I have no problem with the Govt./State taking children away from “unfit” parents. The problem, as it is being presented by some of the posts, is that being a single parent makes you “unfit” by definition.
This is clearly untrue and totally unsubstantiated. Being single, for some parents, may make it tougher and rougher to raise a child/children. But, in and of itself, being single does not mean you are unfit or incapable of raising said child/children.
“Unfit” as it pertains to removal of children from a home has a broader definition and is a legal/criminal term. “Unfit” as it is being thrown around here on this thread is a subjective term and is defined by opinion.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that single parents are by definition unfit, but rather that committed married parents, either natural OR adoptive are preferable.
That being the case, it is the traditional judgment of our society that a single woman pregnant will best serve her child by finding it suitable married adoptive parents if a committed marriage of her own is not an immediately likely prospect.
This isn’t my own “meanspirited” arbitrary “priggery;” this was the common sense of fifty years ago.
“Being single, for some parents, may make it tougher and rougher to raise a child/children. But, in and of itself, being single does not mean you are unfit or incapable of raising said child/children.”
I agree that we can’t treat them like abusers. Abusers don’t deserve to keep their kids. But we do need to discourage single parenthood, in general. It’s not healthy for society and they demand more welfare handouts.