Parents abandoning their teenagers

Parents used to give their kids up to orphanages all the time. He followed the law. Better what he did then neglect them.
 
Perhaps those kids will be somehow kept together but that isn't very easy to do with 9 of them. They will probably all be seperated away from each other and given foster parents. I can only hope those foster parents are better than the natural ones.
 
if the parents are that abhorrent of their children that they would simply leave them at the hospital, then its a good thing they do, who knows what they're doing to their children at home.
 
In this case it is a sad situation but in many others where the kids are miserable brats then ths option should be available.
 
My father was put into an orphanage, along with with his brothers and sister,when my grandmother died.

That was normal - there was no way to care for them without a mother at home, and they had no close family capable of taking them in.

They were retrieved when my grandfather remarried, and regretted it - the stepmother was apparently abusive and mentally unstable.

The banishment of orphanages seems to be based on a pretense that they are no longer needed.
 
iceaura orphanages were a bad way to go, its better off in situations like your fathers to goverment suport the single parent (father in his case)

for cases where there is a real need to remove the children foster parents are a better way to go because there is more chance for that close contact care than the "oliver twist" senario
 
Syzygys said:
Yeah, those whiny bastards think they got it made, just because they have a parent? Think again!

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/triage/2008/09/father-leaves-n.html

Father walks into hospital and leaves his 9 kids behind...
Click to expand...

Ouch..

I promise I will be more grateful to my parents..

I'm gonna go clean my room now..

Seriously,

What the fuck ?, Teens should be able to handle themselves, the 17 year old could have helped take care of the others, 1-17, It's tough, but it's been done before.

But thats harsh, to a teen, In a vulnerable state, they are. before and after.
 
asguard said:
iceaura orphanages were a bad way to go, its better off in situations like your fathers to goverment suport the single parent (father in his case)
Click to expand...
Orphanages have a bad press. The foster home setup we have now in the US is just as prone to abuses, and less stable for the kids - and we still have de facto orphanages, for the transiently placed and difficult cases.

By pretending we don't need orphanages, we prevent the better setup of the orphanages we do have, whether we admit that's what they are or not.

It may be "better off" to support the single parent in theory, but in fact it isn't done well - and the safety net of the orphanage isn't there.
 
i doubt it but i cant say definitivly. However there must be some form of temp group homes for emergency cases but in general foster care is seen as the better choice
 
iceaura said:
My father was put into an orphanage, along with with his brothers and sister,when my grandmother died.

That was normal - there was no way to care for them without a mother at home, and they had no close family capable of taking them in.

They were retrieved when my grandfather remarried, and regretted it - the stepmother was apparently abusive and mentally unstable.

The banishment of orphanages seems to be based on a pretense that they are no longer needed.
Click to expand...

My mum too spent her childhood with her siblings in an orphanage, after her father was killed. My grandmother could not keep them and support them so she put them there, until my mum was able to start working full time. Then they went back home. It was a difficult and brave thing for my grandma at the time. She was barely 27.
 
i find those stories a poor inditment on sociaty sam. Why in gods name does sociaty find it so difficult to surport single parents that they have to give there children up. The numbers of kids abused and neglected in state care v parental care is HUGE, futher more state care costs more money and the kids are less likly to get the level of love and atention
 
Asguard said:
i find those stories a poor inditment on sociaty sam. Why in gods name does sociaty find it so difficult to surport single parents that they have to give there children up. The numbers of kids abused and neglected in state care v parental care is HUGE, futher more state care costs more money and the kids are less likly to get the level of love and atention
Click to expand...

No. Almost every child in state care now is there because of neglectful abusive parents.
 
The first two stages of their lives, Childhood and adlosence , people are very, very vulnerable. The government should have more support, rather than action programs in place.

Youth centers and helplines should recieve more attention, kids simply don't know about them enough.
 
But unlike small children. Few people are willing to take in a teenager, who not only comes with normal teenage issues but all of their past issues as well.
 
Very serious topic and I agree with most of the sentiments expressed here, but this line in the article made me simultaneously chuckle and wince: "a psychologist’s determination that he lacked common sense.”"

Poor guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top