Archive for Boundlessness

Do European laws give pro-choice rights on abortions to fathers?

18 November 2011 jonathanbishop One comment

It is a basic premise of both European Human Rights Law and European Union Law that a right to do something also includes the right not to do something.

Take the ECHR right to found a family. This also includes the right not to found a family. So should men, who have conceived a child, have equal rights to have their potential child aborted as the women they’ve impregnated? I think so.

The ECHR equally says that someone should not be deprived of their property without proper compensation. I think seeing as an absent father could be expected to pay child maintenance for a child for at least 16 years, then if he chooses not to found a family and the mother wants to keep the child, he should have to be compensated in some other way if he is being deprived of his financial property because his human right to not found a family is being broken.

European Union Law prescribes that there should be no discrimination on the grounds of sex. So by not giving men the right to abort their inseminated foetus they are being treated less favourably than women.

I think if women want the benefit of a natural man’s DNA without their full consent, then they should be responsible for the costs of maintaining the use of that DNA.

An lonely on-looker's diary - The world through the eyes of an Aspie, Bestowal, Boundlessness, Economic, Law, Socio-legal

Is Nick Robinson biased against Labour?

14 November 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

In an almost thuggish way, Tom Watson said that Nick Robinson didn’t report the phone hacking scandal enough because he was ‘favouring the Conservatives’ to put it more delicately.

I know how he feels. It annoyed me that Ed Miliband was getting the headlines on the hacking scandal over true experts like myself who have published research on ‘data misuse’ laws. I made the BBC clear of this dissatisfaction when they basically ignored my expertise.

But let us look at the news articles since 1995 on claims of bias against Nick Robinson as evidence.

March 1995 – Claims of bias were made against Nick Robinson by Labour when he sent a memo, as they saw it, trying to cover up the preferential treatment where the BBC Panorama programme, which Robinson was deputy editor of, interviewed John Major as Prime Minister, but did not offer the same prominence to the other leaders.

August 1995 – The London Evening Standard publishes a story, titled, ‘Labour sees red over new BBC reporter’, which highlights the fact that since March 1995 the party felt that Nick Robinson’s presentation of facts on Panorama were biased in favour of the Tories.

March 2003 – In the Times Nick Robinson, who is currently the ITV political editor, notes in an article there might be a problem with Labour’s perception of him. Highlighting the times that Peter Mandelson would be complaining to the Director General of the BBC about his apparent bias.

May 2003 – For the first time on record ‘anti-Tory bias’ and ‘Nick Robinson’ come together. This time in it is in The Times, with him commenting on the pressure being on Greg Dyke at the BBC and not himself, as Robinson is still working for ITV.

This all builds up to a shock confession:

October 2003 – The Independent runs an article, ‘I do not regret my Tory past, Nick Robinson, ITV’s News’s Political Editor’ which shows that Robinson was once significantly involved with the Conservative movement. The article says he has received claims of bias from both sides, which I might expect having spoken with the editor of my local paper who received the same, but unless the Conservatives have a different word for ‘bias’ I see little evidence of this in my brief search!

I will not look further into the articles, as I became politically active around 2002 in the Labour Party, even speaking to Nick on the Radio 5 Live about how a speech by Tony Blair hit a cord with me, just before he went to ITV I think – On Radio 5 Live he and Brian Hayes were my favourite presenters of that era. On his move to ITV I did start to think he was biased against the Labour Government, but then I would expect no different, as the ITV News programmes that he was reporting for have always seemed to me to be the Tabloid Newspaper of Evening TV, changing the tone of the programme to try to capture the public mood regardless of accuracy.

As I am now a Professional, it is this revelation in October 2003 that strikes me the most salient, even above all the past claims of bias. It is unethical for any professional to take up any form of employment where there can be a ‘perception of bias’, whether they are a former government minister taking up a position in a publicly funded body in the same area afterwards, or a sports official who is refereeing a match where a first-line relative is of the same nationality as one of the competitors.

