eumaas wrote:I would invite Flex to offer more concrete proposals here as policy is more his thing than mine. I do not think that to monitor, discipline, and punish creates a healthy adult. Michel Foucault might be a bit dry for you, but he traced the history and logic of therapeutic intervention by the state.
I definitely second the reading of Foucault, or at least reading some stuff about
him since the primary material can be pretty dense, and I'll throw in my two cents here.
Assuming we're on the topic of actions that could, at least hypothetically, be taken right now
with no major changes in public attitude or laws or whatever, it seems like the state could be pushed towards a model that "rewards" individuals for good behavior instead of turning towards a compulsory, invasive system. This would look something like: if you're in one of these especially-bad-circumstance-families, putting your kids through school, providing for them, etc. can be rewarded with (for example, and probably the easiest incentive to implement) tax incentives or further resources being put at your disposal from the state (getting a state grant to buy your kids clothes if they stay enrolled and attending school, for example). Although this still requires some contact with the state, there are a couple of relative benefits here: 1) the onus is on the family to take advantage of government offers, nothing is compulsory, 2) while there's still a dubious carrot/stick approach here, it's at least not as openly authoritarian as the method currently being employed.
There are, like, a zillion complaints to be had with this approach but in terms of policy it's the somewhat more palatable of the two and has the benefit of being something we could actually envision being implemented, unlike some other more tasteful ideas that we won't realistically expect to see right now.