Confiscating Children ... For The Children

There's a tag I use on this 'ere blog which public health and their entourage routinely object to. They refute the term 'health Nazis' because, you see, they're only trying to help us; they're not ogres or dictators at all, but instead simply working hard to make our lives better.

This is obviously why they sit by and allow situations like this one, very succinctly described by Brian Monteith at the Free Society earlier this week.

Sheriff Scott Pattison ruled at Ayr Sheriff Court (24 June) that a mother’s smoking had shown a “parental lack of care” and breached the Children Scotland Act 1995. The law states that “compulsory supervision” may be required if children are “likely to suffer unnecessarily or be impaired seriously in their health and development due to lack of parental care. 

The court, which has greater powers than an English magistrates court, could now decide if the mother – who cannot be named for legal reasons – is fit enough to raise her children or if the should be removed into care.

Can't you see how this help and encouragement is fantastic for the betterment of society? After all, how very small is the threat of destroying childrens' lives by dumping them in care compared with the apocalypse of their smelling a few wisps of sarin-like smoke, eh?

Not to be outdone, anti-alcohol prohibitionists in Sweden have also this week shown how very much they care by calling for kids to be confiscated from parents if they enjoy a glass of Côtes du Rhône with the family dinner.

Law professor calls for ban on parents drinking

"It is a parent's responsibility to be sober when they are with their children," said Professor Madeleine Leijonhufvud to the Dagens Nyheter (DN) daily.

Leijonhufvud pointed out that every fifth child in Sweden lives with one or two parents who suffer from drinking problems and argues that a new law penalizing parents would address the problem. 

The proposal was presented at a seminar organized by temperance society IOGT-NTO's at the Almedalen political week and is specifically designed to tackle "everyday drinking". 

The law currently has no scope for punishing parents who drink in the company of their children and Leijonhufvud argued that the proposal is an attempt to prompt a discussion on the issue. 

She compared the offence to minor assault which currently carries a penalty of up to six months imprisonment. 

While the proposal is aimed at "everyday drunkenness" it in effect suggests that parents would not be able to share a glass of wine at dinner.

So, removing children from their parents is quite clearly the kind and caring thing to do, err, for the children.

They're not health Nazis, merely wise and benevolent people with our well-being at heart at all times. Oh yeah, and there's clearly no slippery slope, either. Got that?