So, in essence, however much I like him, as someone who famously got insulted for holding an apparently undesirable physical characteristic, by George W Bush of all people, I think he should seriously consider his position.

Even if he is perfectly capable of, on most days, creating a perception of impartiality in line with BBC guidance, is it worth the constant claims of bias against him, and this the questioning of his professionalism, to be in an environment where he can be easily perceived to be biased?

Concluding the issue on the assumption of ‘good faith’ on the part of Robinson, I would say that the reason this perceived bias is so persistent is that Nick is likely to draw on the same social networks that took him into the Conservative Party in the first place, so therefore he is more likely to represent a ‘Tory perspective’ than a Labour one.

So I’d like the BBC and other media outlets to take steps to ensure that it is not the same people from the Old Boys’ Networks that get represented in the media, but many others who have expertise but might not normally make it into public life. If they were to do this then the perceptions of bias, whether ‘left-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘all-White’, or whatever, would start to disappear.

 

 

 

 

 

An lonely on-looker's diary - The world through the eyes of an Aspie, Articulation, Boundlessness, Socio-legal, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

Why there needs to be an MTV-XL

25 October 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

There is a huge problem in society – thin people seem to be the preserve of what is considered beautiful. Even pop music about a large woman, Timbaland’s ‘The Way I Are’, had a very slim woman in – Keri Hilson.

Is it fair that people whose genetic make ups make them large are called ‘fat and ugly’? I think not. Had the forerunner to the ratified Lisbon Treaty, which I call the Reform Treaty, being voted for by Ireland, then discrimination on the grounds of genetics would have been illegal, but it was taken out of the one they voted for. It doesn’t seem right to me people who are large are called ‘fat and ugly’ – they should see themselves as ‘differently beautiful’.

While the Daily Mail has talked down the prospect of a magazine for large women, why not create a music channel, say MTV-XL, which gives large people the chance to make it acceptable not to be slim. Number one chart singles like that from Michelle McManus of Pop Idol fame could be the norm on this channel, rather than people being dropped by record labels as she was. Songs like ‘The Way I Are’ could be covered by people who are actually large and actually poor, who could have the XL-Factor.

I’m not saying I’d want to watch such a channel, even though I find bone-thin women repulsive, as I’ve been subject to the biased media of Photoshoped thin women and my ex was a size 10-dress. Like many other people impression by popular music, I would sooner by a bottom shelfer like Nuts or Zoo, than a top-shelfer like XL-Magazine, which isn’t for me. But large women are for many others, like a friend’s friend who finds slim women don’t do it for him like large ones do. So I think, if there was a music channel dedicated to advancing the music careers of large people, then this may cut problems like depression and eating disorders among people who are large, and those who think they are but aren’t, through creating role models that are more reflective of the reality and not unrealistic fantasy.

 

An lonely on-looker's diary - The world through the eyes of an Aspie, Boundlessness, The Arts, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

If sharing is caring, should sharing be a human or civil right?

20 October 2011 jonathanbishop 2 comments

As an egalitarian I believe that people should not solely possess any property, monetary or otherwise, which they are not using or capable of using because everyone should only have as much property as they are able to use.

One of the core parts of my ‘equatricism’ philosophy is that it is not capital that drives an economy, but the exchange of artefacts (i.e. tools/signs). Another part of it is that people will not have full access to their mental artefacts at any one point in time. As I argue most mental artefacts are linked to external artefacts as ‘mediating artefacts’. So as one does not have full access to all ones possessions (mediating artefacts) at all points in time either mentally or physically, should it not be unreasonable that one shares those artefacts with others when one does not need them but they do?

So, it may be that the solution to poverty is not necessarily wealth redistribution, but ‘sharing’ of wealth.

For instance, if someone in a community can afford 10 games consoles and everyone else none, would it not be fairer if they loaned the other people in the community the games consoles they were not using?

