Bliss Roots Cbd Gummies"Where To...
How it Works0 min ago
GrandParents denied access to their Grandchildren, adopted by Gay Couple.
41 Answers
http://
Shouldn't relatives be given the right to adopt their family's children before they are given out to strangers?
In this case the Grandmother will only be 58, and the Grandfather 73, when the boy reaches 18.
That is not old by today's standards.
Shouldn't relatives be given the right to adopt their family's children before they are given out to strangers?
In this case the Grandmother will only be 58, and the Grandfather 73, when the boy reaches 18.
That is not old by today's standards.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
no. anybody who adopts has to be under a certain age and it should be no different for grandparents - if they die before the children reach 18, then they will have to go through the ordeal of going into care/being fostered/or adopted again. it says in the article the grandfather has suffered a stroke and presumably the grandmother is now caring for him. would two children on top of that be too much for her? i think it would. the mother is obviously not a suitable parent as her children have been removed from her care and if she is still using drugs, why should she see her children? it may be that the new parents and social services feel it may be best for the children if no contact is made by their family for a 'clean break'. it does not matter a fig if the new parents are gay/straight/green/or blue.....as long as they are a loving, stable and suitable parent to the child.
Everyone seems to think this is an issue of 'PC' versus 'non-PC'. Like anyone who is opposed to gay adoption is waging some kind of heroic struggle against the ever-present tyranny of 'The Brigade.' I don't think this makes much sense. To me, I don't see how 'political correctness' comes into this issue at all, and I don't see why such semantics are necessary or how they are remotely helpful to having a debate about something.
If your case against gay adoption is so good, you shouldn't need to resort to labelling everyone else 'The PC Brigade'. I don't think I've seen many people actually give responses to the points I and others made earlier in the thread - but apparently it's okay! We're just the 'PC Brigade'. You can ignore us. Tomorrow, if we say the right things, we might not be part of the Brigade. I don't understand how this is a useful or accurate distinction to make at all.
If your case against gay adoption is so good, you shouldn't need to resort to labelling everyone else 'The PC Brigade'. I don't think I've seen many people actually give responses to the points I and others made earlier in the thread - but apparently it's okay! We're just the 'PC Brigade'. You can ignore us. Tomorrow, if we say the right things, we might not be part of the Brigade. I don't understand how this is a useful or accurate distinction to make at all.
The point is Andy, I'm sure you have already distilled this yourself, that if you are going to refer to nature as a procreation stopper then surely the most obvious example is that same sex couples cannot conceive naturally between themselves. As we are now using nature as an example it follows that same sex couples are not the intended unit for the raising of offspring in nature. Now what we do with that information is another question.
andy-hughes
/// I would be extremely wary of the slant given to this story by an avowed homophobic right-wing paper like the Mail.///
One cannot presume that just because a newspaper happens to be regarded 'Right-Wing' one can also make an over generalisation and presume it is homophobic.
Incidentally you also chose to use the word 'avowed', meaning to acknowledge openly, boldly, and unashamedly, confess, can you provide proof of that Andy?
Regarding Grandparents and children, in this case the 'children' happen to be 8 and 9 years old hardly toddlers, and they had been looking after them until the boy became became 5 and his sister 4.
In these days when both parents are out at work, how many Grandparents are actively looking after their young Grandchildren just take a look around your local supermarket, theme park etc, especially during the summer holidays.
No Andy children keep you young, and to address the Grandfathers poor state of health, he was fit until the stress of these proceedings brought about a stroke.
/// I would be extremely wary of the slant given to this story by an avowed homophobic right-wing paper like the Mail.///
One cannot presume that just because a newspaper happens to be regarded 'Right-Wing' one can also make an over generalisation and presume it is homophobic.
Incidentally you also chose to use the word 'avowed', meaning to acknowledge openly, boldly, and unashamedly, confess, can you provide proof of that Andy?
Regarding Grandparents and children, in this case the 'children' happen to be 8 and 9 years old hardly toddlers, and they had been looking after them until the boy became became 5 and his sister 4.
In these days when both parents are out at work, how many Grandparents are actively looking after their young Grandchildren just take a look around your local supermarket, theme park etc, especially during the summer holidays.
No Andy children keep you young, and to address the Grandfathers poor state of health, he was fit until the stress of these proceedings brought about a stroke.
Kromovaracun
Since I was good enough to answer your questions I would have thought at least you would have acknowledged them.
Regarding the PC brigade comment, isn't this the vogue these days, if one ticks the so called right boxes then one automatically becomes accepted?
But if one for some reason fails to tick all of the 'Right Boxes', then one is automatically given much worse labelling than just the 'PC Brigade' one, 'Bigot', 'Racist', 'Homophobic' labelling springs to mind.
