![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Radio Daze and Second Class Citizens
Jul. 29th, 2009 07:44 pmSome people should really not be allowed to sign legal documents. Specifically, the mother of this girl should not be allowed to sign legal documents.
I can not believe that that (a) got signed off on by the producers of the radio show; (b) got signed off on by the mother; and (c) went to air. Liveish.
At least Jackie O came across as having some compassion and empathy - a tad late, given that she appeared to be fine with having a 14 year old on a lie detector being asked questions about her drug and alcohol use and sexual activity on live radio by her mother.
Kyle Sandilands on the other hand... didn't.
And the mother? Comes across as deranged.
I seriously cannot believe the producers signed off on this. I have the feeling at least one of them is likely to be joining the job market very soon.
In completely unrelated news Victoria replaced one piece of discriminatory legislation with another. No longer do we discriminate against single women and lesbians seeking IVF! Now we just require all people seeking IVF to undergo a police check. This is of course to "protect the kiddies" - something which is, as far as I can see, unlikely to happen with this particular check (aka "complete bullshit"). What is interesting is the answer to question 17 on the information pamphlet:
The main concept underpinning much of the ART legislation is 'the best interests of the child'. There was a strong lobby group who believed that an important way to protect the best interests of the unborn child was to require that patients undergo these checks prior to receiving treatment.
So there's a "strong lobby group" who apparently thinks that IVF=pregnant - seriously, have they read the stats? 1/4 success rate if all goes well. If you have additional problems, or are older or quite a few other factors then the success rate is a lot lower than that.
I also have a strong suspicion that this lobby group may also believe that homosexual=paedophile, but of course I've no evidence for that. After all I don't know that the strong lobby group is religiously affiliated, or has a general tradition of discriminating against homosexuals and unwed mothers. Just a guess here. (Mind you if they really wanted to save children perhaps they should bar all leaders of religion from working with children. I mean, just going on track record here.)
What irritates me about this is that it is so completely useless. If they really wanted to protect the interests of the unborn child they could require police checks of all women (and their partners!) in the third trimester. This would of course be extremely invasive. However it would at least be "protecting" what would be likely to be an actual child.
But as that's not ever going to happen and we can't realistically require all people attempting to conceive to undergo police checks - let alone those who didn't mean to conceive - it looks like we've settled for discriminating against the one group who we know are trying to conceive. Some lobby groups just aren't happy unless they've got someone to discriminate against.
Of course if they actually, really wanted to protect children they could fund DHS appropriately so that complete fuckups like this one didn't happen due to under-staffing. But that's never going to happen - after all it's easier to be perceived as doing something and pandering to lobby groups to ensure votes and donations than it is to do something that would make an actual difference.
I can not believe that that (a) got signed off on by the producers of the radio show; (b) got signed off on by the mother; and (c) went to air. Liveish.
At least Jackie O came across as having some compassion and empathy - a tad late, given that she appeared to be fine with having a 14 year old on a lie detector being asked questions about her drug and alcohol use and sexual activity on live radio by her mother.
Kyle Sandilands on the other hand... didn't.
And the mother? Comes across as deranged.
I seriously cannot believe the producers signed off on this. I have the feeling at least one of them is likely to be joining the job market very soon.
In completely unrelated news Victoria replaced one piece of discriminatory legislation with another. No longer do we discriminate against single women and lesbians seeking IVF! Now we just require all people seeking IVF to undergo a police check. This is of course to "protect the kiddies" - something which is, as far as I can see, unlikely to happen with this particular check (aka "complete bullshit"). What is interesting is the answer to question 17 on the information pamphlet:
The main concept underpinning much of the ART legislation is 'the best interests of the child'. There was a strong lobby group who believed that an important way to protect the best interests of the unborn child was to require that patients undergo these checks prior to receiving treatment.
So there's a "strong lobby group" who apparently thinks that IVF=pregnant - seriously, have they read the stats? 1/4 success rate if all goes well. If you have additional problems, or are older or quite a few other factors then the success rate is a lot lower than that.
I also have a strong suspicion that this lobby group may also believe that homosexual=paedophile, but of course I've no evidence for that. After all I don't know that the strong lobby group is religiously affiliated, or has a general tradition of discriminating against homosexuals and unwed mothers. Just a guess here. (Mind you if they really wanted to save children perhaps they should bar all leaders of religion from working with children. I mean, just going on track record here.)
What irritates me about this is that it is so completely useless. If they really wanted to protect the interests of the unborn child they could require police checks of all women (and their partners!) in the third trimester. This would of course be extremely invasive. However it would at least be "protecting" what would be likely to be an actual child.
But as that's not ever going to happen and we can't realistically require all people attempting to conceive to undergo police checks - let alone those who didn't mean to conceive - it looks like we've settled for discriminating against the one group who we know are trying to conceive. Some lobby groups just aren't happy unless they've got someone to discriminate against.
Of course if they actually, really wanted to protect children they could fund DHS appropriately so that complete fuckups like this one didn't happen due to under-staffing. But that's never going to happen - after all it's easier to be perceived as doing something and pandering to lobby groups to ensure votes and donations than it is to do something that would make an actual difference.
