"Comic Relief money should be spent on contraception"

[Lightworker]

Mommyof3- I do get wha you are saying and I have seen successful projects encouraging women living in slums with many children being given the implant. And while I do agree it does help to slow down some problems, to me, focusing mainly on contraception is like putting an elastoplast on a 10 inch gash. The problems are rooted way deep.

 

[flubdub]

I am not sure about this comic relief... but if it's like world vision etc... then in a way yes. Women shouldn't be on birth control most should be sterilized. A lot of women in those poor poor countries are raped, abused etc.. and become pregnant and do not know about contraception or wouldn't be able to take it anyways. I know it sounds harsh but giving money for food isn't solving anything. A lot of places you need to be careful what is sent as others will take their things, and worse. Again, sounds harsh and I may get attacked for it, but I think sterilizing a lot of them would help end the suffering of the children... and really, no child should suffer regardless of principal or laws.

Mum2JK- are you actually saying we should curb their reproductive rights because they are poor? The same way the Nazis decided to sterilize sections of their society for what they believed were justifiable reasons?? And then you (ie the high and mighty rich) decide when and if they can have children? BTW the money is given to run projects that promote the empowerment of the disadvantaged so that they can gain independence.

To be honest, I kind of agree with Mum2J&K. If each persons situation was looked at individually - not just a mass sterilising spree, as that wouldnt be right.
But if a woman/family has, say 3, kids, and she/they cant look after or feed them, then I think she should be sterilised. Not forcibly, but heavily encouraged, to do so.
Otherwise, she may go on to have 4, 5, 6, 7 kids and the first 3 that she had will suffer even more!
Wheres the fairness in that?

I know everyone would be screaming "human rights, human rights" but what about the kids?

 

[Tasha]

Wow at this thread

Forced sterilisation should NEVER happen, it is a disgusting concept IMO.

I dont understand the argument about admin etc eating up the money, that happens in nearly all charities where ever in the world they are, so in that case we should never donate to any charity ever again?

 

[flubdub]

^ nobody said "forced"

 

[Tasha]

To be honest, I kind of agree with Mum2J&K. If each persons situation was looked at individually - not just a mass sterilising spree, as that wouldnt be right.
But if a woman/family has, say 3, kids, and she/they cant look after or feed them, then I think she should be sterilised. Not forcibly, but heavily encouraged, to do so.
Otherwise, she may go on to have 4, 5, 6, 7 kids and the first 3 that she had will suffer even more!
Wheres the fairness in that?

I know everyone would be screaming "human rights, human rights" but what about the kids?

Sterilisation should be available but IMO it should never be forced, nor heavily encouraged. A mother in this country who has many children, whom she cannot afford would never be led in her choices to do with sterilisation because it is unethical.

Besides of her three children, one, two or three could die, and if they do then there is often an 'empty arms syndrome', many women feel the need to have another baby, not to replace but to help them heal, these are normal feelings whether you be in the UK or Africa, but sterilisation is permanent, it means there is no going back. Also if all three of her children have died, who looks after her as she gets old?

 

[Tasha]

^ nobody said "forced"

Sorry I was replying when you wrote your first reply, so mine wasnt a reply to what you wrote. I am sorry if I misread others post, but some sound as if the woman gets no choice.

 

[Lightworker]

I think people are forgetting that we are talking about actual human beings, not goats.

 

[flubdub]

To be honest, I kind of agree with Mum2J&K. If each persons situation was looked at individually - not just a mass sterilising spree, as that wouldnt be right.
But if a woman/family has, say 3, kids, and she/they cant look after or feed them, then I think she should be sterilised. Not forcibly, but heavily encouraged, to do so.
Otherwise, she may go on to have 4, 5, 6, 7 kids and the first 3 that she had will suffer even more!
Wheres the fairness in that?

I know everyone would be screaming "human rights, human rights" but what about the kids?

Sterilisation should be available but IMO it should never be forced, nor heavily encouraged. A mother in this country who has many children, whom she cannot afford would never be led in her choices to do with sterilisation because it is unethical.

Besides of her three children, one, two or three could die, and if they do then there is often an 'empty arms syndrome', many women feel the need to have another baby, not to replace but to help them heal, these are normal feelings whether you be in the UK or Africa, but sterilisation is permanent, it means there is no going back. Also if all three of her children have died, who looks after her as she gets old?

All wrong reasons to have kids!

And if someone in the UK has kids that they cant afford, the kids (most likely) wont starve to death.

 

[Tasha]

To be honest, I kind of agree with Mum2J&K. If each persons situation was looked at individually - not just a mass sterilising spree, as that wouldnt be right.
But if a woman/family has, say 3, kids, and she/they cant look after or feed them, then I think she should be sterilised. Not forcibly, but heavily encouraged, to do so.
Otherwise, she may go on to have 4, 5, 6, 7 kids and the first 3 that she had will suffer even more!
Wheres the fairness in that?

I know everyone would be screaming "human rights, human rights" but what about the kids?

Sterilisation should be available but IMO it should never be forced, nor heavily encouraged. A mother in this country who has many children, whom she cannot afford would never be led in her choices to do with sterilisation because it is unethical.

