Re: Child abuse (Was Re: Is the death penalty Extropian?)

Michael Lorrey (
Mon, 30 Nov 1998 17:36:27 -0500

den Otter wrote:

> ----------
> > From: J. R. <>
> > Extropians identify the cause of criminal behavior and deal with that rather
> > than merely react to the behavior. Just about anything would probably work
> > better than the death penalty. In fact, i guess that if you killed the
> > parents of murderers, instead of the murderers, the crime of murder would
> > drop to near zero in one generation, because we can sum up the cause of
> > violent crime in three words: stupid, unfit parents.
> Well, it is true that many of society's problems are caused by parents
> abusing their kids. In fact, afaik, child abuse is a much bigger problem
> than all other crimes combined. Of course it doesn't explain *all* criminal
> activity, as some criminals are simply "born evil" and some crimes are
> fairly rational or due to circumstance. Nevertheless, solving the problem
> of child abuse should be high on every government's agenda (for various
> practical and "moral" reasons)

> How to deal with it?
> a) Compulsory psychological screening and parenting tests for everyone who wants
> children (let them care for a very annoying "automatic" baby that has,
> em, full bodily functions etc. for about a month. That should put off most
> unprepared parents).

I've always thought that it should be as difficult, if not more so, to have children than to get a drivers license. I don't think though that people should be disqualified, per se, but that make the training required sufficient enough that the dead brainers will not even try, due to the intellectual intimidation factor. Of course, if you eliminate socialized health coverage for prenatal care and childbirth, this would also contribute a goodly amount of deterrence.....

> b) No children if you can't support them financially (abuse is especially
> rampant in poor families. Everyone's frustrated (nothing gets people more
> on edge than financial problems, as I know from personal experience),
> the parents are often drunks, the father beats the kids and his wife
> because he's a dumb, frustrated asshole etc. You know the picture...)
> Ironically, those that can least afford it often have the most children.

Yes, however, do you lose your kids if you lose your job? How about, like a credit report for a load application, the prospective parents must have x amount of time of good credit and sufficient earning power to expand the number of offspring. If you screw up afterward, then thats on your reproductive credit report. Oh, the opportunities to be a tyrant are endless....

> c) A special police service for abuse victims: if you're being abused
> at home (or any other place for that matter), the police will install a
> domestic surveillance system without the abuser's knowledge and
> monitor the situation. Evidence gathered in this way will be used in
> court. Incidentally, the monitoring service can also be installed if
> others (such as doctors, friends of the alleged victim, school officials)
> point out a household as potentially abusive).

How about this: At birth everyone gets a chip installed which monitors the person's stress levels. If they ever are in a situation which might be uncomfortable in the slightest way, call in the shock troops. Haul away the offenders to reeducation camps....

> d) Tough punishments for abusers (jail time and corporal punishment).
> After jail (or in the case of minor abuse after a stern warning/fine)
> permanent installment of cameras in the offender's house, as a
> preventive measure and to serve as evidence should abuse reoccur.
> The victim gets a personal alarm, which summons the police (after
> checking via integral phone and the cam system). In a libertarian
> scenario, this would be a PPA (but, how does a kid pay a PPA?
> Uh-huh!)

A kids PPA services would be provided by the parents policy. A PPA could mandate such coverage, and be the agency imposing huge premiums for those that reproduce without the proper training and financial wherewithal....

> e) In more severe cases the victim would be placed in a special
> caring center (with varying degrees of independence according to
> age, but generally speaking a lot of freedom, according to the
> golden rule). Separate living quarters for everyone, of course full
> surveillance (appartment surveillance is optional, not compulsory)
> to prevent any abuse or other irregularities by staff (strict selection,
> few or no men) or other occupants. The general feel should be that
> of a vacation resort or a hotel, *not* a (pedophile & fascist-ridden )
> prison. Education is, of course, "transhuman style", with a lot of
> emphasis on rational thinking, personal empowerment etc. Multiple
> generations of rational, law-abiding and progressive individuals
> would likely be the pleasant (side-) effect of the anti-abuse program.
> f) Of course, the abusers (should they ever get out of jail) would
> be slapped with a perpetual restraining order, to be enforced by
> an electronic ankle bracelet (or something more sophisticated).

Who says it has to be the ankle....? ;)

> The former victim gets a receiver that goes off whenever the
> abuser gets within the "forbidden" (1 mile for ex.) radius. Of course
> the police also get a beep. Should the abuser somehow manage
> to do harm to the victim anyway (or abuse someone else), he
> goes to jail (labor camp) for life (or at least a *long* time). Should
> he kill his victim, he is to be executed in a most unpleasant way.
> g) It goes without saying that known abusers are *never ever*
> allowed to have kids (again).

Oh, lovely. We now have a benevolent world state like David Brin describes in his Uplift Wars novels, where people judged unfit due to behavior, performance or geneticfactors are classified as PP's (probationary personalities). I think by now most here know that Brin is little more than a statist wolf in libertarian sheeps much as I like his writing, he's really little more than a wannabe Hitler.

Mike Lorrey