Thinking about the European Convention on Human Rights, it would not be unlawful to compel the person with 10 games consoles to share them, providing they were ‘properly compensated.’ However, would asking them to list the game consoles they own count as restricting the privacy of their home and correspondence, which is against their human rights?

In terms of a non-forced application of this; in a housing estate, would it not make sense if people got together to buy one lawn mower which they all share and pay to replace, rather than each house having their own lawn mower? It could also mean that the community could pay one of its members to mow the verges normally done by the council, which would make local government redundant. So long as the ‘free-rider’ problem is managed, which is that people only get access to a resource if they are contributing towards it, then this sharing model could work to end poverty, as well as possibly creating community spirit.

Under European Union Law one has a right to expect to be able to provide and receive services. Should only expect one’s neighbour to provide a goods lending service if they have the excess capacity to be able to provide it?

Boundlessness, Consciousness, Economic, Law, Socio-legal, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

Are the Welsh Single-use Carrier Bag Regulations Against EU Law?

8 October 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

The Welsh Assembly recently introduced legislation to instruct entrepreneurs and other traders to issue a charge of five pence on ‘single use carrier bags’ called the Single Use Carrier Bags Charge (Wales) Regulations 2010.

For simplicity I will refer to eligible bags in the legislation (specifically Part 1) as ‘naturally versatile bags’ (i.e. they fall within paragraph 2a), ‘non-reusable standard bags’ (i.e. they fall within paragraph 2b), ‘small bags’ (i.e. they fall within part 3a), ‘big bags’ (i.e. the fall within paragraph 4), ‘non-reusable big bags’ (i.e. they fall within paragraph 3b), ‘loop-hole small bags’ (i.e. they fall within paragraph 5 and also outside paragraph 4), and ‘Distance Selling loop-hole bags‘ (i.e. those referred to as ‘bags for packaging and delivery of mail order goods’ in Schedule I, section 1i, as discussed at the bottom of this article).

The five pence charge must be applied to naturally versatile bags, non-reusable bags, small bags, non-reusable big bags.
They are not charged on big bags where these are manufactured as reusable. Nor are they charged on what I call ‘loop-hole small bags’, which are small bags which have a label on them saying they are ‘manufactured for multiple re-use‘ and which have a charge on them of say 2 pence (like in Mary Poppins) and where the person issuing the bag promises to replace it if it gets broken.

So in terms of EU Law. There are three important articles in the EU Treaty that cover this piece of legislation. Articles 30, 34, and 35. They state:

Article 30 (ex Article 25 TEC)
Customs duties on imports and exports and charges having equivalent effect shall be prohibited between Member States. This prohibition shall also apply to customs duties of a fiscal nature.

Article 34 (ex Article 28 TEC)
Quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect shall be prohibited between Member States.

Article 35 (ex Article 29 TEC)
Quantitative restrictions on exports, and all measures having equivalent effect, shall be prohibited between Member States.

In this context, Member State refers to the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom can discriminate amongst its own persons (e.g. those in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland), but not against other countries. It may be that if Wales and Scotland became independent members of the EU, then such discrimination would be unlawful, as a Briton who was a Welsh Citizen would have more rights in England when they were also a Welsh and EU Citizen than simply being a Welsh UK Citizen and EU Citizen, and vice versa.

Applying Article 30 is simple, as there is no ‘rule of reason’ as with Article 34. The Regulations say that this charge is applied where say an entrepreneur sells goods from a place in Wales (which may include exports to the EU) and where say an entrepreneur sells goods which are delivered to Wales (which may include imports from the EU). If this charge was applied on transactions from the EU then this would fall within Article 30 and therefore be unlawful under EU law.

Now turning to Articles 34 and 35, where there is a ‘rule of reason’. The Regulations state that the entrepreneur I refer to earlier must keep an accurate record of the various pieces of information referred to in paragraph 3 of section 8 of Part 3, which I call ‘red-tape measures’.

These red-tape measures it would seem apply to imports into Wales (falling within Article 34) and exports from Wales (falling within Article 35). It is not as easy to say whether this is as much of a breach of these Articles as with Article 30, but I shall explore this.

