Wednesday, October 9, 2002

After 20 years of working with children whose parents have burned, scalded, cut, threatened, beat, raped, molested and killed them, it is exceedingly evident that there are parents who are unfit. Anyone who suggests otherwise is ignoring the legal determination of fitness as is routinely determined by the courts in custody hearings, not to mention the obvious.

These thoughtless and cruel behaviors against children are brought about by mental instability, immaturity, substance abuse, and other obvious problems not race, educational level, or intelligence. How Mr. Hoffman sees a problem in addressing these problems prior to having children is beyond me.

He refers to the sanctity of life yet again, but my comments in no way compromise the sanctity of life. In fact, just the opposite is true. I wish for life to be preserved and children to be raised by parents who want them and who are capable of caring for them.

I have not suggested aborting unwanted children after conception. Rather I have suggested waiting to conceive until the person is prepared for the responsibility. Even though I have my own opinions regarding fitness, in my column I did not suggest that I, Mr. Hoffman, or any other person be the one to determine fitness for parenting. Rather, I suggested that the one considering conception make that determination for herself.

His latest letter supposes that I have suggested that parents only conceive when they are "100 percent prepared." He again has read more into my words than were even vaguely implied. No one is 100 percent prepared for parenting. There is a huge difference between suggesting that parents be 100 percent prepared and suggesting that they consider the responsibility of being a parent before they conceive.

I have no clue how Mr. Hoffman sees my comments as "dry, self-interested analysis" and in his latest remarks, he still has failed to logically contest the basic premise of my column personal responsibility in decision-making. Instead he has proposed illogical and indefensible leaps in his rhetoric.

It appears that Mr. Hoffman is using my comments as a platform for launching a discussion of his own agenda that is so weakly related to my remarks as to be difficult to follow.

Gregory K. Moffatt, Ph.D.

Brooks