|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:34 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| bacasper wrote: |
You don't need a hypothetical for this. Alcohol adversely affects spermatogenesis. So it would be unfair or sexist if we did not lock up drinking fathers-to-be as well.
So how far do we go with this? Lock up smoking mothers, too? Prohibit the sale of alcohol (again)? Penalize dad's failure to get a promotion? Why not criminalize every parental imperfection since it can lead to decreased quality of life in offspring? |
That's not quite the same thing. According to that article, a father's consumption of alcohol only has adverse affects on his ability to conceive and not on a developing fetus as in the case of the mother drinking.
...unless I misunderstand spermatogensis, which very well may be the case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| On the other hand wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Lock them up. |
You know, by some coincidence, I was just thinking about this issue the other day, and came up with this sort of Judith-Jarvis-Thomsonish thought experiment...
Suppose it were discovered that drinking a certain type of fruit juice debilitated sperm production, thus making a man more likely to generate sperm that produced offspring likely to have Downs Syndrome. Would we make it illegal for men to drink that fruit juice?
A bit about Ms. Thomson, my personal patron saint of debating |
You don't need a hypothetical for this. Alcohol adversely affects spermatogenesis. So it would be unfair or sexist if we did not lock up drinking fathers-to-be as well.
So how far do we go with this? Lock up smoking mothers, too? Prohibit the sale of alcohol (again)? Penalize dad's failure to get a promotion? Why not criminalize every parental imperfection since it can lead to decreased quality of life in offspring? |
Firstly, I don't think you can quite compare a potential parent, male or female, damaging their sperm/eggs or whatever, with a parent continuing to knowingly and regularly ingest a substance that is known to inflict severe harm on a developing human, once they know that child is in existence. While their smoking drinking father may not have given them the best start in life, their mother's indulgence is likely to severely compound the harm.
I agree that men should be educated about the risks to their offspring, and that they should be strongly discouraged from engaging in such behaviour, and certainly society should frown on anyone smoking or drinking to excess. There are so many variables that can affect a potential life. Not being vacinated against chicken pox, for one. While pregnant with my second child, I was very surprised to learn that I had tested negative to antibodies against chicken pox. Should I have been prosecuted for falling pregnant when I had left myself unnecessarily prone to catching chicken pox and thereby exposing my unborn infant to unnecessary risk? That would be going a bit far. But that is a far cry from me knocking back copious amounts of G & T several times a week, knowing full well that it would harm the child I am carrying.
Secondly, who said anything about criminalising parents? Even in the hypothetical scenario where women are confined in alcohol free zones for the sake of their children, why would we need to criminalise them? I would wager that most women doing this stuff are in some way damaged themselves. In many cases they themselves suffer from FAS. I don't see why they should be treated as wicked. They may be of subnormal intelligence, or mentally ill, or perhaps hopelessly addicted. They may not be able to understand the consequences of their behaviour. I would hope they would be treated, rather than punished. But it seems unfair that their unborn children should be punished by a lifetime of disadvantage because of their mother's unnecessary behaviour, and that's why I am wondering whether I would agree to legislation that saw these women confined for the entire gestation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| If you mean a life in the same way that a born person is a life, then I assume you support the outlawing of abortion entirely? |
Am exhausted today so forgive some sloppy thinking (more than usual).
I used both "life" and "person" because I couldn't decide which was best. I do not support criminalizing abortion but at the moment the woman decides to keep the baby, it must then be protected as a human life by the state. Lots of wiggle room there, but this topic can never be airtight. |
Yes, I agree. One reason I believe that women should be allowed to abort is precisely because the responsibility of bringing a life into the world is a very great one. If you are going to bring a small creature into this big wild world, then you owe that little creature the best care you can give it. Once you've made that decision, a good sane parent would be making the needs of their small vulnerable offspring their priority. Not only that, it seems very wrong to inflict on society a person that is likely to become a violent offender, like many males aflicted by FAS are. Someone who may in turn inflict terrible damage on other peoples' children. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 6:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
You don't need a hypothetical for this. Alcohol adversely affects spermatogenesis. So it would be unfair or sexist if we did not lock up drinking fathers-to-be as well.
So how far do we go with this? Lock up smoking mothers, too? Prohibit the sale of alcohol (again)? Penalize dad's failure to get a promotion? Why not criminalize every parental imperfection since it can lead to decreased quality of life in offspring? |
That's not quite the same thing. According to that article, a father's consumption of alcohol only has adverse affects on his ability to conceive and not on a developing fetus as in the case of the mother drinking.
...unless I misunderstand spermatogensis, which very well may be the case. |
No, you are correct. It is just that is not a great logical leap to suppose that if spermatozoa are impaired in their motility, there is a good chance they are defective in other ways, even if not yet conclusively demonstrated.