The rule of reason says it is fair practice to introduce a measure where it serves to protect the consumer interest and/or the environment. However, it does breach the provisions of this rule where it has a substantial negative impact on cross-border trade, particular where the measure favours the entrepreneurs in the Member State making the rule more than the entrepreneurs outside of that Member State.

It is clear to see that after a period of time Welsh entrepreneurs will have developed efficient mechanisms for handling this red-tape measure. It can also be seen that entrepreneurs from outside the UK and Wales also, will have a disincentive to trading with Wales, because of the records they will be expected to keep in order to do so. Therefore this red-tape measure could be seen of having the equivalent effect of creating barriers to cross-border trade as if it clearly said, ‘No one outside of Wales is allowed to sell to Wales without following our rules’.

Distance Selling Directive

The Distance Selling Directive, as implemented through the Consumer Protection Distance Selling Regulations applies to: ‘contracts concerning goods or services concluded between a supplier and a consumer under an organised distance sales or service provision scheme run by the supplier who, for the purpose of the contract, makes exclusive use of one or more means of distance communication up to and including the moment at which the contract is concluded‘. I would regard this directive to apply to the ‘Distance Selling loop-hole bags‘ above. By virtue of this, bags used for Chinese take-aways and other fast-food or other home-delivery services such as Tesco.com Groceries, where the payment for the goods is made over the phone, Internet or other distance means and not in person (such as at the door of one’s house) should not be subject to the charge under the EU definition of mail order goods in the Distance Selling Directive.

Conclusion

I will not speculate on the specific provisions in the Government of Wales Act that make it unlawful to make laws which affect Law and Order in England such as through the issuing of penalties on English entrepreneurs, nor the provisions on the European Convention on Human Rights applying to Wales, but suffice to say that unless Schedule I is updated to reflect that these Regulations do not apply outside of Wales then these regulations appear to clearly breach EU Law.

Boundlessness, Consciousness, Consideration, Context, Economic, Law, Socio-legal, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

Is it time to call time on the London-based BBC?

15 September 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

If ever there was a time Wales needed its own public service broadcaster it is now. While the BBC News Channel was talking about mining in Libya we wanted to know about what was happening in Gleision colliery. BBC Radio Wales cut off the live comments of Shadow Secretary of State for Wales to play a pre-recorded message from a journalist. After a brief token gesture they went on to talk about banking in London! The BBC are no better today than the media and Parliament were in Keir Hardie’s day when in 1894 the birth of the future Edward VIII was put in the headlines above the tragic deaths of 251 miners in Pontypridd.

It was not until nearly 8pm that say that David Cameron made a comment, being too busy patting him and Nicholas Sarkozy on the back in Libya. If it were not for Sky News knowing their profits depended on covering the only story people in Wales cared about that some people were lucky to get up-to-date information and expert not journalistic commentary.

What should have happened is there should be Sky News’s wall-to-wall coverage on a dedicated Welsh terrestrial channel which would have interrupted its programming. A program, perhaps called, ‘Nos Newyddion’ should have been debating with political leaders whether we should open up more greenfield sites to open cast mining or whether closing the mines in the 1980s was right – My grandfather who served in the mines for 5 decades agreed with the latter, knowing many people who fell victim to deep pit mining’s clutches.

As sad is it will be, maybe the Davy lamp, like the one I inherited from my grandfather Ted, should be a thing of the past, as the deaths from underground mining may be a price too high to preserve the many greenfield sites which bury black gold beneath their pastures. Co-operative open cast mining of these is the only option – We should shove the grass and save lives.

Application, Articulation, Boundlessness, Consciousness, Socio-legal

Wales in Europe

14 September 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

I note Neil Taylor’s claim that “Independence is an out-of-date 19th-century concept” because we are “part of the EU” (Letters, September 9). I agree that concepts such as society and nationhood are “social constructions” as Benedict Anderson described them in his book Imagined Communities, but the concept of self-governance and inter-dependence goes back further, and something my Llantrisant ancestors secured in 1346 with their Town Charter. In March we voted for the Assembly to have primary legislative powers.

