Providing mothers taxpayer-funded financial incentives to refrain from abortion

[mjs2001]

I’ll give one example. It’s relatively puritanical because while parents in Europe and elsewhere are quite comfortable to give their children the sex-talk at a young age or are willing to let the schools educate them on such matters, in the USA parents get upset if any school official talks about sex, especially if a condom is involved. They usually shout that their parental duties are being violated. So the school backs down or lets them opt out. And then the parents usually never give their children the sex talk. Why? Because it makes them queezy. In short, Americans don’t like to talk about sex, unlike a lot of other cultures).

Okay. You’re obviously not an American–this “puritanical” America of which you write is a fantasy. It died a generation ago. Take, for example, New York City–one of the centers of American culture, commerce, and power. Condoms are handed out in public school, and sex education is provided in public schools at a young age. How does this reduce abortion? 41% of pregnancies in NYC end in abortion; 60% of NYC African-American pregnancies end in abortion. And there’s no shortage of prostitution and sex trafficking in NYC is there? I would have our schools teach the sanctity of human life rather than teaching that people are objects to be used, exploited, and discarded at one’s pleasure or convenience.

 

[SimmieKay]

It isn’t even welfare; it is an ill-conceived idea based on emotion rather than common sense and feasibility.

So why stop at abortion? Let’s just bribe drug addicts to stop using, prostitutes to stop hooking, philanderers to stop philandering…everyone gets free money except for the people who have to pay it.

There is a big difference between abortion and drug addiction. Every case of (intentional) abortion is the loss of an innocent life. By contrast, most cases of drug addiction don’t involve any loss of innocent life. While regrettably some drug addicts die due to the consequences of their addiction, they have at least some responsibility for their own addiction. By contrast, an aborted baby has zero responsibility for being aborted. I am sure that sometimes innocent lives are lost due to drug addiction (e.g. the drunk or stoned driver who causes a fatal accident, children who starve to death because their parents are too zonked out on drugs to feed them, children who die when their parents’ meth lab explodes, etc), but only a minority of cases of drug addiction result in innocent deaths, whereas every single case of abortion does. Philandering and prostitution can be distinguished from abortion in the same way - philandering and prostitution rarely or never result in the loss of innocent life, abortion does so every single time.

Simon

 

[SimmieKay]

I agree that the ideas in the OP are “ill-conceived.” Based on emotion rather than common sense and feasibility.

My family has opened our home to a young (18) unwed mother and her baby(4 months.) Yep, she is living with us and we are helping her as much as we can. No, she is not related to us. Nor is the baby.

Am I wasting everyone’s time?

maryjk, I know you think my ideas are ill-conceived, but anyway, I just wanted to say that I am very happy to hear what you are doing. In fact, you’ve inspired me to think I should do something like that myself, when the time is right.

Simon

 

[Rohzek]

Okay. You’re obviously not an American–this “puritanical” America of which you write is a fantasy. It died a generation ago. Take, for example, New York City–one of the centers of American culture, commerce, and power. Condoms are handed out in public school, and sex education is provided in public schools at a young age. How does this reduce abortion? 41% of pregnancies in NYC end in abortion; 60% of NYC African-American pregnancies end in abortion. And there’s no shortage of prostitution and sex trafficking in NYC is there? I would have our schools teach the sanctity of human life rather than teaching that people are objects to be used, exploited, and discarded at one’s pleasure or convenience.

I’m actually from the Deep South/Bible Belt. What I’ve said is still very common. Sex education and handing out condoms are only the beginning of the solution. Also, as I’ve said before, how puritanical a society might be has no precise result on how much prostitution or sex trafficking occurs in it.

 

[francisca]

Not all who have abortion is poor. For example an under-age pregnancy may come from a wealthy/ well off family, but since she can’t inform her parents, she’s in needy state now. So, what she need, is a temporary solution like a place to hide and all of her need until she give the baby for adoption.

However, women who already have 3chilldren may worry about financial matters for another one: how she can send them to school later, or she worry about her own health, and so on.

Regina7, what you are doing is a truly prolife work. Please do not feel discourage with the fact that abortion still happens.

