Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 110

Thread: Beneficiary contraception plan 'intrusive'

  1. #1
    Join Date
    13th December 2008 - 18:22
    Bike
    Your mom
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    3,901

    Beneficiary contraception plan 'intrusive'

    The Government's plan to offer free long-term contraception for beneficiaries and their daughters is being labelled as an insult and intrusive to women's right to have children.

    Social Development Minister Paula Bennett yesterday said contraception would eventually be fully funded for female beneficiaries and their 16 to 19-year-old daughters.

    The move was part of the first round of controversial welfare reforms that would cost the Government $287.5 million over four years, including $81.5m of new money.

    Auckland Action Against Poverty spokeswoman Sue Bradford this morning said while the contraception was voluntary, it was "totally unacceptable" for the Government to get involved in women's reproduction.

    "Most New Zealand women will not accept that. It's because beneficiaries are seen as people who are worth less than others," she said.

    Bradford said the Government was persuading women to take contraception through sanctions, such as having beneficiaries who have an additional child on the benefit to look for work when that child was one.

    "We believe that women in this country have the right to control their own reproduction," she said.

    Bennett denied young women would be coerced to get a contraception implant.

    "It's not compulsory, it's just something to add to them trying to plan their family so they've got choices. It's completely reasonable."

    Bennett said she often heard young women could not afford contraception.

    "There is often an additional cost. Some are subsidised, some are not and it depends on what is best for you and your body as to what you take," she told Radio New Zealand.

    Bennett said she met young women who saw getting pregnant and going on the domestic purposes benefit as a "viable option".

    "Twenty-nine per cent of those on benefits have had a child while on benefits, so that's pretty high numbers.

    "What we are saying is if the cost is a barrier, let's help you overcome that cost so you've got choices."

    Prime Minister John Key told TV3's Firstline programme that young people often engaged in sexual activity and the Government was trying to make sure the outcome was in their hands.

    It wasn't new for the Government to subsidise contraception and the Health Ministry had provided free condoms for many years.

    The long-term contraception was a more effective method of family planning, he said.

    "The advantage as I understand it is that it is highly effective and really doesn't require too much thought. You're just on that programme and it lasts for three years."
    Ad Feedback

    Other welfare reforms included all solo-parent beneficiaries being required to look for part-time work when their youngest child is five, then full-time when that child is 14.

    Assistance payments would provide young parents with up to $6 an hour for 50 hours a week for their children to attend approved early childhood education services.

    That's on top of funding for the 1155 extra early-childhood education places needed to meet the needs of parents returning to work or study.

    The biggest chunk of funding announced yesterday was for services aimed at 16 and 17-year-olds who were not in work, training or education.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...plan-intrusive

    The government really should introduce compulsory sterilization to stop some of these sluts from breeding like rabbits at the expense of taxpayers.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    9th January 2005 - 22:12
    Bike
    Street Triple R
    Location
    christchurch
    Posts
    8,380
    Nazional Party Eugenics programme, step 1. First its "voluntary" then its "complusory" then its "strength thru joy" then its "just line up over there for the showers".

    the upcoming war is not between races, or stupid religions, its between the haves, and have nots.
    I thought elections were decided by angry posts on social media. - F5 Dave

  3. #3
    Join Date
    23rd December 2007 - 09:39
    Bike
    Hog
    Location
    Mainland
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by HenryDorsetCase View Post
    Nazional Party Eugenics programme, step 1. First its "voluntary" then its "complusory" then its "strength thru joy" then its "just line up over there for the showers".

    the upcoming war is not between races, or stupid religions, its between the haves, and have nots.
    Interesting.....

    I'd actually support paying people to have irreversible vasectomies and irreversible tubal ligations.

    Pay guys $500 to have vasectomies.......and an extra $500 for every felony conviction.

    Pay girls $1000 to have tubal ligations....and an extra $1000 for every felony conviction.