Perhaps unknowingly we also voted for the Assembly to ensure it complies with European Union Law, and to make “preliminary references” where it is uncertain whether it does comply with it. The rhetoric in London about “renegotiating” the UK’s “relationship” with Europe is just that – rhetoric. Since the Lisbon Treaty was ratified in 2009, which the people of Wales voted in March to abide by in law if not intent, the UK Parliament now has the power to vote to leave the EU without reference to the wishes of the devolved administrations at any moment.

So far from an “independent” Wales and an “inter-dependent” EU being mutually exclusive, it may only be through Wales being independently constituted from the rest of the UK that we can ensure our membership of the EU, which brings many benefits, is secured without us being dictated to by whichever government is in Westminster.

Boundlessness, Economic, Law, Letters and other Op-Eds, Socio-legal

Using National Insurance and the Student Loans System to Reduce Crime and Burdens on Employers while protecting Employees, the Self Employed, Agency Workers and Victims

8 September 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

When the Coalition came in the promised no more red tape for small business owners and the self-employed of which I’m both. Then the Agency Workers Directive came in and then rather than do what the French do, which is to ‘translate’ the directive to be compatible with their ‘civil code’, which in our case would be ‘common law president’ they basically just did everything it said the way it said it. Every EU Government has the power to use ‘proportionality’ to interpret laws and the French make the biggest use of this. This basically says that any government can interpret an EU directive on the basis of what it was intended to do on no on the technical detail with which it is written.

As someone who holds a Masters in the Economics of Information Systems it is my golden rule that one should never introduce a new information system, such as a way of collecting tax, without first exhausting possibilities of expanding the use of existing information systems.

The information systems I’d like to expand are National Insurance, to reduce burden on small businesses who engage agency workers or self-employed subcontractors as well as traditional employees, and the student loan system, to replace welfare benefits and collect fines and other orders to pay money more efficiently to disincentivise crime.

I would like Employee National Insurance to be optional, with the exception of a ‘basic element’ to cover holiday pay, A&E, and other essential services. I’d like Employers NI contributions to be abolished. With this optional NI, employees would be able to subscribe to any number of social insurances that central government would provide, or not do so and take out private or people insurance with other providers such as private insurers or mutual health trusts. The social insurances NI could be used to fund are:

  •  Public health insurance (i.e. the NHS hospitals and primary care and sight tests, all prescriptions)
  • Public parental leave insurance (to replace SMP, SPP)
  • Public incapacity insurance (to replace SSP, IB, ESA)
  • Public payment protection insurance (to replace Mortgage interest relief, Job Seekers Allowance, and other costs that arise due to redundancy, etc.)
  • Public emergency relief insurance (to protect people in areas at risk of flood or victims of Acts of God that private insurance companies won’t fund, such as those in my ward of Treforest living near the River Taff).

There could be many other schemes that could be introduced, such as to provide low cost energy to vulnerable groups like pensioners or disabled. The actual payment out of these insurances could be done using the new information systems the UK Government is creating for ‘Personal Independent Payment’ to replace Disability Living Allowance. All it would mean is adding a few more categories to include non-disability related elements, such as pregnancy, maternity and paternity.

I’d like NI to be paid by and the insurances paid out to any UK citizen of working age wherever in the EU they are whether they are in work as an employee, self-employed or director, or whether they are out or work claiming welfare or in education receiving a student loan or grant.

People out of work or whose income falls below a certain amount each month, instead of being entitled to the various welfare benefits should have to take out a maintenance loan, using the information systems for the student loan scheme. They would pay their National Insurance out of this loan. All the people out of work on say incapacity benefit or ESA would have to take out this loan and each year, and like I as a student see, they will get a statement every year showing how much they were paid out and the amount of interest they are paying on it. It might be that a ‘carrot and stick approach’ could be used where those who do any work, even just a couple of hours, wouldn’t have to pay the interest. Like students they wouldn’t have to pay the loan back until their income was over 21,000GBP.

