Sterilizing the Handicapped

Do you agree or disagree that the handicapped should be sterilized.
That ranges from downs syndrome, autistic and the physically handicapped.
Do you think there is a cut off point?
Discuss.

disagree 100%

Woah where the hell did this topic come from!
Shit if stupid people can have babies why can't the handicapped. They probably make better parents anyhow. Even though they may need some extra assistance.

now, what would be the rationale behind that, if at all?

I think its a slippery slope. I have a severely retarded cousin who got pregnant in a halfway house from another retarded person. Her daughter not only has some physical disabilities that have required major surgeries for her at such a young age (that her mother also had) her daughter does seem to have more mental faculties compared to her mom but she is severely delayed for her age. It's hard to tell how much is environmental from living with a mother who is more like a toddler, or if things are genetic. While my little cousin is precious, i have to think she is going through a lot of recovery from these surgeries because her mother had no understanding of reproduction and the state can't make someone go on birthcontrol. It's a very sad situation.

My daughter is mildly autistic these days, but at one point she looked much more grim in her prognosis. I think that as her mother i would want her to experience motherhood the way i see her progressing now. But when she was a toddler i would imagine if she didn't improve that there is no way she could be a good parent.

Sterilization used to happen a lot in mental facilities, per request of the parents and/or the professionals.

I would be interested to see Bbucko's outlook on this.

Hitler wanted to kill them, sterilizing them is just a step below.

I misunderstood the title of this thread. I pictured someone wiping Purel on a disabled person.

Some provinces in Canada had a eugenics program until the '70's. This seems awfully draconian, but I can also see advantages.

Case in point:

My older sis is a DSW. One of her clients is a middle-aged female who loves to go out and whore herself for pocket change. She doesn't use birth control. There is no legal way of stopping her from doing this. If she gets knocked up, I highly doubt that she'll be able to care fo her child. Maybe compulsory sterilization should still be used in some cases?

Yes REC,
In my town there is a mentally handicapped lass who gets pregnant every year.
She cannot look after herself and yet she is sexually active.
Every baby she gives birth to has been severly retarded and has been taken from her by the child welfare department.
This lass can't look after herself, a severly retarded, special needs baby, cannot be kept on birth control and is sexually active.

Sometimes the "handicapped" make better parents than we "so called normal" people. I think they should be left alone, god knows they have it hard enough as is.

I know a woman who has a mental illness and who has had 8 children by 8 different men. She is currently a patient in a state psychiatric hospital and this is about her 10th admission. She is not mentally retarded by any means, but because of her mental illness she is unable to care for herself and has never lived independently.
The children are all wards of the state. The thought of her having a baby is repulsive to me. At the same time, the idea of the state removing her reproductive function entirely is frightening. As someone said earlier, that kind of stuff is a slippery slope. Yet, the state does have an interest in this because the taxpayers are supporting her and her 8 children. It is an extremely difficult problem, and I think anyone who proposes a simple solution in either direction is not very bright.

This is really a breakdown of the system that should be in place for adults who are unable to care for themselves and/or conduct themselves as adults due to mental disorders. In most cases these people should have family and professionals involved in their care such that they don't reach a point where they are having unsafe sex. By the time one of these women becomes pregnant, it's already gone much further than it ever should have. I don't solving this problem by sterilization is the answer. Instead, the families (if they are able) and society (gasp!) should take care of these people so that they are supervised and cared for properly. It seems unethical not to do so. I do think that families and guardians should have things like Depo-provera and IUDs at their disposal, but IMO sterilization goes too far.

There again, common sense is vital in dealing with these kinds of situations.
While I don't think it is entirely morally reprehensible to sterilize these people per se', on the opposite end with the babies, unprotected sex there should be something in place for these people if not to safeguard their own well being but to keep from being such a burden on the system.

No law in the world can govern common sense if the person does not know any better and especially by people who know to do better and don't. This is where I see government intervention taking place eventually.

Doesn't George Bush have kids?

But seriously , if something like this was ever mandated , suggestions would arise about doing teh same to people with AIDS and other terminal communicable diseases.

From a genetic quality point of view, its feasible. But bringing morality, equality and emotion into the picture and its not feasible.

Its very Hitler-esque

..... double post