    Why not encourage people who cannot afford to raise the children they already have without taxpayer funding to NOT have more children they cannot afford to raise without taxpayer funding?

    If folks having 2 kids before they go on the dole and 2 kids after they go on the dole(for whatever legitimate reason) is such a good thing....then them having 10 or 20 kids must be better no?

    How about that muppet down south who "was killed by Coca Cola and Big Tobacco"? She had 8 kids.....I bet they all turn out to be super awesome productive adults.

    Have a read of Freakonomics and how legalized abortion is regarded as having a positive impact on reducing crime:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legaliz...d_crime_effect

    So if voluntary abortion is good in reducing crime, then free birth control amongst the cohort at higher risk of producing criminals must be better.

    But then the lefties call responsible efforts to reduce crime and social costs "racist eugenics" because it attrits their voting base 18 years later.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    15th February 2005 - 15:34
    Bike
    Katanasaurus Rex
    Location
    The Gates of Delirium
    Posts
    9,020
    Quote Originally Posted by HenryDorsetCase View Post
    then its "just line up over there for the showers".
    As long as Sue Bradford's in that line, I'm all good with that.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    25th April 2009 - 17:38
    Bike
    RC36, RC31, KR-E, CR125
    Location
    Manawatu
    Posts
    7,364
    I think it is a good idea, I don't think having children should be a right, as the resource drain incurred impinges on other people's rights. Why not encourage those who are not contributing members of society, not to have children?
    "A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal

  6. #6
    Join Date
    24th June 2004 - 17:27
    Bike
    So old you won't care
    Location
    Kapiti
    Posts
    7,880
    I dunno - I think its reasonable. Responsible people would try to avoid having families until they can support one and a responsible society recognizes that accidents happen and will support people should that occur. Most people on benefits struggle and I think many people will take advantage of this offer.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    6th June 2005 - 22:26
    Bike
    Ducati 996 '01, Yamaha '04 R6 Race
    Location
    Close to Hams
    Posts
    928
    Its not intrusive, its helping people out!
    Its not compulsory!
    I wish I could get free contraception, I have 3 kids and don't want anymore but I have to pay for it myself.
    I waited until I could afford kids though, and they were planned.
    I wouldn't dream of having kids with no thought for how I could support them, and definitely not if I was on the benefit!!!!!
    Viva La Figa

  8. #8
    Join Date
    13th July 2011 - 14:47
    Bike
    A Japper
    Location
    In the moment
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by SimJen View Post
    Its not intrusive, its helping people out!
    Its not compulsory!
    I wish I could get free contraception, I have 3 kids and don't want anymore but I have to pay for it myself.
    I waited until I could afford kids though, and they were planned.
    I wouldn't dream of having kids with no thought for how I could support them, and definitely not if I was on the benefit!!!!!
    Yep, that pretty much sums it up. I wish more people thought like that though.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    2nd October 2011 - 19:50
    Bike
    2000 Honda Hornet 600
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2,428
    Quote Originally Posted by SimJen View Post
    Its not intrusive, its helping people out!
    Its not compulsory!
    I wish I could get free contraception, I have 3 kids and don't want anymore but I have to pay for it myself.
    I waited until I could afford kids though, and they were planned.
    I wouldn't dream of having kids with no thought for how I could support them, and definitely not if I was on the benefit!!!!!
    +1 And for the proposed plan. If these young people (and not just the girls/women but their partners du jour) won't take responsibility for their actions at society's expense, then it is well within society's right and responsibility to administrate them.

    Sue Bradford should give up her politician's 'benefits' and live like the people she's 'defending' before she opens her mouth.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Your beliefs don't make you a better person, your behaviour does.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    5th August 2005 - 13:36
    Bike
    '69 Lambretta & SR400
    Location
    By the other harbour.
    Posts
    707
    Quote Originally Posted by Tigadee View Post
    Sue Bradford should give up her politician's 'benefits' and live like the people she's 'defending' before she opens her mouth.
    Cut her some slack, she just doesn't seem to understand that not all women have her natural advantage of being able to use her looks as a method of contraception.