People trained in economics and IT, and who like me have been through the whole benefits and tax system, from claiming income support, incapacity benefit, housing benefit, disability living allowance, and tax credits, as well as the rest of the system paying Class 1 and 2 NI and income tax, paying dividend tax, filing VAT returns, PAYE statements, CIS statements, paying corporation tax and doing self-assessment as well as receiving student loans have a more intrinsic understanding of the system than may others who may only have been exposed to one part.

So I think great credence should be given to how I think the system could be improved with minimum cost in terms of new information system, and how to overcome the following fears which I and others have had

  • The fear of coming off benefits and going back into work in case it doesn’t work out
  • The fear of losing essential benefits like free sight-tests and prescriptions due to increased income
  • The fear of making a wrong calculation on PAYE, VAT, CIS and the 2000GBP fine that could follow
  • The fear of being fined due to errors or omissions on the complex self-assessment system
  • The fear of not being able to pay for life’s essentials due to loss of employment or being forced of benefits
  • The fear that because I have a good day where my disabilities aren’t as bad as usual that the government will use it as evidence to take all my support away

The maintenance loan could also be used as a supply side policy to get rid of rogues like loan sharks and payday loan providers. Employees who can’t afford a new washing machine or need money to pay for essentials like food should be able to use this extension of the student loan system to fund it safely then pay it back through the payroll like they would a student loan.

This maintenance loan system in place of benefits could also be used to collect fines for parking tickets, fixed penalty notices, County Court Judgments, child support and compensation payments. If someone’s maintenance loan was reduced or the ‘student loan’ component of their wages went up when the person was issued such an order then they may see the consequences of their actions more clearly and act more appropriately in future.

Bestowal, Boundlessness, Consideration, Economic, Information Technology, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

The role of the BCS in regulating and encouraging entry to IT

7 September 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

The IT industry is under-regulated in my opinion, and I think BCS – The Chartered Institute for IT have a big role to play in this.

I would like it so that a certificate of competence from the BCS for each area in The skills framwork for the information age (including from certification like CompTIA for tech support or ECDL for DBAs or other administrator) will be as required to practice in IT as FRCS is in surgery or CIMA etc. is in accountancy. I don’t think someone should be allowed to be an IT director or CIO/CTO of a Plc without FBCS or equivalent from IET or CILIP – Maybe they’d need CITP as well which IET and CILIP would have to sign up for.

So this creates a problem, how are people from my generation going to get the experience in order to operate at this level to get FBCS? This is nearly already out of their reach as they are already working for nothing as graduate interns just to get administrative experience.

The Baby Boomers can’t retire because their pension pots have swelled. Generation X are holding all the middle management jobs ready to jump into the Baby Boomers shoes, so my generation faces becoming the lost generation.

Geneartion Next will be youthful and energetic, when they are 36 at the optimal age in IT when the Baby Boomers have gone, we will be around 56 and not have had the life either the Baby Boomers had or Generation Next will have who will easily cruise to FBCS based on actual experience not synthetic.

So I’d like a career in the IT industry to be based on merit, not age or social networks as it is now. I see FBCS as the gold standard for this. Why should public sector job ads for IT be designed with a specific candidate in mind to get around the procurement rules? They should be based on SFIA so the criteria is objective, accepted and regulated. If the job ad is for a director position it should be based on SFIA Level 7 (FBCS).

SFIA along with CITP and FBCS are the route to equality in IT I feel. Jobs for the boys is rife in IT, but if everything had to be based objectively on SFIA and everyone had to be a member of BCS/IET/CILIP to work in IT, whose codes of conduct state one must not claim a competency one doesn’t possess, then a job in IT would be based on merit and not other criteria.