There are cases in which a married woman pregnant not by husband. In this case, she has a marriage and children from her legitimate marriage to protect. She may not dissuaded by anything regardless how well the aid and consultation given. And she won’t tell the true reason either. There are other cases like rape within marriage, depression, rough relationship, rough sex (which basically rape) within relationship, or any other reasoning that no matter how good our statistics, it simply won’t appear in those statistics, but they are just reasons that no other can intrude into these women privacy and coerce them into raising a child she do not want or even carry it in her tummy if she-- after all alternatives given to her, she just refuse to-- then it is between God and her and the fetus father.

 

[SimmieKay]

It shouldn’t be made available as a reward of wanting to abort pregnancy.

It should be made available for all mothers who are pregnant with certain condition, example: under-age pregnancy and/ or unable to support herself and the coming baby.

For changing mothers mind from abortion, financial is one reason, but there are other factors too. These factors include giving them correct information about their own health and the fetus being “alive”, and consultation, and adoption alternative, and other means such as a place to give birth in secret because most abortions are by unmarried women.

I would support a broader scheme which provides increased financial support to all mothers in difficult situations, including those who have no plan or thought of aborting their child. My original idea was just a thought, a discussion-starter, I’m not wedded to it, and I’m happy to consider other ideas.

Let me put things a different way - when you want to change human behaviour, you can use both “carrot” and “stick”. Now the government wields a very big stick, but isn’t willing to use it on abortion, and heroic attempts that have been made by the pro-life movement to get it to change its mind about that have met with at best modest success. Conversely, the government also wields a very big carrot (a billion dollars is a huge amount to you or me, but to the government it is not that much money at all), yet it seems to me (please enlighten me if I am wrong) that the pro-life movement has spent comparatively little effort to get the government to wield its carrot on the abortion issue.

Simon

 

[francisca]

Let me put things a different way - when you want to change human behaviour, you can use both “carrot” and “stick”. Now the government wields a very big stick, but isn’t willing to use it on abortion, and heroic attempts that have been made by the pro-life movement to get it to change its mind about that have met with at best modest success.

What is this big “stick” exactly that can be used against abortion ?

Conversely, the government also wields a very big carrot (a billion dollars is a huge amount to you or me, but to the government it is not that much money at all), yet it seems to me (please enlighten me if I am wrong) that the pro-life movement has spent comparatively little effort to get the government to wield its carrot on the abortion issue.

Simon

Prolife movement nowadays is only mainly pressure groups consist of church people. Many people still have no idea what it means to be a true prolife.

For example:

many prolife people use alot of “drums” and “slogan yells”, but not many people really think carefully what it really means to be a prolife. Don’t get me wrong, I am actually happy that many young people are involved in these slogan yells, so long there is continuation to their initiative: to educate them (especially boys/ men) how to behave in order to be truly prolife.

Education for

1. men to understand that all adulterous behavior will result in probable abortion is key in my opinion. Therefore being prolife is to refrain from adultery.
2. parents of teen. Parents of teen must know the danger of nowadays culture. Ask yourself: if this ever happen to my teen kids, what will I do? That’s the true prolife in you. There are catholic parents who educate their sons in a catholic way, but when it’s about girls, then they teach their sons to just “drop it” and being irresponsible. Yell prolife slogans as loud as you can, it doesn’t guarantee one is a prolife when reality shows up.
3. women to understand that-- as much as the romance goes-- true love doesn’t come in the form of adulterous men.

Regarding what the government can do:

• make life easier for women to raise their children in the form of aid for education, health care for both mother and children, and make the information easy to understand for those women who are not educated, as these are the group need to know how to get this aid available for them. Subsidy for orphanage, education for the orphans, adoption centres.
• it is in gov interest to improve morality of the people: so… minimize obscenity in the media: porn. Minimize immoral sex business. Educate the society to behave morally. Abortion is the result of immoral behavior. The more immorality, the more abortion will happens.

 

[SimmieKay]

What is this big “stick” exactly that can be used against abortion ?

The big stick is the coercive power of the state, its monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, expressed through the law, especially the criminal law. Its power to lock people up for doing things it doesn’t want them to, its power to use force (even lethal force) to compel compliance with its demands. It used to use this big stick against abortion - e.g. in the US prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion was a crime in many states. It no longer uses that big stick against abortion, although it still uses that big stick against many other types of behaviour (e.g. selling drugs, rape, murder, theft, etc). Many (most? all?) pro-life people would like it to go back to using that big stick, in some way or another (e.g. criminalise abortion, prosecute and imprison those who perform abortions, etc) However, to me at least, it seems unlikely they will succeed any time soon. Ever since I have become a father, I have found the idea of abortion very upsetting (honestly, until I became a father, I didn’t so strongly feel that way - I used to call myself “pro-choice”, but now whenever I think those words I feel guilty.) I would love for there to be a lot less abortions, ideally no abortions, but I don’t see attempts to get the government to change the law as having any great likelihood of success in the short-to-medium term. (In the long term anything is possible.)

The big carrot is the many billions and even trillions of dollars the government has at its disposal. Of course, the big carrot exists because of the big stick - people pay their taxes because otherwise they’ll go to prison.

Simon

 

[francisca]

It used to use this big stick against abortion - e.g. in the US prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion was a crime in many states. It no longer uses that big stick against abortion, although it still uses that big stick against many other types of behaviour (e.g. selling drugs, rape, murder, theft, etc).

The bible (Moses Law) punish/ criminalize adultery, for both man and woman.
I think this is more just, as compared to criminalize abortion, because
abotion is done only by woman, and therefore it is not just to criminalize abortion.

Moreover, the bible also speak about care for orphans and widows,

and

Jesus say “those who are without sin can cast the first stone (to the adulterous woman)”
No man is sinless when it is regarding adultery. To criminalize abortion is basically stoning the adulterous woman.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

The bible (Moses Law) punish/ criminalize adultery, for both man and woman.
I think this is more just, as compared to criminalize abortion, because
abotion is done only by woman, and therefore it is not just to criminalize abortion.

Doctors who perform or assist in abortions are also culpable. Also, it seems the fact that some abortions may be forced seems to be overlooked at times (especially when it’s regarded as a “choice”), for instance domestic violence abusers pushing their partners or parents extorting their children.

To criminalize abortion is basically stoning the adulterous woman.

I see it more as recognizing the humanity and personhood of the unborn.

Have a wonderful week.

 

[francisca]

Doctors who perform or assist in abortions are also culpable.

How about the father of the fetus? Is he culpable?

If this is about punishments, the big sticks, then I agree. They’re all culpable.

If this is about PP scandal again, please, they’re guilty of illegal selling of fetus organs.

I disagree to let go the father of the fetus, because he-- according to the bible-- is guilty of the death of his children.

If about behavior correction, I think men’s adulterous behavior need to change. Therefore to criminalzie abortion alone while allowing adultery is not the way to go. Moses law criminalize adultery, not abortion. The Torah insist in the caring of widows and orphans.

If it is about “murder”, then read the story of King David in the Murder of Uriah. 2Samuel11.
King David was not at the murder scene. His hand didn’t kill Uriah. Uriah was killed by valiant men (they’re comparable to the doctors in the “murder” of the fetus/Uriah), and was placed in the battle field by Joab (he is comparable to the mother of the fetus, because Joab was there in the murder scene with Uriah). But of all of them, King David is-- according to God-- he is the murderer. 2Samuel12.

I see it more as recognizing the humanity and personhood of the unborn.

If you punish the mother, you punish the fetus too, because the fetus is inside her.

Have a wonderful week.

You too.

 

[maryjk]

maryjk, I know you think my ideas are ill-conceived, but anyway, I just wanted to say that I am very happy to hear what you are doing. In fact, you’ve inspired me to think I should do something like that myself, when the time is right.

Simon

My point is, I am tired of people trying to claim that conservatives somehow don’t want to help people in need.

Conservatives help plenty of people.

 

[SuperLuigi]

That is welfare and no way will conservatives support that.

I would seriously consider that.

Of course, it would be best to make abortion illegal in most every case.

