Hi Seeker,
I don't like to see so much Miss-Information presented in the media.

The issue of IVF could be discussed in the other forum, but if you read through this article carefully, you will notice the author repeatedly uses the words "I" , "Mother", and "Children" throughout the article.

These words could be strung together, or perhaps the author intended that these words would be sub-consciously strung together by the reader, like a form of sub-conscious brainwashing. It becomes similar to repeated use of the term “women and children” in an article. This is commonly done in many articles that are written to a formula. Repeat the term “women and children” often enough in an article, and the reader begins to think that children can only associate or belong to women (and not men also)

Within the article, the word father is not used, and the author does not mention “her” children’s father at all. Just herself and her children.

So what has become of the father?. What father?. The children no longer have a father, only a mother.

Tracey Crisp argued that Julia Gillard was damned for not having children, and she would have been damned if she did. . . . .And may I suggest 'and so are we all'. One section of government NEEDS us to breed blue collar workers of the future, at the same time that another section of government hypocritically decries Single Teenage Mothers.

Brownie,
What do you think single teenage women are. Some type of breeders?

And what do you think fathers are. Irrelevant donors and paypackets only?

Timkins,

I was actually going to settle for Miss Information after the debacle that was Ms Perfect. Now that you express reservation, I have reconsidered.

Wish me luck with Miss Diagnosed!

Seeker

'...how about DNA certification of both parents on the birth certificate?...'

l like that idea in principle but wounder about the practical ramifications. Its a great way to verify paternity. However the idea of everyone being effectively DNA finger printed and that information then existing in government data bases is a bit too Brave New World/1984/Gataga for my taste. Maybe that information could be used to establish paternity and then discarded/removed from government control.

However, l suspect that the enforced accountability would make it rather politically unpalpable to various vested interests in the status quo. Not sure that the politicians and treasury number crunchers would be too enamoured of the financial consequences for the already bankrupt house of cards that is the State. If DNA verification of paternity was established it would go a long way to sorting out this huge mess and people might actually be a bit more sexually responsible.

Mr Timkins, in response to your first remark, a clip from the London Times of Feb 6 follows, with indicates that it is true in Britain at least:
What this means in practice is that the early breeders turn to the state. Teenage mothers who go on to own property are unusual.

“We are talking here about single mothers, because few women under the age of 22 are giving birth while in settled relationships,” said Jill Kirby of the Centre for Policy Studies, author of a recent pamphlet, The Price of Parenthood.

More than 90% of births to mothers aged under 20 were outside marriage in 2003, the latest year for which figures are available.

Britain’s “natural” population increase, excluding immigration, measured by the number of births less annual deaths, has averaged 78,000 per year in the past decade; in 2003 the increase was 83,215. Without the 120,000-a-year births to young unmarried mothers, however, Britain’s population would be in decline