As the BCS code of conduct says one was not do work for which one does not have competency, and the problems I raise with my generation (The Net Generation) not being able to get experience, then there needs to be a training scheme to get them to the standard where they can be treated equally.

I think doctoral programmes are the route to getting FBCS without being held back by not getting opportunity as my generation are facing. Research councils already accredit doctorate (as ESRC) and newly trained educational psychologists can’t practice without a relevant doctorate. Equally I think no one should be allowed to offer any lower IT qualifications like the ones advertised on TV unless they were approved by BCS as meeting the standard for the training of the competency claimed.

So while my generation are waiting for the Baby Boomers to retire, and the Generation Next are getting ready to be the next best thing in town, my generation could be doing doctorates accreted by BCS to Level 7, and providing BCS convince public authorities to use SFIA to draft job ads objectively rather than on the basis of jobs for the boys, then maybe my generation will stand a better chance of getting the opportunity to realise our potential where we otherwise be denied in the current climate.

Acquisition, Boundlessness, Fourth Way Society Foundations, Humanities and Principles, Information Technology, The Official Weblog of Jonathan Bishop

Becoming the perfect role model and distance dad: Avoiding DNA Thieves that destroy childhood

11 August 2011 jonathanbishop No comments

Today David Cameron spoke about the problem of absent fathers. This makes a change from the usual Tory rhetoric of attacking single mothers.

I would like to have children, or a child, as a decedent who can take up my family’s tradition of being a Freeman of Llantrisant (in the case of a boy) or pass it onto their husband (if a girl). I would even fight for their right to this if in the case of a boy they had a male partner.

But, if I have children, I am not going to let any opportunist woman take them off me and deny them their chance to have the perfect male role model. If I have children they will be my flesh and blood and there is no way I am going to let anyone deny me access to them – no one.

So because I have autism and are not one of the easiest people to live with, I think I should accept that if I have children with a female partner, there is a good chance they will get taken off me, as I don’t have the competencies to raise them on my own. If you assume that a child would ideally have a stable relationship for at least the first 16 years of a child life – I don’t think someone could put up with me for that long! Therefore, in order to avoid any harm to my children I should not need a partner to have them, who might turn out to be a DNA Thief.

So, as far as I can see, the only chance to have a dependent and not lose them to a DNA thief is as follows-

1. I have a child via a surrogate mother.
-If gay couples can, why can’t I?

2. Have the child looked after by foster parents near to where I live and keep regular contact with them.
- If rich people can send their children to boarding school or the Courts can force fathers to only see their children at weekends because state endorsed DNA thieves get a monopoly on raising them, why can’t I outsource my childcare to a family who already have children and the experience of raising them?
- Surrogate parents get paid and monitored by the local authoirty. Those parents would have a financial incentive to stay together, and my children would have a better upbringing that they otherwise would as they would have the stability of two parents and me as a role model at the same time.
- So on that basis, if women can’t hold down a relationship with me, why should I deny my children a stable up-bringing and the chance to have me as a role model in a stable environment?

The Equality Act 2010 makes marriage a protected characteristic. So I should have the right to not get to married. The Human Rights Act 1998 gives me a right to found a family and the right not to associate with those I don’t want. Also, on top of this, the case of R v R means there is no legitimate expectation for a relationship between two people to be a sexual relationship. Therefore, taking the two together the right to found a family should not be based on the requirement of a sexual relationship. Therefore I should be able to have a child without having a partner in order to create them, who may be someone who turns out to be a DNA Thief.

There are so many women who murder potential children in the name of ‘choice’. Therefore, I should not have to take a risk of being with such a fetus-killing-feminist. If they want control over their body then want control over my sperm! Why can’t I be pro-choice and pro-life at the same time, just because I’m not willing to have a child with a potential DNA thief, and don’t have the ability to be a single-dad? I should be allowed to become a become a distance dad who is the perfect role model instead of being put in a position where I could be forced to be a absent father.

An lonely on-looker's diary - The world through the eyes of an Aspie, Boundlessness
« Older Entries   Recent Entries »