 

[JimG]

This pretty much already happens. I run a crisis pregnancy center. So a woman comes in, and we convince her not to have an abortion. Let’s say she decides to keep the baby and not adopt. Here is what we offer: free healthcare (either through doctors working for free or we help them get free government healthcare); free maternity clothes; free parenting classes; free baby stuff, including diapers, clothes, car seats, beds); free daycare. We also hook mom up to receive food stamps, subsidized housing, jobs, free food at food pantry. And this doesn’t end when baby is born either.

So, I’d say mom already has NO financial reason to abort.

I suppose your question though is do we give her more? To be honest, what else does she need? I’m mean, seriously. We even helped one mom but a battery for her car.

I get pretty ticked off when I’m called a greedy conservative. Do I get free healthcare? No. Free food? No. Free anything? No.

I volunteer a great deal of time to help support pregnant women, to show them that there is no logical reason to get an abortion. I also put in my own money to help support these women.

You make a good point about the help that is already being offered. Also, I wonder if infanticide becomes legal, as it possibly could, would the OP’s financial incentive proposal apply equally to those wishing to dispose of their already born children?

 

[SuperLuigi]

My point is, I am tired of people trying to claim that conservatives somehow don’t want to help people in need.

Conservatives help plenty of people.

If you’re talking about America, the last time I looked, conservatives gave more than quadruple what liberals do to charity despite making less money.

 

[SuperLuigi]

You make a good point about the help that is already being offered. Also, I wonder if infanticide becomes legal, as it possibly could, would the OP’s financial incentive proposal apply equally to those wishing to dispose of their already born children?

Well, now, we can’t have discrimination, now can we? Someone’s feelings might get hurt or something… /sarc.

 

[francisca]

…, would the OP’s financial incentive proposal apply equally to those wishing to dispose of their already born children?

Well, isn’t that why wise men design incentives to send their already-born-children to war?

 

[JimG]

Well, isn’t that why wise men design incentives to send their already-born-children to war?

Only if their specific intent is to kill them. Financial incentives to prevent abortion or infanticide are by definition incentives not to kill. “I’ll pay you if you don’t kill this child.” It’s the sort of precedent one is reluctant to set; in the end we might have to pay everyone not to do evil.

 

[Theo520]

maryjk, I know you think my ideas are ill-conceived, but anyway, I just wanted to say that I am very happy to hear what you are doing. In fact, you’ve inspired me to think I should do something like that myself, when the time is right.

Simon

My mother provided free room and board to two pregnant teens through our Catholic church, when I was young. This problem can be resolved within the communities, without a big expensive govt program that fails to deliver results.

 

[Theo520]

Single mothers on welfare frequently live with the baby daddy, but he keeps his official residence as another address, so as not to reduce payments.

Instead of encouraging strong families and self reliance, Guv welfare often does the opposite and is a target of fraud.

Million-dollar Welfare Fraud Schemes Roil New England
MANCHESTER, NH – A 33-year-old convicted cocaine dealer collecting a monthly SSI handout used his state EBT welfare card to rent a bank safety-deposit box in which police have found $560,050 in cash – the latest in a series of busts in New England involving massive welfare fraud, often committed by drug dealers or recent immigrants.

The unprecedented increases in the number of people on welfare has led to ever more criminal activity in New England, a region where until recently most people took pride in their independence and self-reliance. Now New Hampshire’s traditional motto, “Live Free or Die,” has taken on a new meaning as the non-working population has exploded in cities like Manchester and Nashua.

In this latest investigation, local and federal law enforcement confiscated another $216,000 in cash at three other locations that they have claimed in court filings belonged to the imprisoned welfare recipient, Zakee Stuart-Holt. He was described in court documents as “a large-scale heroin distributor.” When asked by police what was in the bank safety-deposit box, the drug dealer’s wife had replied, “Nothing of significance.”

The feds are seeking forfeiture of the $775,000 in cash, plus the couple’s two vehicles, one of which they reported is equipped with a hidden compartment. The drug dealer and his wife also own a women’s clothing store in Laconia, which the wife told police she pays no taxes on.