Thursday, May 3, 2012
DEFENDING PARENTAL FREEDOMS IN A CHILD-CENTRED SYSTEM
Isn’t it true that we have generally concurred, no; we have theoretically agreed that the state and the family each have roles and responsibilities. The discussion had become louder and more intense until there is dispute about the relationship between these.
I can only tell you what I think. The state and its organizations should not usurp the family’s suitable role. Instead the state should facilitate the operation of the family. Of course the state is mandated to protect the lives of those who are vulnerable, such as children who not being able to fend for themselves, may suffer neglect or abuse at the hands of caregivers. That is conceded, no, applauded as the right concentration of the community or the state. However, the government should determine never to confiscate family independence. That’s what I have discerned is happening in so many of the cases where children are apprehended by government social workers within a legislated system within which bureaucratic and judicial wheels turns so slowly that human compassion and understanding are squeezed from the equation for solution.
Mounting evidence confirms that the tension between the state and family which we write about and read here and on numerous similar sites requires examination and correction. We are surrendering the family’s proper role and duties without a conscientious defence. We are doing this because of an international focus upon the rights of a child which has run away from common sense in practice.
Here is a novel concept. Let’s protect parental liberty within what has become a child-centred legal system.