Quote: Marc P @ May 22 2012, 2:38 PM BSTI think you will find that Starbucks for one have issued some policy guidelines in this matter.
Is this why they put your name on it now?
I read the news today oh boy! Page 829
I don't see why we need such treatment at all, after all, our immigrant population is highly capable of reproducing. Let's simply encourage more people to come here and pop out multitudes of ethnically diverse kids. Who could possibly object?
Quote: Nogget @ May 22 2012, 2:44 PM BSTI don't see why we need such treatment at all, after all, our immigrant population is highly capable of reproducing. Let's simply encourage more people to come here and pop out multitudes of ethnically diverse kids. Who could possibly object?
Topical! (Where the hell have you been? 1983? This has been happening for decades.)
Quote: Badge @ May 22 2012, 2:43 PM BSTIs this why they put your name on it now?
The King size cups you mean??
Quote: zooo @ May 22 2012, 2:23 PM BSTIf they made adoption less impossible/ridiculous/terminally slow they could probably avoid a lot of NHS spending.
Not to make it sound like a supermarket, but what's the availability of adoptable children over there? I have friends who tried to adopt but the wait time for a healthy baby was just about infinite. They could pick up a heroin-addicted minority child with cerebral palsy without too much difficulty but they did like so many others in this country: they "bought" a baby from China. Funny how adopted Chinese babies are always females ... 
Firstly, one doesn't get inexhaustible treatment until one becomes pregnant. There are time and financial constraints already in place.
Perhaps if people can't afford to have it done privately then you could argue they can't provide for the immense costs of having a child, and shouldn't have the initial enablement from public money.
But if you offer it to some then it is ludicrous and dangerous to not offer it to all.
There is no fundamental aspect of NHS funds allocation that every single person would agree on. A recent poll of GPs showed that the majority (who answered the poll) thought that smokers (and drink related injuries or illnesses, and obesity issues) should be unprioritised in receiving treatment.
So maybe we should all demand that when we pay for anything we get to allocate where the taxes go.
Agree entirely that the bureaucracy and general astonishing approach to approving people for adoption is one of the most shameful aspects of this country.
Children already needing loving homes is the reason I don't feel comfortable with free IVF for those who already have a biological child.
But it's the responsibility of the state and society to make this an easier process, not the responsibility of the individual to have to battle to such an extent when their other option is to attempt having their own child and not have to deal with a million heartbreaking pieces of legislation that say things like if you're a smoker who smokes outdoors you're still a greater threat to a child with no parents who is living in care homes who will probably never feel loved and know what it's like to be part of a family.
Quote: DaButt @ May 22 2012, 2:49 PM BSTNot to make it sound like a supermarket, but what's the availability of adoptable children over there?
There are plenty of babies, but the authorities have made it almost impossible for anyone to adopt a child of a different ethnicity. As a result, these children go into care homes and become less appealing to those who wanted the kids from day one.
By the time they get to their teenage years, they're almost untransferable, nobody wants them.
Sad but true.
Quote: AJGO @ May 22 2012, 2:50 PM BSTBut if you offer it to some then it is ludicrous and dangerous to not offer it to all.
Agree with the rest of your sentiments, but not this one. Older pregnancies carry great risks for both mother and child. There is a reason nature steps in and stops ovulation.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ May 22 2012, 2:55 PM BSTAgree with the rest of your sentiments, but not this one. Older pregnancies carry great risks for both mother and child. There is a reason nature steps in and stops ovulation.
I'm willing to compromise on anyone who hasn't finished menopause. For when we're in charge.
But the rates you've helpfully provided show that it's not a great option for anyone, and drops dramatically even through the years that one would consider women to still be of actual or plausible child-bearing age.
So to niggle about details seems discriminatory. Either don't provide it at all or don't limit access based on factors such as age.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ May 22 2012, 2:55 PM BSTThere are plenty of babies, but the authorities have made it almost impossible for anyone to adopt a child of a different ethnicity. As a result, these children go into care homes and become less appealing to those who wanted the kids from day one.
By the time they get to their teenage years, they're almost untransferable, nobody wants them.
Sad but true.
I would totally do a private adoption. Buy some Russian baby or something. Wonder how much they cost?
Quote: AJGO @ May 22 2012, 3:02 PM BSTEither don't provide it at all or don't limit access based on factors such as age.
Look, when you ladies are in charge, then you can use women's logic, but whilst we blokes are still allowed to give it a go, we'll use statistics, science and evidence to make decisions.
Just realised that this will never effect me, I'm going to take Oldrocker's route and never have a wife over 40 - kind of like Logan's Run but with divorce court instead of Carousel.
Quote: zooo @ May 22 2012, 3:05 PM BSTI would totally do a private adoption. Buy some Russian baby or something. Wonder how much they cost?
They're good value, you get a few of decreasing size
Quote: AJGO @ May 22 2012, 3:06 PM BSTThey're good value, you get a few of decreasing size
The mothers also have very efficient C-sections.
Quote: zooo @ May 22 2012, 3:05 PM BSTI would totally do a private adoption. Buy some Russian baby or something. Wonder how much they cost?
I think Chinese girls go for about $20,000.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ May 22 2012, 3:08 PM BST
The mothers also have very efficient C-sections.
I think we've uncovered a better evolutionary path here
Quote: AJGO @ May 22 2012, 3:06 PM BSTThey're good value, you get a few of decreasing size
Teehee.
Quote: DaButt @ May 22 2012, 3:10 PM BSTI think Chinese girls go for about $20,000.
Ooh, bargain.