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Firstly, I don't think you can quite compare a potential parent, male or female, damaging their sperm/eggs or whatever, with a parent continuing to knowingly and regularly ingest a substance that is known to inflict severe harm on a developing human, once they know that child is in existence. While their smoking drinking father may not have given them the best start in life, their mother's indulgence is likely to severely compound the harm. |
Yes, I agree with this. The problem is that it is the period BEFORE the woman even knows she is pregnant that is the most dangerous and teratogenic. Sure, it is a good idea not to damage the fetus further, but most of it has already been done. So you are taking fairly extensive measures for at most a partial benefit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joshuahirtle27
Joined: 23 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
When I found out I was pregnant with my son one of my biggest worried was FAS. Not because I drink all the time or deliberatly continued to drink after I found out but because I did not find out till I was 6 months. Now most people who read this are probably thinking how the heck couldnt you know but My husband(whos account I just took over) and I decided to go to Korea because we were told that we would not be able to concieve with out a Drs intervention so we decided to put off our dream for children and travel. After getting to Korea I got very ill and even went to the Dr and took several hpts and they were all negative so when my husband and I had drinks on occasion about once a month I never bothered to worry about it.
When I found out I was pregnant I felt so worried that I could have harmed my child that I felt like the worst mother in the world which caused people to tell me that worrying ment that I would make a good mother. I ended up being very lucky and have a happy and healthy child but since then I have come to realize by meeting other people especially mothers who have babies with FAS is that generally women who drink durring their pregnancy without any regard for their child do not make very good mothers after the damage is done (I will stress not all mothers). I believe like some others that the only real way to combat this is manditory parenting classes for all pregnant women educating them In every part of being a parent (Men should take them too but as they cannot damage the baby while it is gestating and the mother can its more important for them). Also like some others have said many of these women maybe damaged from their own history and do not know better which is why education is so very important. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Firstly, I don't think you can quite compare a potential parent, male or female, damaging their sperm/eggs or whatever, with a parent continuing to knowingly and regularly ingest a substance that is known to inflict severe harm on a developing human, once they know that child is in existence. While their smoking drinking father may not have given them the best start in life, their mother's indulgence is likely to severely compound the harm. |
Yes, I agree with this. The problem is that it is the period BEFORE the woman even knows she is pregnant that is the most dangerous and teratogenic. Sure, it is a good idea not to damage the fetus further, but most of it has already been done. So you are taking fairly extensive measures for at most a partial benefit. |
Yes, I had already conceded in my OP that that was one reason that the 'lock 'em up' method was impractical. How can the state know who is pregnant when even the mother herself does not? I was more than 9 weeks gone with one of my kids before I had any inkling I was pregnant. But, once the pregnancy is established, there is usually a window of several months where harm can still be done. They used to say that the damage was done mostly in the first 3 months. Now they are not so sure, and recommend that women abstain throughout their pregnancies.
Since many (half?) of pregnancies are unplanned and unexpected, ideally all fertile women would be living a lifestyle that would not be harmful to an unnannouced critter. Of course that's not realistic, especially as most of those women would not believe they were likely to fall pregnant anytime soon... Perhaps the days when society frowned upon women who drank were not such a bad thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sounds pretty similar to any other type of child abuse to me, but I don't have a solution to propose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It makes no sense for a person to have fetal alcohol syndrome when all the mother had to do is not drink on behalf of the child. I wouldn't want my life messed up by my mother drinking alcohol. I say lock them up, period. Although, there is no need to criminalize drinking mothers, JUST keep them from drinking alcohol. It is the right of the person to be. It would be my right under those circumstances. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^ Is this downright Orwellian, have we entered a brave new world, or have we stepped through the looking glass? Exactly how do you lock women up without criminalizing them? In the US, this would be unconstitutional because in order to deprive one of life, liberty, or property, one must be afforded due process of law, i.e. essentially, a criminal trial.
OR
OK, sorry women, no more alcohol for you. 
But wait, prohibiting women from drinking would not only prevent FAS, less women would get pregnant in the first place! 
Never mind. Men would never go for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| young_clinton wrote: |
| I wouldn't want my life messed up by my mother drinking alcohol. |
You probably wouldn't want your life ended by your mother having an abortion either though.
A very liberal interpretation of laws against consumption of alcohol by minors might justify legally denying mothers access to alcohol. However, I think the penalty for breaking such laws is generally a ticket, not jail time. Not really all that much of a deterrent.
Realistically, anyone with poor enough judgment that they're willing to risk permanently damaging their child just so they can enjoy some alcohol probably also lacks the judgment to be deterred by any remotely reasonable law. I don't think this can really be legislated away. I also don't think that it happens often enough to need to be legislated away. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
