How does the government fit in? A political view.

In a recent survey conducted by a group of students from Walden University, several parents participating in the survey cited the government as the problem involving parental responsibility. The problem one stated was a parent could not discipline a child without fear of Child Protective Services. Smart children, it is concluded, used CPS as a threat against Disciplinary actions. However, is the government really the cause of our deteriorating society? In my research, I have uncovered government involvement that is meant to encourage parental involvement and protect the rights of the child.

Should parents be held responsible for the actions of their children? The law says yes. All but two states, New Hampshire and New York, hold parents legally responsible for the actions of their underage children. These responsibilities can include, forced parental involvement in the court proceedings process as well as financial liability. While the amount of responsibility varies by state, it shows that the rights of the child to be cared for and educated in responsible social and ethical behavior is one thing our government is trying to enforce (Parental responsibility laws, OJDP).

Should parents be forced to be parents? How much free parenting style can be allowed at the cost of societal safety and ethics? In 1990 the United Nations General Assembly received the minimum requirement of twenty nations to adopt a policy called the Convention on the Rights of the Child or (CRC). However, due to strong debate in the United States concerning parental rights, it was never adopted by the U.S. In fact, The Bush Administration was strongly against it for those reasons.

However, the Obama Administration is bringing the CRC back into debate. Why? Because the main concern of the CRC is to “ensure that all children receive special rights, including the right to a name and nationality; access to health care, education, and parental care; and protection from exploitation, abuse, and neglect”.

So why are we debating? Members of congress who are opposed to the CRC oppose it on the grounds that “ratification would make the treaty the "supreme law of the land," overriding existing family law, which is usually considered to be the province of state or local governments”. Furthermore, they argue that it will take away “the power parents have to raise their children as they see fit -- whether in regard to religious instruction, education, or the use of corporal punishment.” The Obama administration however, emphasizes that the ratification of the CRC gives children the right to “parental care” which emphasizes the need to make parents responsible for rearing their children in manner that results in socially responsible and healthy mature individual. (Children’s Rights International Debates, 2009).

Written by LaNita Norman

Point to Ponder

In our survey of parents and teachers in selected preschools, we asked whether new parents should be required to take a class prior to hospital release, which also included passing an exam at the end of the course. Responses for the class were positive; however, most disagreed with the idea of a required exam.

Consider the fact that the United States government has already acknowledged through Child Protective Services intervention that some individuals are not qualified to parent children.  Consider also that the United States government currently conducts hundreds of detailed parenting exams across the country daily.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, in 2008 alone there were 1.8 million children in the United States whose parents had to pass an exam before they entered the home environment. Reasonably assuming that some of these children were siblings, we can approximate around 1 million parents were required to submit to this testing before taking on their parental responsibilities.

The official title of this exam is The Adoption Home Study. A home study consists of three half-day interviews with a representative of the state digging into every confidential area of the parent's lives, a heath and safety inspection of the home by a state inspector, a thorough inspection of the home by the county Fire Chief, and a complete Federal background check initiated by providing finger prints at the police station.  Also required are a minimum of 15 hours of training on topics befitting a soon-to-be parent. 

Ironically, the only individuals currently required to submit to this type inquisition are those who truly understand and desire to be quality parents but are, in many cases, medically unable to bear children.  With this obvious acknowledgement and precident set by our government I wonder how we could find it so horrifying to suggest that unprepared adults who can become parents by accident be held to the same standards as those of us who fight every day to create a family.

For more details on the 2009 survey of adopted parents, see the USA Adoption Chartbook.

Written by Jess Tryon