[ItsOurTimeNow]

We received our adopted son because the State intervened after he was born to his birth-mother.

This woman had 5 children, not one of them in her custody, was addicted to crack and meth, no job, no address, and a petty criminal. We adopted one of her birth-daughters, and once she became pregnant again, the State got involved.

She gae birth to a boy who was addicted to coke, and left the hospital 2 days later without giving him a name or listing a birth father. The State called us, since we recently adopted his sister, and we received him as a foster child. We adopted him a few months ago.

So - should the Nanny State have not gotten involved in the first place?

[mvpel]

That’s a very, very, very, very far cry from refusing to consent to a “mandatory” blood test inflicted by the government.

[JenB]

There’s a really clear difference between cases where intervention is needed and cases where it is not. If the parent has a history of actual harm to their child, the government may need to get involved. If the parents merely refuse some government mandated screening, fine.

I would hate to find in a few years that the government wants to do a mandatory “home risk screening” before letting parents take their kids home from the hospital. Our ten or so guns, subversive conservative literature, and computers set to FreeRepublic would doubtless be just too dangerous to expose children to.

[mtbopfuyn]

So - should the Nanny State have not gotten involved in the first place?

We adopted from a mother who was two seconds away from getting the baby taken away by the state much in the same circumstances as you. There are times the state does indeed need to step in. Most of the adopted kids I know were rescued from deplorable "birth givers" (I won't say "parents" because they weren't).

I was also a CPS worker and saw horrible situations. One such was a common law couple who couldn't understand why their 6-8 children were handicapped and/or had died. It didn't take much investigation to find out they were half brother and sister. I sooo agree the state needed to step in on that one and stop them from having any more children.

[Red Boots]

So - should the Nanny State have not gotten involved in the first place?

Children were rescued from bad situations and adopted by caring families and other organizations long before the state decided it had to be involved, and it would happen again if they'd just leave people alone.

Yes, there might have been some horror stories, but there still are now, with the "benevolent" state involved. The above is one of them.