Parents of Adolf Hitler denied custody

**SteveJones7** · 06-03-12 at 01:50 AM

This story was so unexpectedly strange, I had to think about my feelings for a few minutes before replying.

I tried to think how I would feel, if my parents named me Adolf Hitler.
I would have cursed the day, I had two complete morons for parents, and I would have grown up resentful and angry at the world.

So my conclusion is that they are unfit parents.
Parents should make a childs life happy and secure.

Even if you didnt question their rights to believe nazism, you still have to condemn their poor poor judgement on naming their children.
The names they gave are clear indications of mental instability x2.

You would think at least one parent would have been concerned about the names, but no.

You could be christian, but calling your child satan, would be harmful to the child as another example.

Calling your child Adolf Hitler etc.., is child abuse, there is no way anyone can seriously debate otherwise.

The children should not be returned to them, they have no real future with two nutcases.

Adanaliyik · 06-03-12 at 02:56 AM

I'm with Bookdragon on this one. The abuse is not your belief system, or how you raise your kids. It's putting your kids in line to be abused from birth onward, by giving them names that immediately bring out hate in others. Let's take it to an extreme to illustrate the point.

Let's say I was KKK, and named my kid N***** Killing Whiteboy. Hey, it would freedom of speech, and freedom of belief right? But, it would also endanger the child's life should his name be spoken aloud near any black people. The endangerment is not in the family being white supremacists, or in raising their children to be the same. It's in giving the children names that will ensure they have unnecessary problems their entire life.

:(

Nunki · 06-04-12 at 02:12 AM

I do understand your point.
But following this point, you would have to take the children of a lot of parents.
Jesus is a common name. As is Winston.
True, Adolf Hitler is very specific. But where do you ultimately draw the line, and why?

Adanaliyik · 06-04-12 at 02:34 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Nunki

I do understand your point.
But following this point, you would have to take the children of a lot of parents.
Jesus is a common name. As is Winston.
True, Adolf Hitler is very specific. But where do you ultimately draw the line, and why?

As with all cases of suspected abuse, the government draws the line at the point where the actions of the parents could reasonably be expected to cause harm to the child. Calling a kid Jesus or Adolph doesn't guarantee abuse, neither does calling them Moon Unit or Dweezil (Frank Zappa's kids - If you know who Zappa is).

But, giving a child a specific name like Adolph Hitler or Aryan Nation, can reasonably be expected to cause harm to the child. Not just ridicule, as in the case of silly names like Zappa's kids, but actual physical harm. And that's where you draw the line, and where the names go from freedom of choice to child abuse.

:)

**MacFalic** · 06-04-12 at 02:48 AM

Once a line is created, it is devilishly difficult to erase it.

06-03-12 at 01:50 AM	#15
SteveJones7 Too sexy for this board Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: teh earth Posts: 1,540	This story was so unexpectedly strange, I had to think about my feelings for a few minutes before replying. I tried to think how I would feel, if my parents named me Adolf Hitler. I would have cursed the day, I had two complete morons for parents, and I would have grown up resentful and angry at the world. So my conclusion is that they are unfit parents. Parents should make a childs life happy and secure. Even if you didnt question their rights to believe nazism, you still have to condemn their poor poor judgement on naming their children. The names they gave are clear indications of mental instability x2. You would think at least one parent would have been concerned about the names, but no. You could be christian, but calling your child satan, would be harmful to the child as another example. Calling your child Adolf Hitler etc.., is child abuse, there is no way anyone can seriously debate otherwise. The children should not be returned to them, they have no real future with two nutcases. Last edited by SteveJones7; 06-03-12 at 01:52 AM.

06-03-12 at 02:56 AM	#16
Adanaliyik Master Join Date: May 2012 Location: Turkey Posts: 1,162	I'm with Bookdragon on this one. The abuse is not your belief system, or how you raise your kids. It's putting your kids in line to be abused from birth onward, by giving them names that immediately bring out hate in others. Let's take it to an extreme to illustrate the point. Let's say I was KKK, and named my kid N***** Killing Whiteboy. Hey, it would freedom of speech, and freedom of belief right? But, it would also endanger the child's life should his name be spoken aloud near any black people. The endangerment is not in the family being white supremacists, or in raising their children to be the same. It's in giving the children names that will ensure they have unnecessary problems their entire life. :(

06-04-12 at 02:12 AM	#17
Nunki Novice Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Terra Posts: 174	I do understand your point. But following this point, you would have to take the children of a lot of parents. Jesus is a common name. As is Winston. True, Adolf Hitler is very specific. But where do you ultimately draw the line, and why?

06-04-12 at 02:34 AM	#18
Adanaliyik Master Join Date: May 2012 Location: Turkey Posts: 1,162	Quote: Originally Posted by Nunki I do understand your point. But following this point, you would have to take the children of a lot of parents. Jesus is a common name. As is Winston. True, Adolf Hitler is very specific. But where do you ultimately draw the line, and why? As with all cases of suspected abuse, the government draws the line at the point where the actions of the parents could reasonably be expected to cause harm to the child. Calling a kid Jesus or Adolph doesn't guarantee abuse, neither does calling them Moon Unit or Dweezil (Frank Zappa's kids - If you know who Zappa is). But, giving a child a specific name like Adolph Hitler or Aryan Nation, can reasonably be expected to cause harm to the child. Not just ridicule, as in the case of silly names like Zappa's kids, but actual physical harm. And that's where you draw the line, and where the names go from freedom of choice to child abuse. :)

06-04-12 at 02:48 AM	#19
MacFalic Sleeps with Kuune Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Land of Cunning Sheep Posts: 836	Once a line is created, it is devilishly difficult to erase it.