I'm of the unpopular opinion that all females (teens and young women) capable of reproduction (started having their period) and women who can't afford to have children should be on mandatory birth control.
If ever a successful men's birth control came out that was similar - I suggest the same for them.
2007-01-17 16:45:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Lucy_Fur 3
·
4⤊
2⤋
What is with this world? does that mean they are bad parents? It really depends on a lot of factors. Do you think the wealthy people who have nanny's raise there children and do drugs, should they have mandatory birth control? How about this, people get educated on using birth control, parenting classes should be something everyone has to take, but as far as welfare moms using the system to get on their feet, if you don't like it then too bad, it's not gonna change, so quit whining and thinking everyone else has it better than you and deal with your life instead of bitching about someone elses.
2007-01-17 17:00:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by littlegirllost 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't believe so. We never know someones situation surrounding the reasons why they may need government assistance. I have a friend who has a master's degree in nursing and was attacked at the jail she worked for. She now receives some government assistance (health care) for her children. She has never received assistance befor and has always worked since the age of 16 she's now 32. Why shouldn't she be able to take her children to the doctor.
My point is...... We should never make a general statement or assumption about people because of what you see on the outside.
Asking this question is just like asking should grant be given to students to attend college just because your low income.
2007-01-17 16:47:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by lifeisbeautiful 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
I don't think birth control should be a requirement to receive public aid. It's everyone's right to have children, not just the rich people.
If you're asking about specific methods, I think that women on public aid who do use birth control should have a reasonable choice of options. Not all bodies respond the same and women should be able to use whichever method causes them the least discomfort/harm.
2007-01-17 16:56:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jen 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Absolutely.
If someone is already receiving government assistance because they cannot support their current family, they do not need to have additional children at this time.
Regarding Nor-Plant, it does not matter to me which birth control they use; that should be their doctor's decision to choose the proper prescription, but yes, some type of birth control.
2007-01-17 16:49:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
I totally agree. You see these women on welfare and all their children are two years apart. You know why? Because she can only have the assistance for 2 years. After she has the baby she can reapply and get it again for another 2 years and the cycle continues, she never gets off welfare and continues milking the government for everyone else's hard earned $$'s.
2007-01-17 17:11:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by LilyDragon 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
No, but I think men who want to condemn mothers just because they've hit a rough patch should be castrated.
2007-01-17 17:11:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It depends on the person. I know one girl who uses it so that she can be lazy and not do anything with her life. I also know a girl who gets daycare assistance so she can go to college.
2007-01-17 16:43:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Lin_Z 4
·
5⤊
0⤋
yes..I agree
I think that if they are on public assistance or welfare, they should not be able to have more children untill they get their lives back in order and get off the assistance successfully...
2007-01-17 16:43:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Absolutely. If they can take my hard earned money in the form of government assistance, I can tell them to use birth control.
2007-01-17 16:41:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sparkles 7
·
4⤊
5⤋