The state of Indiana has adopted a new law that will allow them to put up a kind of drop-box for unwanted babies. Mothers have always been able to give up their unwanted infants at hospitals, and other authorized places; but because some mothers do not want to have any contact with authorities, the incidence of babies simply being abandoned in the woods, or on a church doorstep have been increasing. Is this a good idea or a bad idea ? ? I think that it is definitely better for the infant to be placed into a safe "incubator style" baby box than to be left to die out in the woods somewhere, or even just left on a doorstep where they may or may not be found in time. However, it seems much better to me if the child is properly given up at a hospital, and it makes me wonder if more babies will simply be abandoned in the baby boxes now that this is available. What does this say for us as a nation that we even need to provide a place for mothers to drop off an abandoned baby ? ? http://rt.com/usa/236307-baby-box-abandon-newborn/
I would prefer it if a mother who intends to abandon an infant would use a box that would keep the baby safe. However, I can't see the scheme working in genuine cases where women are in such a state of mind. Where would the mother have to go to get the box? Wouldn't she be scared of being seen carrying such a box? I think there is a reason why some women hide their unwanted baby in the woods or in the ladies restroom. They don't want anyone to know what they are doing. If they were seen carrying a child in a box it would be obvious to anyone what they were intending to do and they could be challenged by some "do gooder" or abused for what they were about to do.
I know that some cities have arrangements where unwanted children may be left at a fire station, no questions asked, although I don't know if it actually works out that way. I don't know how I feel about this, as it's pretty hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that people have no choices. I know that things can be tough, but I can't help but think that it's a matter of priorities and that children should always be the priority.
Ken, I agree that the children should be the priority. And in this case, if the mother doesn't feel like she can raise the child, there should be absolutely no shame or recrimination for her to give the child up. I hate the "do gooders" who try to convince us that the baby is better off with the biological parents. To me, the child is better off in a home where he gets fed, changed, loved and cared for. In a home where he doesn't have to worry about getting raped, abused or drug addicted. He's better off growing up loved and cherished rather than resented and scorned. I understand that a parent has rights, but to me the child's rights trump the parents every day of the week. We need to change our societal view away from how the parent should feel (that a mother should never give up her child) to one where we are concerned with the welfare of the child. There should be no shame in a parent admitting they aren't in a position to take care of the child, and they should be admired that they have the courage to do what's right for the child.
From what i read in the article, the baby boxes aren't something that you get and carry the baby in; it is a place where the baby can be safely left and it will be warm until the baby can be rescued. I would guess that there would be some sort of an alarm system to let the people who are responsible for rescuing the baby know that an infant had been left in the baby box. That way, they baby coulf be picked up right away. One thing that I would worry about is whether just anyone could get into the box and take a child that had been abandoned in there. Just as there are horrible people that prey on the "free to good home" dogs and cats; there would surely be mentally deranged people who would steal a baby if they were able to just go to the baby box, open it up, and take out an infant that had been placed inside the box.