[margalabargala]

The US fought a whole war with itself over whether people should be allowed to own other people. They shouldn't, we decided, except on certain circumstances.

Some parents, finding themselves owning a child, decide to push the boundaries of what they get to do with their possessions to the point that it runs afoul of other laws against how humans treat one another.

[frumplestlatz]

Conflating parenting with slavery and ownership is not only a category error but an offensive one. Parental authority isn’t ownership; it’s a duty to safeguard children’s developing autonomy and vulnerability.

Pretending otherwise betrays an indifference to children’s actual welfare, and a disturbing form of motivated reasoning deeply concerning in its implications.

[susiecambria]

It might not be consistent with slavery, but children as chattel was a thing.

It wasn't until 1874 that child abuse was documented with Mary Ellen Wilson and then later that rights and protections were accorded children. Now it's true that foster care and congregate care existed before 1874. But it was Wilson who started the ball rolling.

More on Mary Ellen Wilson and child abuse, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Ellen_Wilson, and the history of child welfare, https://blogs.millersville.edu/musings/a-history-of-child-we....

[rtkwe]

The hardline parental rights arm does actually believe they own their children and have absolute rights to do whatever they want to their children.

[margalabargala]

I'm conflating slavery/ownership, and certain styles of parenting. Most parents are not described.

If you were offended by my comment, perhaps it felt a little too close to home?

[esafak]

I would not call that a decision; it was the victor's dictate.

[margalabargala]

So is each decision made by an election winning politician? Different word same thing.

[rtkwe]

I'm not sure they're saying it's wrong more that the change was imposed externally by the victorious union rather than actually being arrived at so the question was never really settled. Looking at the history it looks clear it was. After reconstruction was halted and southern states weren't forced to allow black politicians and voting you get the decades of segregation, Jim Crowe laws, etc that followed until the civil rights act forced equal treatment under the law. Civil rights were never willingly given by the southern states.

[gjsman-1000]

That’s idiotic; as the amount of control parents are allowed over their children has never been lower compared to historical norms. We’re at the point a minor can get an abortion without parents being informed; which would have been unheard of and unthinkable 50 years ago, let alone the idea that a government would even mandate leaving parents unaware of a sexually active child. That idea didn’t even occur to the most rabid of socialist dreams.

[margalabargala]

No, that's not true at all. There are ample examples from the past of children being both more and less controlled by parents. It's mainly upbto the parents and how they choose to parent.

You're correct that recently the most overbearing, authoritarian parenting styles have received a minor legal haircut, where the worst abuses must be done either in secret or not at all. The parents who feel victimized by this new norm would like things to go back to how they were when no one asked why their kids had so many bruises on their faces.

[novemp]

> We’re at the point a minor can get an abortion without parents being informed

This is a good thing. Imagine a child having to get the permission of her father, who is also her child's father, before she can stop being pregnant.