Lethal Injection Under Fire Again

[Occhidiangela]

Ah, but the issue then arises as to whether or not the parents are competent enough to dole out such judgements.  What about the parents who are otherwise incapacitated? (Perhaps those waiting in the padded confines of death row isolationism?) The parents who aren't there, and who shuttle the kids off to the grandparents'/aunt or uncle's/other relative's house?  There are an infinite amount of variable that could stem from every possible circumstance, which is why I think the Constitution is a bit vague.

If the parents are unable to make sound decisions as to the welfare of their children, what then?
[right][snapback]107338[/snapback][/right]

Why is a parent presumed incompetent by participants in this conversation? It seems to me that a rather large urban myth is overtaking the mundane reality. The presumption of inadequacy smacks of an assumption that the writer, or the "authority," is wiser and more competent than the postulated "parent."

As to the Constitution, it didn't get into child rearing. As I see it, it was presumed by the Founders that people would raise their children, and that is wasn't the government's business to get into their knickers about it. Raising the "Constitution" in this context is a red herring. As I understand the issue, most of the statutes on "child" issues are codified at the State rather than Federal level, but I may be wrong on that.

The overbearing interference of The State is a by product of the Progressive and Socialist movements in the modern context, however, a case could be made that in morally based societies, which the U.S. no longer is, "everyone" got involved in the rearing of children. Certain norms and taboos were rarely violated, due to the force of morals, or cultural norms.

Back to the modern world. Once child labor issues were being addressed, during the industrial revolution, that concern, coupled with "what to do with orphans" was used as the thin end of the wedge to put "The State" into a Paternalistic or Maternalistic role -- we now live with the various attempts to replace parents by "the all wise and all knowing experts." Who are these people, and what is their aim? Where does this core idea come from, that children are the property and wards of the state? The economies of scale are logically used for public education. Benefit, or another thin end of another wedge?

What preconceived ideas must one harbor about "parents" to presume that "they" won't or don't care enough to raise their children? I smell an example of a modest sample size being used to feed a generalization.

Occhi