fivetide

iTrader: (1)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-18295310

Personally, I'm fed up of reading about these sort of scum. At what point do we say the kid has a right to a decent life and that is going to mean taking them away from their smack head, junkie, boozing filth of a family and letting someone who will actually care for them have a go?

I'm all for sterilising junkies.

5t.

chocolate_o_brian

iTrader: (22)

Leslie

There are circumstances where the safety of a child transcends all other needs and that child should be protected without a second thought!

Les

Turbohot

I agree 100%. Until the addicts show full recovery, they should have no right to even conceive a thought of having a child.They are incapable of caring for one.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Can't argue with that.

At a guess I reckon they gave the kid methadone to shut him up as he was crying out for attention.

Conception of a child is so easy but the responsibilty and care required is massive. A pair of druggies isn't going to be able to bring a well balanced person into this world.

So yeah glue her crack shut with epoxy resin and rip off his nuts (if it hurts them, they can take more heroine - and hopefuly OD on it).

jef

iTrader: (13)

lot more to it that that.

social services put keeping a family together above all else, unless at direct risk.

and actually getting things done takes a fcking age!

BAD BOY V

iTrader: (1)

theres was an article somewhere in the paper last week, at a couple who killed there toddler by braking his arms and limbs and got sparred prison because it was there first offence, instead got fooking community service in the end, i mean WTF?? did anyone else see the article i think it was in the sun?

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

Scum, neither owned up to it why only 9yrs though ffs

TX.

Turbohot

Druggies and alkys are extremely high risk, but some non-druggies are also better off without babies TBH. I don't think they will essentially lead unfulfilled lives just because they decide not to have children. Some are very sensible to decide against having children as with their reluctance, they acknolwdge their lack of emotional capability and the lack of their readiness to care for a child. I'd rather this than some healf-hearted and/or a screwed-up person giving birth to a child; doesn't matter if they eat golden crunchies with silver spoon instead, and abstain from smokes, alcohol and drugs all their life. Don't have one if you don't want one. Don't have one, if you have any doubts. Search yourself deep before having a child whether you can provide a genuine care for it. There are some who end up having babies to make their quarrelsome relationships with their partners right. They think that the vulnerable child's existence will cement the cracks. Wow, job cut out for the baby before it is even born! Some have babies because they themselves have been deprived of love, and they would like to use the child as a filler for this deprivation. Many of such type forget that the child is a separate entity, and he/she shouldn't be loaded with that responsibility for life. So wrong, as it could affect child development very negatively. Babies aren't dolls to play with, they are living beings. Treat them right. If you can't do that, don't ******* bother with one.

CREWJ

I wonder if it can be passed on by breast feeding?

Sounds like they gave him much more than that though.

cookstar

iTrader: (6)

And if neither owned up, and they don't actually know who gave it to him, why on earth has the woman yet again got a much reduced sentence than than the equally involved man?