Since I was good enough to answer your questions I would have thought at least you would have acknowledged them.
Regarding the PC brigade comment, isn't this the vogue these days, if one ticks the so called right boxes then one automatically becomes accepted?
But if one for some reason fails to tick all of the 'Right Boxes', then one is automatically given much worse labelling than just the 'PC Brigade' one, 'Bigot', 'Racist', 'Homophobic' labelling springs to mind.
AOG
There IS medical evidence that prolonged periods of stress can induce a stroke, but we should be wary of assuming that grandfather's stroke WAS brought on by the stress of the situation.
Re: The Daily Mail's stance on gay people...I think the reason people think of the paper as being homophobic is down to the number of anti-gay stories it prints, coupled with the anti-gay stance of some of its leading columnists (Jan Moir and Melanie Phillips immediately spring to mind).
There IS medical evidence that prolonged periods of stress can induce a stroke, but we should be wary of assuming that grandfather's stroke WAS brought on by the stress of the situation.
Re: The Daily Mail's stance on gay people...I think the reason people think of the paper as being homophobic is down to the number of anti-gay stories it prints, coupled with the anti-gay stance of some of its leading columnists (Jan Moir and Melanie Phillips immediately spring to mind).
More importantly - we absolutely have to be wary of the way this story has been presented. We literally only have one side of the story. Who's knows what the whole picture is? Has the mother vowed to snatch the kids back given the chance? Is she currently in a relationship with a drug dealer? Has the grandfather got any criminal convictions for spousal abuse?
All or none of these may be true - but all we have is a snippet of the story, presented in such a way as to support a narrative which chimes with the Mail's current stance on certain topics (gay parenting, gay marriage and so one).
All or none of these may be true - but all we have is a snippet of the story, presented in such a way as to support a narrative which chimes with the Mail's current stance on certain topics (gay parenting, gay marriage and so one).
sp1814
/// There IS medical evidence that prolonged periods of stress can induce a stroke, but we should be wary of assuming that grandfather's stroke WAS brought on by the stress of the
situation. ///
And don't you think it would also be wrong to assume that the stress which the Grandfather experienced during that difficult and stressful time, that his stroke was NOT brought on by this?
I think the later is the most likely, given that we know nothing of any other stress he was unfortunate to experience.
/// There IS medical evidence that prolonged periods of stress can induce a stroke, but we should be wary of assuming that grandfather's stroke WAS brought on by the stress of the
situation. ///
And don't you think it would also be wrong to assume that the stress which the Grandfather experienced during that difficult and stressful time, that his stroke was NOT brought on by this?
I think the later is the most likely, given that we know nothing of any other stress he was unfortunate to experience.
AOG
The thing is - The Daily Mail is an anti-gay newspaper, and a significant proportion of its readers are...let's call them 'gaysceptics', rather than 'homophobcic'.
It's nothing to do with ticking whatever boxes - its more to do with printing dozens and dozens of stories which have an anti-gay slant.
The thing is - The Daily Mail is an anti-gay newspaper, and a significant proportion of its readers are...let's call them 'gaysceptics', rather than 'homophobcic'.
It's nothing to do with ticking whatever boxes - its more to do with printing dozens and dozens of stories which have an anti-gay slant.
AOG
No - we cannot assume anything about the stroke. It might be a pre-existing condition, there may be a family history of strokes.
Again, it's difficult to assess this story without hearing from the other side, and correctly, the adoption agency are not getting involved because they have a duty to keep the privacy of those involved.
No - we cannot assume anything about the stroke. It might be a pre-existing condition, there may be a family history of strokes.
Again, it's difficult to assess this story without hearing from the other side, and correctly, the adoption agency are not getting involved because they have a duty to keep the privacy of those involved.
Surely the story isn't about a gay couple adopting a child - that is just something that is being used by the mother/grandparents as an excuse for them to be awarded custody.
Should the grandparents be awarded custody? - I don't know but I feel that there is much more to this story, and we have no right to know the full details.
Should the grandparents be awarded custody? - I don't know but I feel that there is much more to this story, and we have no right to know the full details.
sp1814
/// More importantly - we absolutely have to be wary of the way this story has been presented. We literally only have one side of the story. Who's knows what the whole picture is? ///
Not being in possession of a Crystal Ball, we can only comment on the news story before us, any other invented scenarios would be complete conjecture.
/// More importantly - we absolutely have to be wary of the way this story has been presented. We literally only have one side of the story. Who's knows what the whole picture is? ///
Not being in possession of a Crystal Ball, we can only comment on the news story before us, any other invented scenarios would be complete conjecture.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.