Projection Prevention offers to help UK drug addicts stop having kids - people freak out

Oct 21, 2010 15:06

I have always supported Project Prevention, a charity that pays drug addicts to get long-term birth control or sterilization in order to prevent more kids from being born as crack babies. They've been active in the USA for a while but recently they expanded into the UK as this news story discusses:
Charity offers UK drug addicts £200 to be Read more... )

drugs, project prevention, crackheads, overpopulation, sterilization

Leave a comment

Comments 140

teamharkness October 21 2010, 20:08:22 UTC
I don't see what the problem is ...

Reply


object_sleep October 21 2010, 20:17:12 UTC
I'm sorry, but this is very much like eugenics.

Its coercing vulnerable, addicted people into making a life-long, or long term decision. And when it comes to drug addiction, people aren't necessarily in their right minds, or a stable mindset when making this decision.

I am adamantly against this practice, or any practice that resembles it, and am also adamantly childfree.

BUT. Because I am PRO CHOICE, I am also ANTI COERCION. Please don't peddle this bullshit as being a good thing.

Reply

ycleped October 21 2010, 20:29:27 UTC
I think I am more comfortable with it when it comes to long-term birth control, because that does make sense. It's a one-time thing that you don't have to think about, and it keeps women from having the stress of a baby (who will also suffer ill effects) on their bodies in addition to the stresses from drugs. It's not permanent and it seems like a pretty sensible way to avoid unplanned pregnancy. A free IUD for someone who does not want kids in the next few years is an okay thing.

I am, however, right there with you when it comes to sterilization. It's permanent, it can be invasive (and dangerous if you're in poor health, or incapable of proper aftercare), and it's not a decision someone should be making when they are pretty clearly not in a good place for decision-making. If it's not eugenics, it's certainly unethical because you're dealing with people who are vulnerable. It's a very uncomfortable place.

Reply

coconut_theory October 21 2010, 20:30:41 UTC
Agreed on all counts 100%.

Reply

umlautless October 21 2010, 20:37:47 UTC
Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

It would be great if there was a form of BC that worked for everyone and was totally safe and reversible. But there's not.

IUDs are a bad choice for people with lots of partners (and people on drugs tend to have a lot of partners) because you can end up with (sometimes fatal) etopic pregnancies. Hormonal methods (long term ones, depo, nuvaring, the implants) can have side effects and be poor choices for people who have other compromising health issues.

It would be nice if there was a fund available, so people who came to the decision themselves could get it. But PAYING them is all kinds of a bad idea.

Reply


dog October 21 2010, 20:37:55 UTC
woah wat the fuck, people. it is giving them the option of LONG TERM BIRTH CONTROL, which does not mean they ALL MUST get sterilized! jesus.

Project Prevention, started in 1997, says it has paid money out to 3,242 addicts, or clients as it prefers to call them. Most of them were women and 1,226 were permanently sterilised. Thirty-five men have had vasectomies.

on my planet, 1,226 + 35 does not equal 3,242. options are always good shit. over half her clients are white. OF COURSE they're gonna be poor, they're getting paid instead of payING for BC. honestly? the choice is THERE. I LIKE IT.

Reply

barbayat October 21 2010, 20:48:41 UTC
Gee, but we can not have people making decisions for themselves - and maybe life with the consequences of making that decision. *rollyseyes*

As I see it, chances that someone who is so keen on grabbin 200 pounds that despite knowing it is permanent get sterilised ever turns out to be responsible parent material are significantly lower than creating a baby that will be born with problems and parents not suited to take care of them.

Sometimes if you mess up, you need to life up to it.

Reply

object_sleep October 21 2010, 21:13:04 UTC
This is a really fucked up comment.

My partner and I choose to be childfree, as a mutual decision. But when I met him, he was a recovering herion addict.

Gee, but we can not have people making decisions for themselves - and maybe life with the consequences of making that decision. *rollyseyes*

And you're an asshole for thinking that people with addiction problems (drug, alcohol or otherwise) are prone to making good decisions, or are going to make the best decision for themselves long term when it comes to fertility.

Reply

barbayat October 21 2010, 21:22:13 UTC
So you feel it is better they chose pregnancy or knocking up others and create unwanted, neglected kids that have a much greater risk for health issues. And I am the asshole, really?

Reply


longtail October 21 2010, 20:48:19 UTC
I wish people would learn what "Eugenics" is. This is NOTHING like eugenics. Unless you believe that addiction is totally hereditary and we're trying to "breed out" people prone to addiction.

Frankly, I'd rather a drug addict get it and maybe suffer some regret later on than having a helpless child suffer through addiction in the womb, health problems, abuse, and neglect at the hands of an addict.

So I wholeheartedly support this.

Reply

object_sleep October 21 2010, 21:29:21 UTC
And you're a jerk for supporting this, and apparently not pro-choice.

This is absolutely eugenics.

This is coercing the 'undesirable' members of society (in this case, drug addicts) into sterilization, or long-term birth control methods. WTF do you mean this is not eugenics?

And what drug addict wouldn't accept free money? omg fucking coercion to the point where my eyes fall out.

Reply

bloodyrose82 October 21 2010, 22:04:55 UTC
As a child of an addict, I can categorically say you are talking out of your ass.

Reply

object_sleep October 21 2010, 22:06:57 UTC
I am a child of TWO addicts.

One to alcohol, the other to drugs.

And no, I'm not talking out of my ass.

Reply


elbereth October 21 2010, 20:51:44 UTC
Kids being born with severe health problems due to drug addiction is far FAR worse than giving someone with a severe drug addiction sterilization.

As much as I dislike babies, my heart really goes out to those born with severe addictions or problems due to the lifestyle of the parent. It's one of the saddest things that could happen to the human race. It's quite frustrating to see an effort like this that has good intentions made to prevent something as horrible as this, only to have others turn around and call this "eugenics." This is not an effort to weed out certain qualities in the human race. Anyone could develop a drug addiction regardless of intelligence, class, race, personality, situation, and so on. If the addiction becomes so severe that it could hurt others, then yes, something should absolutely be done about it.

Ideally, long-term non-permanent birth control would ideally be used in place of sterilization since there are some perfectly good options in existence.

Reply

dog October 21 2010, 21:02:06 UTC
ahh. thank you, you said what i was trying to say. i am much too frustrated for words today!

Reply

barbayat October 21 2010, 21:29:40 UTC
Don't be frustrated (I know easier said than done) - as always some people are somehow too close for various reasons to the subject of Eugenics to think rationally or compassionately when it comes to something like this.

Hmm, on a different note - I wonder if caffeine addiction would make me eligable :D

Reply

morrigan530 October 22 2010, 00:30:54 UTC
Thiiiiis.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up