Category: Family Planning & Child Rights

This week Having Kids urged officials in Florida to consider a Fair Start order in the event of a conviction of a couple charged with child abuse. Part of the media coverage of Having Kids’ letter included a response by a Florida-based civil rights attorney, Andrea Flynn Mogensen, who expressed concern that a Fair Start order would infringe upon an individual’s constitutional rights, including one’s fundamental right to privacy.

Having Kids agrees that preservation of fundamental rights is important, but all courts recognize that these rights are not unlimited. Specifically, when an individual is convicted of felony offenses, our legal system is rife with examples of limiting constitutional rights – convicted felons lose their right to possess weapons, for example, associate with other convicted felons, and even to vote for certain lengths of time. In fact, Florida is one of only two states in the country that imposes a lifelong denial of the right to vote to all citizens with a felony record.  

If the legal system is able to put restrictions on certain fundamental rights for convicted felons, the government has the authority to impose narrowly tailored restrictions on the right to have children for those convicted of child abuse or neglect, for the rehabilitation of the parents, and for limited periods of time. Each person’s liberty is restricted by the liberties of others, and when it comes to parenting in the context of a child abuse conviction, we must protect the rights of future children.It’s the most compelling state interest of all – the most important collective concern, because it determines the future.

To address additional points raised by Ms. Mogensen:

• The United States is not the only country with constitutional liberties. But if we want our system of human rights to be the best in the world, we should understand that the right to have children is nuanced and not reducible to the nonsense of “it’s nobody else’s business.” 
• The right to have kids is not unlimited; several high courts have upheld fair start-type probation orders. Ms. Mogensen’s statement that courts are limited to policing pregnant mothers is incorrect.  
• The orders would ideally be authorized by state legislation. If Florida legislators want to protect kids and prevent their abuse, they will sponsor and pass such legislation, permitting judges the legal authority to make such orders in narrow circumstances, where appropriate. 
• There is no legal or moral rationale for ensuring that abusive and/or neglectful parents have more kids while they are being rehabilitated. Doing so puts children into unfit surroundings (either the troubled home or failing child protection systems) and thereby harms them.  

The bottom line is that we, as a society, show ourselves willing to tolerate child abuse and neglect until we embrace limitations like Fair Star orders. Are we really willing to make a policy decision that harms parents, kids, and the community, when we can’t even articulate a concrete reason for doing so? Think about it. Having Kids stands for reason, and for child-first family planning. Join us!

Take action now to prevent, and not just react to, child abuse and neglect.

Since 1983, the month of April has been designated Child Abuse Prevention month in the US. Although there is certainly more awareness about child abuse today – 35 years later – the number of cases of abuse and neglect continues to rise. Having Kids is taking steps to protect children by urging judges to prevent convicted child abuse from having additional children. Even this very clearly defined and limited step is surprisingly controversial, as society currently privileges parents’ “right” to reproduce above what should be every child’s right to be born into even a minimum level of well-being.

Recently, Having Kids targeted parents in a particularly egregious child abuse case in Tennessee for Fair Start orders. Having Kids selected Tennessee because their legislature is considering legislation HB 2520/SB2133, which would limit state courts’ authority from using coercive family planning as part of sentencing. The legislation is a direct response to one judge’s recent and controversial offers of reduced sentencing conditioned on sterilization. This legislation sets one end of the spectrum of state intervention in family planning – what is not permissible – and that is laudable. Permissible and necessary family planning must also be discussed, however. After all, the state has no greater interest than the well-being of its citizens, including its future citizens.

Having Kids asked Tennessee Governor Haslam to consider working with the legislature to protect future children from abuse, using its existing and constitutionally approved probationary authority. Sharon Helene Robinson and Bradley Dwight Hill stand accused of criminal child neglect after their severely autistic child was found naked, and covered in both human and dog feces, which he was eating. The police reported: “Ms. Robinson stated that she is a meth user and this also contributed to her not caring for her autistic son.”

Having Kids petitioned state authorities to seek a Fair Start court order, in the event the couple is convicted, temporarily prohibiting them from having additional children during the pendency of any probation, in order to facilitate the couple’s rehabilitation and recovery, and, more importantly, to prevent the neglect of any future children.

Having Kids is targeting Tennessee because of what HB 2520/SB2133 expressly says regarding coercive family planning and sentencing, and the broader and problematic message it sends regarding family planning, in general. The model Fair Start order is non-coercive and seeks to strike a balance between the rights of parents and the needs of future children and the community. The charges against Robinson and Hill show a clear need for that balance, and Fair Start orders make clear the state’s compelling interest in the welfare of future children. We must not allow child abusers to create more of their own victims; Fair Start orders represent a clear and constitutionally appropriate step forward.

Ultimately, a better future for all means reforming family planning to focus on the child, first and foremost, to give every child a fair start in life. Please join us in this work for a better future for all.