SE1-The Southern Adoption Bill of 2015 (passed)

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

The Southern Adoption Bill of 2015:

1. Anyone can adopt a child, as long as they are not convicted felons and as long as the parent or guardian gives permission. This means anyone regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, etc... can adopt a minor. The same applies to foster homes, anyone can adopt regardless of sexual orientation, gender, etc... as long as the parent or guardian approves and they are not a registered felon or sex offender.

Sponsors: Haslam2020

"Let's open up a debate on this, I believe everyone can get behind this."

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Is there any debate to this bill?

[Leinad]

Hmmm...thoughts:

-"Child 0-18" is a bit vague. Adding "aged" might help, but I'd rather just say "minor." (Also, I believe the age of majority in Atlasia is 16, not 18, so a child aged 17-18 is nonexistent.)

-Also, I'd just merge the two sections, saying adoption and foster care. And make sure it says "parent(s) or guardian," because the first part just says parent (which wouldn't work if both parents are dead/themselves felons).

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Well, if there isn't a debate let's vote? AYE

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Well, if there isn't a debate let's vote? AYE

Leinad's comments have not been addressed...

[Blair]

Likewise the language of this bill allows murders and pedophiles to adopt if the parents agree

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Likewise the language of this bill allows murders and pedophiles to adopt if the parents agree

Not exactly...? It says convicted felons can't, which means murderers and pedophiles can't?

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Well, if there isn't a debate let's vote? AYE

Leinad's comments have not been addressed...

I combined them and modified the age?

[Leinad]

I still think "child 0-16" should be "child aged 0-16." Not to be pedantic, but overly vague laws are never good.

And then, "child aged 0-16" is redundant anyway, so "minor" would probably be best while you're at it.

And is this not the case anyway? What are the current restrictions on adoption/foster care? Is this more restrictive than the status quo or less, or does it even change it?

I mean, this is probably a good thing, but we have to look for any unintended consequences before we pass stuff.

[Blair]

Likewise the language of this bill allows murders and pedophiles to adopt if the parents agree

Not exactly...? It says convicted felons can't, which means murderers and pedophiles can't?

No it says

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Or, as I've underlined means that only one of the criteria must apply. For example-to get into my house you have to come in through the front or back door-that means that you only need one. Basically this law says that with parental permission anyone can adopt.

And for about the 100th time-this isn't how fostering/child care works. This law allows anyone to adopt

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

I still think "child 0-16" should be "child aged 0-16." Not to be pedantic, but overly vague laws are never good.

And then, "child aged 0-16" is redundant anyway, so "minor" would probably be best while you're at it.

And is this not the case anyway? What are the current restrictions on adoption/foster care? Is this more restrictive than the status quo or less, or does it even change it?

I mean, this is probably a good thing, but we have to look for any unintended consequences before we pass stuff.

ok, sorry will do! and true

[Leinad]

For example-to get into my house you have to come in through the front or back door-that means that you only need one. Basically this law says that with parental permission anyone can adopt.

Blair's right. Change it from "or" to "and."

To carry over from his door analogy, it should instead be where one door takes you into one room, but you need to go through a second door to access the important parts of the house. Kind of like a foyer in a house, or an airlock in space or something.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Ok, now that most concerns have been addressed, what's y'alls opinions of it? Where do you think it needs more improvement and Governor Blair, I think parents/guardians wouldn't give kids to "bad" people. What could we do to make that part better?

[Leinad]

I just noticed that it says "parent" instead of "parent or guardian" in the first sentence, which should be fixed.

Also, and I suppose this is due to a lack of clarity on my part, but it should just be "minor" instead of "minor aged 0-16," as the "aged 0-16" part is redundant, given that all minors fall within that range (from birth to the age of majority).

Regarding Blair's concerns, perhaps another hurdle should be added? I'd hate to ruin it with red tape, or add subjectivity on the part of the government (which opens the door to discrimination), but I'd also hate to let children be adopted by people who aren't necessarily fit to raise children.

[Pingvin]

I agree with Governor Blair's concerns and I believe that the bill should be amended so we prevent adoptions by felons, that may include registered sex offenders.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Ok, revisions being made

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Revisions made, I'm sure everyone can get behind this? Felons, sex offenders, etc can't adopt. This is meant to save lives and hopefully it does! I vote AYE!

[Leinad]

It still says "parent" instead of "parent or guardian." Obviously there are cases where "parent" doesn't work, such as orphans. This is an obvious error and simple to fix, so hopefully you can fix it at least before we open the final vote.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

It still says "parent" instead of "parent or guardian." Obviously there are cases where "parent" doesn't work, such as orphans. This is an obvious error and simple to fix, so hopefully you can fix it at least before we open the final vote.

made it sorry XD I thought I did before haha! Ok, let's vote! Aye!

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Aye!

[Pingvin]

Aye

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Welp, no matter what now It's gonna pass. It's a great act.