+ Reply to Thread
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 111
  1. #91
    Busy-Bee's Avatar
    Busy-Bee is offline Offending people since before Del :D
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    11,183
    Thanks
    3,664
    Thanked
    4,704
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Past Moderator - Thank you
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonja View Post
    And what about dads who take drugs and f--k up their sperm and then produce babies this disabilities. shall we fine them too? If not why not? Why single out mothers?
    Then there's those selfish women who have children after they are 35 or even in their 40s and increase the risk the baby miscarrying or at least having a disability.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    12,708
    Thanks
    9,558
    Thanked
    12,690
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 9/1/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 7/11/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 3/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonja View Post
    My point is that parents who smoke in a car with kids cop a fine. The kids? Well they could cop severe lung and breathing damage. But you don't send the parents to jail nor provide compensation for the child for ongoing health problems (which is what I understand you're suggesting for mothers of FAS babies).

    And what about dads who take drugs and f--k up their sperm and then produce babies this disabilities. shall we fine them too? If not why not? Why single out mothers?

    I used to see it all the time in ivf threads. The mum to be was living like a saint while the dad to be partied and carried on like usual. They knew they were TTC. What's the difference?
    I see your point, it's a good one. I think the difference is with smoking/dodgy sperm the link between cause and effect isn't as clear cut. If you catch a parent smoking with kids in a car once, you can't say that was the cause of the kid getting lung cancer when they are 40. Whereas a doctor diagnosing a child with FAS (which can have some permanent and pretty horrendous consequences) Pretty much points the finger at the mum. While I am speaking about the strength of the cause and effect link... I would support criminally charging smoking parents with sick kids (asthmatics etc) where the doctor says "you are harming your kids" and the parents continue to smoke around their kids.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    10,495
    Thanks
    1,430
    Thanked
    9,003
    Reviews
    3
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by VicPark View Post
    I see your point, it's a good one. I think the difference is with smoking/dodgy sperm the link between cause and effect isn't as clear cut. If you catch a parent smoking with kids in a car once, you can't say that was the cause of the kid getting lung cancer when they are 40. Whereas a doctor diagnosing a child with FAS (which can have some permanent and pretty horrendous consequences) Pretty much points the finger at the mum. While I am speaking about the strength of the cause and effect link... I would support criminally charging smoking parents with sick kids (asthmatics etc) where the doctor says "you are harming your kids" and the parents continue to smoke around their kids.
    But even with FAS it's not clear cut:

    "Despite intense research efforts, it has not been possible to identify a single clear-cut mechanism for development of FAS or FASD. On the contrary, clinical and animal studies have identified a broad spectrum of pathways through which maternal alcohol can negatively affect the outcome of a pregnancy. Clear conclusions with universal validity are difficult to draw, since different ethnic groups show considerable genetic polymorphism for the hepatic enzymes responsible for ethanol detoxification."

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    12,708
    Thanks
    9,558
    Thanked
    12,690
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 9/1/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 7/11/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 3/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonja View Post
    But even with FAS it's not clear cut:

    "Despite intense research efforts, it has not been possible to identify a single clear-cut mechanism for development of FAS or FASD. On the contrary, clinical and animal studies have identified a broad spectrum of pathways through which maternal alcohol can negatively affect the outcome of a pregnancy. Clear conclusions with universal validity are difficult to draw, since different ethnic groups show considerable genetic polymorphism for the hepatic enzymes responsible for ethanol detoxification."
    One thing is clear though when a care is diagnosed: the mother is solely to blame.

  5. #95
    headoverfeet's Avatar
    headoverfeet is offline The truth will set you free, but first it will **** you off. -Gloria Steinem
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    18,954
    Thanks
    3,142
    Thanked
    4,892
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    If we give the right to a person to take legal action against its mother for actions taken during pregnancy where will the line be drawn, will it open a precedent for damages other than FAS?

    Maternal smoking.
    Damages due to birth choices.
    Listeria due to high risk food intake.
    Damages due to "high risk" activities.


    Sent from my GT-N7105T using The Bub Hub mobile app

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to headoverfeet For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (09-11-2014),TheGooch  (08-11-2014)

  7. #96
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    10,495
    Thanks
    1,430
    Thanked
    9,003
    Reviews
    3
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by VicPark View Post
    One thing is clear though when a care is diagnosed: the mother is solely to blame.
    What if it discourages diagnosis and treatment from fear of criminal prosecution?

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Sonja For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (09-11-2014)

  9. #97
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    12,708
    Thanks
    9,558
    Thanked
    12,690
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 9/1/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 7/11/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 3/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonja View Post
    What if it discourages diagnosis and treatment from fear of criminal prosecution?
    One could also ask that question about other criminals... Men who have desires to rape etc etc.... Treatment isn't always wanted or successful. At some point you've got to move from Rehab to prosecution. Judges are usually the most qualified to make that call.

  10. #98
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    10,495
    Thanks
    1,430
    Thanked
    9,003
    Reviews
    3
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/10/14100 Posts in a week
    I meant treatment for the child.

  11. #99
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,729
    Thanks
    1,522
    Thanked
    1,959
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Here's another one. There's a virus (will find what it's called later, getting ready for work atm) which, when contracted during pregnancy, causes about half of all hearing loss for newborns. Washing hands regularly etc. could significantly reduce this. Shall we charge mothers for knowingly not washing their hands?

    I know it's a bit different, but I guess the point is, there are SO many things that a pregnant mother can do that COULD harm her baby. None of it's clear cut, although there are degrees.

  12. #100
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    12,708
    Thanks
    9,558
    Thanked
    12,690
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 9/1/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 7/11/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 3/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Renn View Post
    Here's another one. There's a virus (will find what it's called later, getting ready for work atm) which, when contracted during pregnancy, causes about half of all hearing loss for newborns. Washing hands regularly etc. could significantly reduce this. Shall we charge mothers for knowingly not washing their hands?

    I know it's a bit different, but I guess the point is, there are SO many things that a pregnant mother can do that COULD harm her baby. None of it's clear cut, although there are degrees.
    Big difference is: probability and proof ... Not washing your hands may result in a tiny chance of this virus...most people wouldn't know about it... And good luck trying to prove the woman didn't wash her hands as opposed to just touching a dirty surface in between washes.

    But you would have to be an idiot to not know that getting totally drunk while pregnant is going to cause your baby damage. If you do something which you know is going to seriously damage your baby but do it anyway then you deserve to be punished.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 03-04-2014, 10:07
  2. How much and often is it okay for a father of a young child to drink alcohol?
    By changethestars in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 15-12-2013, 14:03

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
WaterWipes
Give your babies bottom a gift this Xmas! They are the only wipe made using just water and a drop of grapefruit seed extract and may help avoid nappy rash. Check out the great reviews on bubhub and see our website for more info and availability.
sales & new stuffsee all
True Fairies
True Fairies is the first interactive website where children can engage and speak with a real fairy through the unique webcam fairy portal. Each session is tailored to the child, and is filled with enchantment and magic.
Visit website to find out more!
featured supporter
Sarah Tooke Childbirth & Parenting Education
Providing private, personalised antenatal childbirth & parenting education to expectant parents in the comfort of their own home. Sessions are flexible, including everything that hospital based programs cover. Click to find out more!
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!