# Very strange new law...



## BioHazardCustoms (Aug 5, 2009)

Saw this and thought it might be a good idea to share. Sorry if political news is a no no.

Wisconsin Lawmaker Introduces Law To Classify Single Parenthood As Child Abuse


----------



## RoxyBlue (Oct 6, 2008)

The man is clearly an idiot. Also bigoted and offensive, but I digress.


----------



## BioHazardCustoms (Aug 5, 2009)

His logic is definitely "unique". I wonder how much he had to drink/smoke/inject before he drafted the bill? 

Coming from a single parent household until I was 13, I personally think I turned out pretty good. My mother worked two jobs to provide for my sister and I, up until she met the man I consider my dad now, just so she wouldn't have to take any kind of assistance from the state. I spent a lot of time with my grandparents, aunts and uncles, but that was okay, too. This law is extremely bigoted towards the single parent who actually tries to provide for their children, instead of going to a state office and holding out a hand. I am 33 years old and could not, if my life depended on it, describe a "food stamp" to you. I have never seen one, nor a welfare check. I did learn from an early age to get an education and work hard, though.


----------



## Troll Wizard (May 3, 2012)

Just what this country would need, another law. A stupid one at that. So now if your married or have a partner and they die or go through a divorce then your now labeled a child abuser if you have children? I mean really? Come on!!!! There are enough problems in this country with people just trying to get by, to feed their families let alone some stupid ignorant law like this!!!!

So here we go, your out TOT'ing with your children and you knock on a door. Someone answers and knows that you are single parent with children. Now if they wanted to they would have the ability to call the police and report you because your single and have children then you may be a child abuser. The police show up at your home with child services and the option of taking your children away and your going to jail for child abuse! Not even knowing reason behind why you may be single. 

There is enough problems in this world already with child abuse from people who are couples, let alone people who are single and abuse children. I would hope the governing people in that state would have enough smarts to turn down this farce of a law. Where in the world do people come up with these things anyway?


----------



## typoagain (Feb 27, 2012)

I have spent some time in the Single parent group-as both a child and a parent.

Sometimes it is the best choice. But I think that he is simply trying to bring attention to the growing number of people who desire to be single patents from the get to.

While some parents make good single parents, the fact is that many, many studies support the stand that a child is much better off with an intact, two parent family.

I have family members that have chosen to be single parents. They can't support themselves, but they want to have kids. One of the actually has three kids and has never held a job for more than 6 months. She has been unemployed for 80% of her adult life and lives off government handouts and charity.

All she is doing is exactly what her mother did-living off the government. So when her kids grow up, what do you think they are going to do?

Research says that odd are they will do the same thing.

While I do not agree with what the guy is doing, he does have a point.


----------



## Blackrose1978 (Aug 13, 2011)

Great under this law I would be classified a child abuser since me and my kids dad never got married after my divorce was final from my first husband, yet we have been together for over 13 years.


----------



## Frighteners Entertainment (Jan 24, 2006)

Horse poo poo. 
I want to know how these types of people get into office?


----------



## Terrormaster (Sep 27, 2007)

I think you make a valid point typo. It's always the people that are abusing the system that make things difficult for those who aren't. I can definitely see a law like this targeting those who WANT to be single parents and mooch off the government. This country is in enough debt and we don't need to flip the bill for freeloaders. There are good and honest people who do need government assistance, nothing wrong with that. But the problem with this particular law is that it also lumps those who were thrust into single parenthood by circumstances out of their control into the same pool as those who are abusing it which is completely unfair. 

And sometimes marriages just don't work out even with mediation. I've always been of the opinion that if the parents are not happy the kids are not happy. You can't love others if you can't love yourself. Staying together "for the sake of the kids" has never sat right with me. In the end its the kids who suffer. And the way this law is setup it seems he believes in just that, "staying together for the sake of the kids". Because the only two other choices are child abuse or adultery.

"Big head and little arms... Anyone think this through?!" Apparently not.


