and sacrifice to have a child via adoption or reproductive assistance obviously WANT a child/children. They are prepared for parenting, they know what they are getting into, and they will do anything to get that baby. Why stifle this, especially if it does not affect federal money/grants?
And, to imply that single people should not have children? Shut up. Just, shut up. Will children be removed from homes after a spouse's death? Huh? Grrrrr...
This bill will most likely not reduce child abuse rates, or child abandonment, or child welfare expenditures. This bill will definitely not reduce unwanted pregnancies (that can sometimes lead to the things I just listed.) This bill is just hateful, prejudiced, and a seeming attempt by a politician to play God with the private lives of Americans.
Journal Gazette 10/04/2005 State bill would limit procreation assistance
«
chicago
blogs »
A doctor can’t begin an assisted reproduction technology procedure that may result in a child’s being born until the intended parents of the child have received a certificate of satisfactory completion of an assessment required under the bill. Wait, what? So, if you go to the doctor, and you pay with your own money, your doctor cannot help you? Oh, this must be only if you want to use federal funding to help you procreate... no? So you're basically just legislating peoples' private business. WOW.
The assessment is very similar to what is required for infant adoption and would be conducted by a licensed child placing agency in Indiana. Just the idea that single people or homosexuals cannot adopt in Indiana makes my skin crawl. So many children NEED HOMES. Why not help them get nice loving homes? WHY NOT?
Some of the required information includes the fertility history of the parents, education and employment information, hobbies, personality descriptions, verification of marital status, child care plans, letter of reference and criminal history checks. A description of the family lifestyle of the intended parents is also required, including individual participation in faith-based or church activities. So... is going to church enough, or do you also have to volunteer for Market Day?
The thing that bothers me most about this type of legislation is that the people who go to the trouble, time, pain (sometimes), expense, and sacrifice to have a child via adoption or reproductive assistance obviously WANT a child/children. They are prepared for parenting, they know what they are getting into, and they will do anything to get that baby. Why stifle this, especially if it does not affect federal money/grants?
And, to imply that single people should not have children? Shut up. Just, shut up. Will children be removed from homes after a spouse's death? Huh? Grrrrr...
This bill will most likely not reduce child abuse rates, or child abandonment, or child welfare expenditures. This bill will definitely not reduce unwanted pregnancies (that can sometimes lead to the things I just listed.) This bill is just hateful, prejudiced, and a seeming attempt by a politician to play God with the private lives of Americans.
Journal Gazette 10/04/2005 State bill would limit procreation assistance
Web Counters
