Having trouble with your out of control teen? Dump them at a hospital
 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/08/neb...ven/index.html

I havent researched this, but these parents shoudl they have a change of heart should NEVER be allowed to have their children back......this is just shameful.:mad:

I may be the sole person that feels this way, but I do not feel any anger/ill will towards those parents that use the Safe Habor options. In most cases, it's parents who are "at the end of their rope" and just don't know what else to do. HOPEFULLY they directed to the proper community resources that offer assistance to get them over this hump or to AT LEAST teach them how to cope with a pre-teen/teen.

Who I don't feel sorry for are those parents that don't give a squat about their kids and instead of at least putting them into the care of the state/foster family, they do inhumane things to their children such as abuse them, kill them, starve them, or some other form of sadistic treatment.

I have been reading these stories. With so many of them being over ten years old, I am wondering if these are parents are actually unable to care for their children or if these are parents who are having trouble with their teenagers/pre-teens who are beginning to find out who they are and trying to find boundaries. Teenagers and pre-teens are not going through the easiest phase and its a hard time to parent. The children often are trying to figure out what they are doing and what will be problematic. The parents are then faced with a fuzzy line of their children not being children anymore and trying to push away from the identity the parents gave the kids.

No I'm not a parent. My mom and I have talked about this very often. She studied this age range and psychology.

So the basis of my nice little rant is: Are the parents just fed up with the teenagers or are they actually unable to care for their children?

Personally, I think you should also consider the economic situation of most of the people that use such options. With the climate changes, things are harder on farmers, and remember: the economic crisis is magnified in the lowest income brackets.

Thank you for that point. I usually put that under the unable to care for the children.
I don't know much or really anything about Nebraska economics and climate.

Sorry, I read it as "physically" unable to care for their children. Anyways...

I'm with you. Far better to drop them off then to have them be abused - by neglect, verbal or physical abuse.

I don't believe the article goes into detail about why the teens were surrendered.

It doesn't seem to make sense to me though that people would drop off their teens/pre-teens because they couldn't afford them anymore? It's not like they are designer handbags that they can just get rid of.

If they are physically unable to care for them, would it make sense to have relatives help raise them? Plenty of people are raised by their aunts/uncles/grandparents in situations where their parents are unable to do so.

If they are just misbehaving and no one wants them, I am not sure what to say. It's really sad, but then again I've never been in that situation since I don't have kids.

It seems strange that anyone would choose to abandon their kids, but I think that it's better to give people an option to surrender their kids at any age than to merely intervene once they are actually neglecting or abusing them.

I believe parents are morally obligated to take care of their children certainly, but it's probably a good idea to give them a legal option when they realize that for some reason that they can't.

I just have a hard time imagining that this is going to become a big trend, or at least a bigger trend than we would have seen with kids ending up in either foster care or youth detention centers had the parents been compelled to try to keep them.

But it isn't like this is a new concept. The orphan trains of the early 1900s and even the selling of children into servitude has been present in society since Biblical times.

I don't deny that, but do you think that allow parents to avoid criminal charges for dropping off teens or children at a hospital is really going to create a big trend of people doing it?

I think the only people who would actually do such a thing are parents who are afraid that they've lost the means to provide for the children who if they kept them would likely face criminal charges of neglect or abuse OR are parents who were so poor at parenting or whose children have such strong and out of control personalities that kids would end up out of the parents' care because the kids ended up in trouble with the law.

I just don't think there are going to be too many people who simply decide they'd prefer not to keep their kids even though they could continue to provide for them.

I think it's almost just a way to put your kids in state foster care without having to neglect or abuse them first.

Anybody who would do this shouldn't have custody of their kids, whether it's for financial, behavioral or purely selfish reasons. But, wouldn't it have been better if that mom in NC had done this instead of driving her kids into a lake in her car and reporting her car hijacked?