Yes. Co-opting CPS a weapon in the “war on drugs” was a very intentional choice with extremely predictable outcomes.
While CPS is a good thing in concept it most often gets used as a weapon for class warfare. No angel investor is getting their kids taken away for getting busted snorting coke off a stripper.
Co-opting CPS a weapon in the “war on drugs” was a very intentional choice with extremely predictable outcomes.
That’s a nice sentiment until you look at the actual data. Drug-addicted parents are horrible for their children. Even if you want to make the argument that it was some intentional class warfare shit—and I’m not actually disputing that point here—it’s still a fact that SA parents tend to be shit parents. Every case should be evaluated on its own merits, that’s the point. And that doesn’t happen, and it sucks. But that doesn’t mean that drug testing pregnant mothers is a bad policy inherently. In fact, it’s a good policy, with sub-par implementation following it.
Would you like to provide the data you’re referencing? Because what data I’m aware of is nowhere near as black and white as you suggest.
that doesn’t mean that drug testing pregnant mothers is a bad policy inherently ___ it’s a good policy, with sub-par implementation
What is the goal with the drug tests? If it’s to determine what additional resources and medical care will be needed then I agree with you. If the goal is incarceration and punishment, which is the majority of “resources” CPS has to offer, then it’s actively harmful.
Good policy fundamentally requires good implementation. Don’t forget when forced sterilization was just “good policy” for the exact reasons you’re outlining above. The “sub-par implementation” you’re describing has the same ultimate result, just with a lot more orphans.
Yes. Co-opting CPS a weapon in the “war on drugs” was a very intentional choice with extremely predictable outcomes.
While CPS is a good thing in concept it most often gets used as a weapon for class warfare. No angel investor is getting their kids taken away for getting busted snorting coke off a stripper.
That’s a nice sentiment until you look at the actual data. Drug-addicted parents are horrible for their children. Even if you want to make the argument that it was some intentional class warfare shit—and I’m not actually disputing that point here—it’s still a fact that SA parents tend to be shit parents. Every case should be evaluated on its own merits, that’s the point. And that doesn’t happen, and it sucks. But that doesn’t mean that drug testing pregnant mothers is a bad policy inherently. In fact, it’s a good policy, with sub-par implementation following it.
Would you like to provide the data you’re referencing? Because what data I’m aware of is nowhere near as black and white as you suggest.
What is the goal with the drug tests? If it’s to determine what additional resources and medical care will be needed then I agree with you. If the goal is incarceration and punishment, which is the majority of “resources” CPS has to offer, then it’s actively harmful.
Good policy fundamentally requires good implementation. Don’t forget when forced sterilization was just “good policy” for the exact reasons you’re outlining above. The “sub-par implementation” you’re describing has the same ultimate result, just with a lot more orphans.