Suze:” We should drag ourselves out of the 20th century and realise that kids of today are just as resilient as they ever were.”

No they’re not and no they never were but yes they usually survive it. Thing is – how would you know if they couldn’t of turned out better without being in DC? Experiment on twins?

Suze:”Just like stay-at-home-mums don't like being put down because they don't work outside the home, so too do working mothers not enjoy being put down because they leave their kids with others.”

Who would put them down? They’re in a society where it is the thing to do without front braining it... Poirot explained why.

Banjo:”Mandatory child care for pre schoolers, no way!”

You know if you don’t go for all your health checks when you are pregnant it can be reported to DoCS? Now some women know how to be pregnant without help same as some parents weirdly know how to parent without govt input and private lessons from child care experts. What I am seeing is things being the “done thing” on many levels and people not questioning it. But yeah I will go off and try to understand what this article was about because the wording was creepy.

Jewely <"You know if you don’t go for all your health checks when you are pregnant it can be reported to DoCS?"

I understand where you are coming from Jewely, and I too am horrified at any talk of mandatory childcare.

We can't blame all Government employees and departments for everything. They are damned if they try to help families, and damned if they don't.
However, with regards to not going for health checks when you are pregnant, and being reported to DoCS, it all depends on the particular situation doesn't it?

If a pregnant woman has previously not cared for her children or babies prior to this current pregnancy, then surely it is up to DoCS to check on the health of this current pregnancy?
If a woman has drunk too much alcohol or taken illicit drugs during this or previous pregnancies, leading to fetal alcohol syndrome ,or drug addiction in their babies, then we have a responsibility to the baby to watch out for the mothers health don't we?

As a community nurse, we were on alert for a pregnant woman and her partner who had refused treatment for gonorrhea at an earlier doctor's checkup. As soon as her baby was born, it was checked for this disease and found to be positive.
Maybe if the woman had been followed up more closely by DoCS, she could have had treatment before baby was born.
I am all for any Medical or Government intervention that will protect children from irresponsible and abusive parents.

Suze:“...she could have had treatment before baby was born.”

That’s how it starts. With a sEEd planted (EE=Extreme Example) that justifies and convinces people how the vast majority should be targeted.

I guess me and you Suze see a number of extreme examples of humans behaving badly and the damage that does to children. But we’re also parents that don’t do those things and don’t want anything in place that assumes that Every parent is a potential abuser unless their children are constantly monitored by ngo’s..?

This child care thing I can see it building up as it has been for years. Govt supporting another profit hungry private business build wealth.

It started as a babysitting service for working parents then became an essential govt subsidised service for everyone and I reckon it will move into being thought of as a place you put your children unless you are an abusive parent with something to hide. After that thought sticks in the minds of society then they can make it mandatory by planting a few sEEds.

Jewely,
You said "It started as a babysitting service for working parents then became an essential govt subsidised service for everyone and I reckon it will move into being thought of as a place you put your children unless you are an abusive parent with something to hide. After that thought sticks in the minds of society then they can make it mandatory by planting a few sEEds"

You left one little bit out of your equasion. The bit where politicians promoted government subsidising child care to garner some votes. It worked and now is an essential part of policy and no government will take it away.

So now parents are looking for even greater subsidies.

The danger is what you fear. That politicians will progress to providing full day care and making it mandatory. If they think that will gain votes then that is what will be promoted.

I cannot even see the 'baby bonus' being done away with, which was Costello's brilliant idea.

'That’s how it starts. With a sEEd planted (EE=Extreme Example) that justifies and convinces people how the vast majority should be targeted.'

As with the feminist propaganda Jewls;-) Apparently because I view porn I'm an 'Amoral life support system for an erect penis', guilty of misogyny and destined to rape and abuse women my whole life.

'I guess me and you Suze see a number of extreme examples of humans behaving badly and the damage that does to children. But we’re also parents that don’t do those things and don’t want anything in place that assumes that Every parent is a potential abuser unless their children are constantly monitored by ngo’s..? '

As I was saying.

I see extreme examples of men raping and pillaging, but I'm also a man that doesn't do those things, and doesn't want anything in place that assumes that Every man is a potential abuser.

ie; The Challenging of 50% custody, the coercion to support White Ribbon Day to prove you're not a wife beater like other men, The 'violence against women (only), Australia says no' campaign that turns every violent domestic dispute into an assumed male aggressor model.

I just want to happily go about my life viewing naked women online with the blessing and occasional involvement of my wife, loving my kids while not abusing and raping and pillaging, without being a target of suspicion if I converse with kids in a playground that my daughter is playing with and to have the freedom to wield a camera anywhere around kids.

'However, with regards to not going for health checks when you are pregnant, and being reported to DoCS, it all depends on the particular situation doesn't it?'

Well, post pregnancy, at the early childhood centre, my wife was asked (matter of routine you'know) whether I hit her and whether she was scared of me. Sure she laughed, but I think I am justified in being offended. Easy for you chicks walking around without a weight of suspicion over you all the time.

Jewely and Houellebecq lament that all men and women are tarred with the same brush.
I don't want to see children abused or neglected by both women and men in our society go undetected just so us adults can have our 'human rights' firmly in place.

I am sorry, but I don't care how many adults feel hard done by by the increasing regulations involving children, because the adults can look after themselves!

At the end of the day, it would be a brave/stupid Government that brought in mandatory childcare. You forget that politicians have children and families too.

Houellebecq <"Easy for you chicks walking around without a weight of suspicion over you all the time."

Is that right? How about all the 'sluts' out there? All the women who are called sluts if they have sex with men out of wedlock, or appear to be 'sowing their wild oats', or dare to dress as they please, like the men are encouraged to do?

What about all the single mothers who are considered deadbeats, dole-bludgers, sluts and neglectful mothers unless proven otherwise?

If a woman stands up for herself or other women, she is considered a rabid, ball-breaking feminist, unless proven otherwise.

If a woman works outside the home and her kids are in childcare, she is a neglectful and materialistic mother.
If a woman stays home and cares for her kids, she is considered a rich, lazy, and boring mother.

Sometimes it's hard to be a woman... :)