----------



## Hairazor (Mar 13, 2012)

Usually it is the mother who ends up as the "single" parent, would the father also be guilty of abuse?


----------



## BioHazardCustoms (Aug 5, 2009)

This story kept me up pretty late last night. I had some unique thoughts on it:

1. What's next? Saying that because someone has been convicted of a crime that they are also guilty of child abuse/neglect because they went to jail?

2. Why not target the ones who abuse the government assistance programs, and require them to submit to regular/random drug testing? You have to take a drug test to get a job, most of the time, so if your paycheck is a welfare check, shouldn't you also have to submit to testing?

3. He says he believes in "old-fashioned family dynamic" So basically, if someone doesn't believe exactly as he does, they're guilty of child abuse? Sorry, I think that's a violation of the first amendment, specifically freedom of religion, because you're imposing your religious beliefs and values upon another person.

4. We all know that this law is meant to target same-sex couples, parents who abuse the government assistance programs, and people with problem children. The way it is worded, though, also attacks hard working Americans, widows/widowers, and parents who bust their chops and don't get to see their kids as often as they'd like because they're trying to make a good life for those children. This is a blanket law that will attack loving parents as much as neglectful parents, which in the end is unfair to the children. All this law will accomplish is to create a very large number of wards to the state, in a system that is already overflowing with foster children who are forgotten by a state that really doesn't care about them.

5. I think that before the state places a child or parent under this law, the state should have to show proof of the totality of the circumstances, i.e. documentation of abuse/neglect, a proven history of inappropriate/ unacceptable behavior on the part of the child or the parent, record of the child lashing out or committing a crime, etc. Don't just go in and take someone's kid away because they don't have a spouse. 

6. This law opens a lot of very bad doors. What if the single parent divorced a cop for abuse? First thing that will happen is that cop's buddies will come in and take the kid from the single parent, citing abuse due to divorce. This opens the door to many cases of abuse of authority, in my opinion.


----------



## Spooky1 (Aug 25, 2008)

My first thought was, this bill would make a widowed parent a child abuser? Who elected this guy into office?


----------



## niblique71 (Dec 2, 2009)

BioHazardCustoms said:


> His logic is definitely "unique". I wonder how much he had to drink/smoke/inject before he drafted the bill?


I don't know about the Drinking or Injecting part, but if he'd smoked something natural he might have just said the heck with it. That Single parent family is doing Fine..... Or at least the best that they can.

here's the Thing which we are all endanger of. Government intrusion is the new wave of politics.

Nah I thought better of the rest of my comments.... I erased them... Wrong forum.


----------



## Dark Angel 27 (Sep 11, 2008)

Seriously? 

While, I'm all for a strong family dynamic, and see the value of a good stable home life, I'm strongly gonna disagree with this bill. It is stupid. My best friend is a single mother of three. She does a good job raising them and works her ass off to provide for them. 

She's in no way abusive. That doesn't make her a child abuser.


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

RoxyBlue said:


> The man is clearly an idiot. Also bigoted and offensive, but I digress.


Calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots. I am the product of a single parent...and I certainly was never abused. Well, I didn't get that pony for Christmas, and there is my odd fascination with the devils holiday....


----------



## Zurgh (Dec 21, 2009)

Clearly, that Senator needs more fiber, and possibly more lead and mercury in his diet...


----------



## typoagain (Feb 27, 2012)

*Slippen' the clutch*

I don't think he is specifically targeting same sex couples. I think he is after single moms. 

I am a pediatric nurse in a county that has one of the highest teen-age pregnancy rates in the country. I see easily fifty times as many single moms as same sex couples. 

Heck, among one racial group in the US, about 80% of the kids born last year were to single moms. 

In my area, around 75% of all kids are on Medicaid. Most of these kids will end up having kids themselves who will be raised by a single parent.
However, I think the point about a widower being am abusive parent under this law is a very good point. So many times politicians have overlooked the effects their great ideas will have.