Besides of her three children, one, two or three could die, and if they do then there is often an 'empty arms syndrome', many women feel the need to have another baby, not to replace but to help them heal, these are normal feelings whether you be in the UK or Africa, but sterilisation is permanent, it means there is no going back. Also if all three of her children have died, who looks after her as she gets old?

All wrong reasons to have kids!

And if someone in the UK has kids that they cant afford, the kids (most likely) wont starve to death.

Maybe so, but my point was it doesnt stop these women having those feelings, after a loss.

As for the getting old, I am sure it would be a consideration for some, I am not saying it is right but there is no system to look after the old and frail.

 

[Mummyplus3]

Wow at this thread

Forced sterilisation should NEVER happen, it is a disgusting concept IMO.

I dont understand the argument about admin etc eating up the money, that happens in nearly all charities where ever in the world they are, so in that case we should never donate to any charity ever again?

It doesnt just nark me off about CR but all charities in general, If i am donating £10 to an orphanage in Romania I want all of that to go to the people that need it not to lose £7 of it paying someones wages.

 

[Eve]

Mum2JK- are you actually saying we should curb their reproductive rights because they are poor? The same way the Nazis decided to sterilize sections of their society for what they believed were justifiable reasons?? And then you (ie the high and mighty rich) decide when and if they can have children? BTW the money is given to run projects that promote the empowerment of the disadvantaged so that they can gain independence.

Oh my goodness you have quite the imagination there dear. I am so high and mighty, and very wealthy, yes ma'am. You have no idea.

All I am saying is a child's right to be fed, warm, clothed, educated and cared for IMO are more priority than my right to breed. A child suffering shouldn't take the back burner because I want to have sex.

I also said I don't know about Comic relief. I know with world vision, they help people and give food to the very poor, build wells etc... but each child helped, how many more are born into this world to know nothing but starvation,rape,abuse? To me I would gladly give up my rights to reproduce to save a child from that pain. We give money to charities, and yes, it helps but people have been giving for how many years now and we still have so many suffering. I think if you can't take care of your children, be it at your hands or not, you shouldn't have them. For the women who do not have a choice and are gang raped and sodomized over there, I really don't think they would be against sterilization and in some cases it should be forced I know of a girl who terminated so many pregnancies, the local clinic refused to give her more (this was after her doctor refused her as well) so she went to a different city to terminate yet another pregnancy! To me, as an adult if she would rather terminate her child, than close her legs, she shouldn't be given the option to have more... Yes, that is a severe case and I think forced sterilization should only be used in the most severe of cases, but it should be highly encouraged to those women who can't afford to care for them...
I mean really, when it comes down to it I know I would prefer not to watch hundreds of thousands of babies and children die to protect the rights of someone... a child's right to proper care should come first.

 

[indy and lara]

As far as I can see, AIDS is the greatest problem in Africa not overpopulation. Many people are struggling and children looking after sick parents because the parent is dying of AIDS and too weak to work. Sterilisation and implants will not stop the spread of AIDS, only condoms will.

To be honest, I kind of agree with Mum2J&K. If each persons situation was looked at individually - not just a mass sterilising spree, as that wouldnt be right.
But if a woman/family has, say 3, kids, and she/they cant look after or feed them, then I think she should be sterilised. Not forcibly, but heavily encouraged, to do so.
Otherwise, she may go on to have 4, 5, 6, 7 kids and the first 3 that she had will suffer even more!
Wheres the fairness in that?

I know everyone would be screaming "human rights, human rights" but what about the kids?

Sterilisation should be available but IMO it should never be forced, nor heavily encouraged. A mother in this country who has many children, whom she cannot afford would never be led in her choices to do with sterilisation because it is unethical.

Besides of her three children, one, two or three could die, and if they do then there is often an 'empty arms syndrome', many women feel the need to have another baby, not to replace but to help them heal, these are normal feelings whether you be in the UK or Africa, but sterilisation is permanent, it means there is no going back. Also if all three of her children have died, who looks after her as she gets old?

All wrong reasons to have kids!QUOTE]

When my son died I had empty arms syndrome. As did many of the mums I know who have lost children. I do not think that it was the wrong reason to go on and have another child thank you very much. The emotions surrounding losing a child are the same regardless of where you are in the world. It is pretty common to go on to have another child.

There seems to be a thread running through this from some posters that children in Africa only know starvation, rape and abuse. Being born into a poor family does not mean that you will be raped or abused. While there are some African countries where this happens, not all African children face a life of abuse. Sadly children all over the world in many supposedly developed countries face the same yet we do not call to sterilise women in these countries.

I wonder what would happen in centain countries in Africa if women were to be sterilised in a mass programme? Countries do actually need babies to be born or their population will die out. Are only the wealthy in these countries to have children as they are the only ones who will be able to afford to look after them?

