With so many changes to our family structures in todays society are we moving in the right direction, does the law do enough to protect our children from abuse, spousal abuse of women & men and why men refuse to report it. Any views or vents concerning all areas of todays family.

Tough questions, Iodine.

"Does the law do enough?"

or

"Are we enforcing the laws well enough?"


In other words, would the laws be effective if we didn't interpret and enforce them so liberally?



Edit to correct spelling of "tough". I had "Touight" - what the heck it that?

This post has been edited by JohnWho: Aug 29 2007, 07:31 PM

It appears to me as a very viable topic to discuss.

But might be incorporated under another topic title - IDK

I also agree this topic is very interesting to discuss,and deserves it's own Forum with sub titles.
Possibly with a Forum title, say 'Family Issues' Just my thoughts.
Excellent 'Iodine'

always an interesting subject for discussion

I guess the first thing we need to do is define "family structure", for the family seems to be an endangered species in America. And we've been moving in the wrong direction for a couple of decades now.

As for "laws protecting children" whatever happened to parents protecting children? It isn't the job of society as a whole to raise everyone's kids. It's the responsibility of the people responsible for those kids being here in the first place. It falls under the concept of personal responsibility a phrase that is anathema to Linerals. Liberals that are the direct cause of so many of the problems that exist in today's society.

I was raised in a household in which my father went to work each day, and my mother managed the household and dealt with the problems that my brothers and I could create. And that was the norm at the time. There were a few kids that were missing a parent, and we always felt a little sorry for them. Today, however, such a household is rare indeed - and others seem to feel that such a household is in some way wrong.

Now, until the sixties American women were quite satisfied with their role as nurturer, accountant, budget specialist, and all of the other hats they wore in keeping the household functioning, while their husbands worked for the means for her to be able to do so. And some women still are satisfied with those roles. And I suspect there are more than just a few that are envious of them.

There is nothing wrong with a woman being a stay at home mom. There is nothing wrong with a woman having a career, if she so chooses. But, trying to do both is likely to result in a failure at one - and most often, the family is sacrificed in favor of the career. This is not to say there are no exceptions to this general rule of thumb, but for the vast majority it holds true.

Then there is the problem of the single parent household. In such a household, the parent has to work, and any semblance of a normal family life is nearly impossible to achieve. I know a number of people that struggle to provide both security and a family life for their kids, and sometimes the problems they face seem insurmountable.

Our schools are supposed to be places of learning, not substitutes for far too busy to raise their kids parents. And that is exactly what they have turned into. Kids in today's society are being "raised" by people whose parents showed them that abdicating the responsibility for raising a family is alright. We have people that had little in the way of family life when growing up passing that on to the next generation.

Think for a minute. Can it be simple chance that the rise in problems with America's youth coincides with the dissolution of the American family?

You've made some very valid points MattV. I too was raised in the same type of family structure as you and the American family as we knew it and our parents knew it is well on the road to being an outmoded idea. It's a sad realization but all too true. There are too many children being shuttled from place to place allowing for very little structure in their lives that would help to create a good solid base for them to start life from. There is nothing wrong with being a "stay at home" mom but with the advent of women's lib, rising divorce rates and the quest for the almighty dollar we have fallen into a position of needing a double income for most families to get by on. There are many in this type of situation, that given the removal of the second income , they would not know how to make do or keep a household afloat.
As to the government doing enough to protect children from child abuse, yes it is the parents duty to protect and raise their own children and it should not be left up to society as a whole to do so for those who would put their responsibilities on others, however, the key word here is child abuse. The majority of the time the abusers are the very same parents that are supposed to be responsible for raising these children. What is, should and can be done to rectify this type of a situation or can it be rectified at all? I leave this particular subject open for discussion. I would also add a question here, is the government getting too involved in our lives by telling us how to raise our children?

See all this conversation, its very off topic and would fit perfectly in teh forum your suggesting

I suggest saving it for then lol.

Regards,
TheYoda

Maybe an Admin or Mod could move this to the appropriate forum?

First, let's define "abuse". I've seen enough stories about parents being arrested fro spanking their kids that I believe that there are far too many over-zealous crusaders around that want to put an end to a parent's responsibility to enforce any discipline on their kids. Keep the zealots out of the way and let parents raise their kids.
Yes. Government has no business interfering with our personal lives in any way. Unless, of course, we're doing something illegal. But that's really the domain of law enforcement and the courts, not government.

Yes, this is a great topic Iodine and I bet if a wee PM was sent to Grinler he'd pop it into 'Off Topic, at the very least, for us.

The original topic is almost too broad to have a focused thread; maybe it should be broken up into several topics.
Z

We're always open for suggestions Z.

The "Z" is astute.
I see several topics spawning here.
Can we define the differences and provide a better split of such?

Instead of worrying about where this "belongs", why not just let it continue to run as it is? I'm sure that if Admin. thinks it needs to be moved, it'll get moved. So why worry about it?

Besides, talking about where the thread belongs is

This post has been edited by MattV: Sep 13 2007, 11:33 AM