For example, our current administration has passed an executive order allowing illegal young adults to have a pathway to citizenship. But in order to get it they have to report to the governmentcertain facts. Included in this are places of former employment-as in all the people who have employed them illegally. 

They have to show all income-much of which will be improperly taxed for the last 5 years. 

So when they turn over all the information of companies or individuals who are committing crimes, what is the government supposed to do? Nothing?

But if they ignore it, then they are not checking out if the people's claims are true. What are the guidelines for checking out and verifying this information?

This law has not been thought out at all. And the healthcare law is am even bigger mess.

So as my Grandad used to say, _"Here we have another politician slippin' the clutch on his mouth without puttin' his brain in gear."_


----------



## Spooky1 (Aug 25, 2008)

If this became law, I'm curious what would happen once a single parent was labeled a child abuser? Would the state then come in and take the children away and put them into foster care or orphanages?


----------



## BioHazardCustoms (Aug 5, 2009)

The way the law is written, the parent would face a fine, and possible jail time.

typoagain, I read the actual bill, and the way it's written, it targets single parents, same-sex couples, and any other combination that isn't dad+mom+kids.It is a bigoted law that targets anyone who doesn't believe the same way as the writer of the law. It infringes on a person's first amendment right to freedom of religion, as well as a person's freedom of choice. IF it passes into law, it will cause more problems than it is meant to solve. Whether this politician realizes it or not, some single parent situations are better than the traditional family dynamic he is trying to enforce with this law. 

Basically, it states that if a man and a woman get a divorce, they better both remarry almost immediately, or face charges of child abuse and neglect. The law does not care what the reason for divorce, only that there be a two parent dynamic restored. So, if a man is abusive to the point that his wife divorces him, he better marry another woman and start beating on her, so that his kids learn that behavior. If a woman sleeps with every man in town and her husband divorces her for it, she better marry one of the men she's sleeping with so she doesn't lose her kids. The logic behind this law makes no sense. It's meant to lower the rate of divorces, and also to keep people from drawing welfare/state assistance to help them raise their children, but it will cause more problems for the state than it cures.


----------



## Terrormaster (Sep 27, 2007)

Also, for a lot of the reasons BioHazardCustoms has pointed out, this law promotes adultery. Basically saying that if you divorce you better find someone right away or you're a child abuser. Lets flip this around the other way from BioHazardCustoms' example. Woman is abused by husband; divorces husband and wants the kids. This woman best be remarrying soon or she could loose her kids to the state or her abusive ex. Now with that in mind she's going to be looking out for the best interest for her kid(s). If she has any common sense she's going to look for someone better than the ex. And that doesn't always fall into place right away. That next significant other has to connect with not just her but her kids. That takes time. And the only way for that to work in time enough to skirt this crazy law would be to have an affair while still married to the jerk bag. An affair, which would not only potentially traumatize the kids, but give the jerk more ammo to use against her during the divorce. It's just not well thought out at all.


----------



## typoagain (Feb 27, 2012)

BioHazardCustoms said:


> Basically, it states that if a man and a woman get a divorce, they better both remarry almost immediately, or face charges of child abuse and neglect.


 

So I did a little reading tonight and I fear that you have gotten just a bit off target.
 

The proposed law, Senate Bill 507, specifically requires _"the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize no marital parenthoodas a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect."_

Sadly, studies have shown that children raised in homes with single parents and non-traditional families *ARE* more prone to being subject to abuse and neglect. It does not say that single parents, etc. are in fact abusive, or that the child is being subjected to abuse. 

Personally, I think that it has more to do with other social and economic factors than if your parents are married.

Anyway, under the proposed law being a single parent does not mean you are guilty of child abuse. But it does say that the government has to consider the fact that statistically the child is at a greater risk of being subjected to abuse and/or neglect.

What I don't understand is just what this guy is try to accomplish with this law? That, my friend is the big question.

However, I still think that the law has some major flaws in that it can allow a LOT of abuse of the overloaded and under-funded system that we have to protect our children.


----------

