Children's referendum, have decided to vote, No

It seems a waste of money to be campaigning/postering on low turnout sure thing.

Has any political party come out looking for a no vote?
 
I haven't heard anyone campaigning against it either. This is the quietest campaign I have ever encountered.
 
The fact that so many children have died in state care is a good reason to vote yes. The reason so many of these children remain in state care instead of being adopted by people who really want children and can provide them with a good home is because currently natural parents have all the rights and the children have none. Therefore, no matter how hopeless or dysfunctional the parents, they have the absolute right to remain their child's legal parents no matter how detrimental to the child. Therefore, if the child has to be removed from the family home the only alternatives are foster care or institutionalised care. Foster care is obviously a good short term arrangement in a situation where a family is in temporary difficulties and just need some support and help. It is not a good long term arrangement and just leaves a child in a type of limbo where they grow up with no security, often frequent changes of foster parents, and being moved backwards and forwards at the whim of their natural parents who are often completely incapable of looking after their child properly.
 
A child of 6 was fostered by a family friend,she stayed with them until she was 18,during that time they got a payment to help towards having the extra child in their home,they could not afford to adopt her even if that had been available to them.
They are not moved back and forward at the whim of the natural parents rather its the whim of the case social worker..
There seems to be this idea ,that having children adopted will solve all problems...it wont work,heres why:

Lets be clear ,how many prospective parents willing to adopt, will adopt any child over the age of 3? Very few Id imagine..most of those who wish to adopt want a baby..

Those who are presently fostering children ,get two things ,state "support" and payment..
Of those who are presently fostering , a lot are depending on the income to help pay for the extra child/children.

I dont think there will be the mad rush to adopt these kids, so where does that leave the kids whom have been told they would be adopted/ordered by the high court to be adopted?
There are constantly ads placed in newspapers looking for foster carers.Yet we have people travelling to China Romania etc to adopt a baby,because thats what they want ,a baby..

What about the kids who have been with the same foster family for many years,yet the family cant afford to adopt them.Do they get put up for adoption by another family who can afford to have them?

How will they feel about that? How will a family who have had a child with them for years feel when they and the child knows that adoption is an option,yet the family cant afford to act on it.
So in my opinion its unworkable..on so many fronts,adoption option being one,but number one,is the messy state of how cases are sorted,and the many cases where social workers have failed many many times is another.
Get the service sorted,the social workers on board and then we will make progress ,adding more rules to an already jammed up system which clearly isnt working,and where what is already there is not being implemented,is just adding on for the sake of it!
 
And those friends, who parented that child throughout her childhood, and beyond (I hope they didn't stop when the cheques stopped), couldn't apply for a passport for her or act as medical next of kin.

As for how will a child feel about being removed from foster carers to carers who can provide a home regardless of payment - at least that voice will be heard should this amendment be passed.
 
To be honest, Thedaras, I think there are situations where children below 3 should be put up for adoption with or without their parents' consent. I am talking obviously about extreme cases where, even if the natural parents do eventually sort themselves out, it would take so long the child would already be damaged by years of insecurity and trauma. If someone is totally incapable of looking after their baby, has multiple issues and addictions and is totally dysfunctional then their child shouldn't have to wait for 4-5 years before social workers can be allowed make the decision that the baby would be better off being adopted.
I know I will probably be lambasted for that opinion but I think its so unfair that a child has to suffer and possibly never get a real chance in life because of a reluctance to inflict hardship on the parents (with whom I would have sympathy but not enough to think they're 'entitled' to remain the legal parents of a baby they haven't a chance of looking after properly for a long, long time)
 
liaconn said:
To be honest, Thedaras, I think there are situations where children below 3 should be put up for adoption with or without their parents' consent.
Click to expand...

I agree. There are plenty of parents out there who cannot/will not bring up their children in a safe and loving environment. I don't think we are talking about a HSE police force here removing children out of the home on a whim or over a minor issue. We are talking about children being abused and/or being grossly neglected. Even in such cases, the right for another couple to adopt said children will be a lengthy process anyway. In all matters, it should, IMO, simply come down to what's best for the child. I think this is a positve move for our country and will be internationally recognised as such (even if the support systems behind it are presently insufficient).
 
I have read all the responses,and I have to admit Im tempted to go down the Yes road..
I have no doubt that it will be passed..

I suppose I just wish that the system was better ,that it would be enforced correctly and that the safe guards that we already have ,were in fact correctly implemented.
Having read a lot about it and listened to the various debates and responses on here,I think on balance and looking at who the yes voters are,I think I have changed my mind..not 100 %.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top