 

[Lightworker]

Mum2J&K- oops sorry, when I said "you" I meant the collective you ie those campaigning for sterilization, I did not mean you specifically. And I said high and mighty rich because it is those that can afford to look after their children that want to sterilize those that cannot

 

[flubdub]

To be honest, I kind of agree with Mum2J&K. If each persons situation was looked at individually - not just a mass sterilising spree, as that wouldnt be right.
But if a woman/family has, say 3, kids, and she/they cant look after or feed them, then I think she should be sterilised. Not forcibly, but heavily encouraged, to do so.
Otherwise, she may go on to have 4, 5, 6, 7 kids and the first 3 that she had will suffer even more!
Wheres the fairness in that?

I know everyone would be screaming "human rights, human rights" but what about the kids?

Sterilisation should be available but IMO it should never be forced, nor heavily encouraged. A mother in this country who has many children, whom she cannot afford would never be led in her choices to do with sterilisation because it is unethical.

Besides of her three children, one, two or three could die, and if they do then there is often an 'empty arms syndrome', many women feel the need to have another baby, not to replace but to help them heal, these are normal feelings whether you be in the UK or Africa, but sterilisation is permanent, it means there is no going back. Also if all three of her children have died, who looks after her as she gets old?

All wrong reasons to have kids!QUOTE]

When my son died I had empty arms syndrome. As did many of the mums I know who have lost children. I do not think that it was the wrong reason to go on and have another child thank you very much. The emotions surrounding losing a child are the same regardless of where you are in the world. It is pretty common to go on to have another child.

There seems to be a thread running through this from some posters that children in Africa only know starvation, rape and abuse. Being born into a poor family does not mean that you will be raped or abused. While there are some African countries where this happens, not all African children face a life of abuse. Sadly children all over the world in many supposedly developed countries face the same yet we do not call to sterilise women in these countries.

I wonder what would happen in centain countries in Africa if women were to be sterilised in a mass programme? Countries do actually need babies to be born or their population will die out. Are only the wealthy in these countries to have children as they are the only ones who will be able to afford to look after them?

But you planned your children, yes? I cant imagine women in Africa planning to have kids. Sorry but I cant. Or, maybe one child, and when they cant feed that one, I imagine the child-planning would stop! And also, when you got pregnant after your loss, you knew you could care, and look after the child. These women do not.

 

[Lightworker]

Sterilization (forced or otherwise) is akin to dealing with an overflowing bathub by placing cloths on the floor instead of just turning the tap off. Starving children are a by-product of the actual problem which include the exploitation of africans and their resource eg via unfair trade agreements, corrupt govts, AIDs etc. Sterilization does NOTHING to deal with the ACTUAL problem. Plus, it smells of that old imperialism we (the world) worked to abolish. It is undemocratic and morally reprehensible.

 

[beckibee]

No child will go starving in the UK. NONE. Millions of babies literally starve to death in Africa every year

Exactly that is the point. How can we possibly think that it is okay for this to happen in 2011. Its is a human OBLIGATION to help these people. Its all about education, and thats the main issue. Religion is a problem too, alot are catholics so i believe?? and we all know that the pope has "instructed" them not to used condoms as THEY spread HIV.
Not many people starve to death here in the UK now do they.
Of course here in the UK people need help, and cancer is horrendous but i think while 40 odd children die of malaria every 20 minutes in africa, people can die of cancer. I DO NOT mean that horribly, do you know what i mean?? xx

 

[twinkle1975]

Firstly, if you don't agree with Comic Relief then don't donate. If you don't donate then you have no reason to complain about how the money is spent because it is not your money. The 'charity begins at home' thing always amuses me. It is as if only some things are worth giving to. What things? And if it begins at home then what is acceptable to do? Surely if it begins at home then it then moves on somewhere else where the need is greater?

I sat last night and watched the story of a little girl called Esther who was nursing her dying mum while looking after her toddler sister. Her Mummy died and she talked about the fact that her heart felt as if it was breaking. She has no money for food and does not go to school. And then I looked at my own daughter who was sitting on my knee, having her milk before going to bed and being totally honest, I cried for the next 2 hours. My daughter will never have to face that and I believe that it is my duty to do whatever I can to help other people in this world. And last night what I could do was donate to RND.

Comic Relief has not solved all the problems in Africa. Of course it hasn't. Africa is a huge and diverse continent with complex problems. But the lives of millions of people have so far been improved. That is something to celebrate and be proud of being part of. We support lots of UK and local charities too. They continue to need support so have they also failed as they haven't solved all the problems here? Of courseo not.

There are children in the UK who are living in poverty and who are malnourished but nothing to the extent of the children helped by RND. In the UK, Social Services are available to step in, protect and help vulnerable children and families. There is not an equivalent in Africa.

Children are dying because they do not have clean water or food to eat. This is 2011. This should not still be happening. I will never stop trying to help.

Well put!

 

[Blah11]

at the idea of even thinking of 'heavily encouraging' sterilisation. African women are entitled to have babies and they are also entitled to the same human rights as we are.

 

[flubdub]

at the idea of even thinking of 'heavily encouraging' sterilisation. African women are entitled to have babies and they are also entitled to the same human rights as we are.

And their children are entitled to eat - but they dont.

 

[Blah11]

which is why i donate money to several charities every year.