    (yeah, stolen from Kiwiblog, but I can't find the link to do proper attribution just now...)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lobster View Post
    Only a homo puts an engine back together WITHOUT making it go faster.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    27th April 2009 - 10:10
    Bike
    2015 KTM200XC
    Location
    Hellishville
    Posts
    214
    IMO its not going to change a thing. Its not that expensive to use contraception anyway so WTF? meh wot a load of crap. Family Planning Clinic is cheap as chips - if your going to be a baby factory to supplement your income then this 'initiative' is not going to stop you. I thought there was already some deal where if you were on the benefit and you had more kids they would not be included anyway. Seriously? we pay the politians to come up with this shit? what a fukn waste of time.
    WESTIE CHICKS ROCK

  12. #12
    Join Date
    1st November 2005 - 08:18
    Bike
    F-117.
    Location
    Banana Republic of NZ
    Posts
    7,048
    Quote Originally Posted by buffstar View Post
    Its not that expensive to use contraception anyway so WTF?
    Explain that to the catholics.
    It would cut down the churches' income and create a smaller pool of little boys for the priests to fondle if their customers had to use contraception.
    TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”

  13. #13
    Join Date
    2nd October 2011 - 19:50
    Bike
    2000 Honda Hornet 600
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2,428
    Quote Originally Posted by buffstar View Post
    IMO its not going to change a thing. Its not that expensive to use contraception anyway so WTF? meh wot a load of crap. Family Planning Clinic is cheap as chips - if your going to be a baby factory to supplement your income then this 'initiative' is not going to stop you.
    I reckon They're gonna put something into the water for these people, forget "voluntary"...

    And cheap is still not free...

    Quote Originally Posted by buffstar View Post
    Seriously? we pay the politians to come up with this shit? what a fukn waste of time.
    Indeed... I mean, who decided the capital of the country should be right smack on top of a faultline?!
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Your beliefs don't make you a better person, your behaviour does.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    21st May 2007 - 22:52
    Bike
    Noire
    Location
    Eastside
    Posts
    954
    I have girlfriends whose men have walked out them, leaving them to raise their babie/s predominantly on their own, they do a great job, full credit, I salute and love em to bits, it's a 24 hour demanding job.

    Sure, women have the right to control their own reproductive systems But, I think once you're at the point where you're on a benefit, you also need to start taking some responsibility for your own life and not place more demands on the support that exists within your own network, on your finances and wider society.

    So, I reckon it's great and should've been introduced a long time ago, it is responsible, it's not intrusive as it's not compulsary, maybe a few less accidental and unwanted pregnancies will occur because of this policy.
    ter·ra in·cog·ni·ta
    Achievement is not always success while reputed failure often is. It is honest endeavor, persistent effort to do the best possible under any and all circumstances.
    Orison Swett Marden

  15. #15
    Join Date
    24th June 2004 - 17:27
    Bike
    So old you won't care
    Location
    Kapiti
    Posts
    7,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Genestho View Post
    I have girlfriends whose men have walked out them, leaving them to raise their babie/s predominantly on their own, they do a great job, full credit, I salute and love em to bits, it's a 24 hour demanding job.

    Sure women have the right to control their own reproductive systems But, I think once you're at the point where you're on a benefit, you also need to start taking some responsibility for your own life and not place more demands on the support that exists within your own network, on your finances and wider society.

    So, I reckon it's great and should've been introduced a long time ago, it is responsible, it's not intrusive as it's not compulsary, maybe a few less accidental and unwanted pregnancies will occur because of this policy.

    Yeah I don't get Sue B at all on this. If the contraception is given discretely and free it just give women MORE choices without sacrificing the family budget. Like you I know heaps of ladies left to bring up kids by ratbags and not one of them wants another child at that time. The rabid minority who deliberately have kids for extra bene money are unreachable anyway and wont change. Good on the govt I say.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •