Bob Whiteside wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Bob Whiteside wrote:

For a person who claims to be from Minnesota who has so many strong
opinions
about men's parental responsibility, you ought to understand the
Minnesota
laws regarding women's parental avoidance.
Never heard of it, but then I've only been back for four years.

"Under the Minnesota program, called "A Safe Place for Newborns,", a
mother
can anonymously drop off an unharmed newborn without fear of
prosecution.
She will be asked to volunteer medical information, but not required to
do
so. No identification required, no signed relinquishment, no mandatory
medical information."
So tell me, which do you prefer, having the child dropped off at a
firehouse or hospital, or dropped into a dumpster? That's a very serious
question, and I hope that you will respond in that spirit.

I prefer having the mother prosecuted for child neglect and abuse, and force
her to be accountable for her decisions to birth a child she didn't want.

Under this scenario she ignored her legal rights to use a post-coital drug
to stop the pregnancy, have an abortion to terminate the pregnancy, give the
child up for adoption, or take the child to term and raise it. Instead, she
chose to have the child and then abandon it. The choice between child
neglect and child murder is a false choice.

I see your point, but shouldn't we also be thinking of the welfare of
the unwanted child?

If this "parent" is going to get rid of the unwanted child, then the
child is going to be gotten rid of, one way or another. In my opinion,
the responsible way to do so is through adoption, but for some reason
that I do not understand a substantial number of "parents" are unwilling
to do that. So we're left with the unpalatable choices of either the
firehouse or the dumpster. Given those choices, I'll go for the
firehouse, in the interest of protecting the unwanted child. Not the
preferred outcome, but better than finding a newborn child dead in a
dumpster.