Would reversible sterilization injections for welfare recipients be ethical?

There was (and still is) a controversy over something very similar to that. A group called CRACK (Children Requiring a Caring Community), now called Project Prevention, offers $200 cash to drug addicted women to either undergo sterilization or to take some long-term form of birth control like depo provera, norplant, or an IUD.

The unethical part of this is that it does target people by social class. It tells people that their children are undesireable because they are poor. We are living in a culture where corporate welfare is the norm, and even desireable behavior for many communities, but social welfare is a burden. It's fine for taxpayers to support the wealthy, but not the poor? This where ethics is a problem. It's really not simply social stratification as capitalism. What's good for capitalism is good for society. What's not good for capitalism is not good for society. Social welfare is socialism, which isn't good for capitalism, so it's not good for society. Therefore, we must take steps to control or curb it.

Socialist and communist societies (which do not exist outside of some tribes in Africa, South America, and Asia) don't have this kind of ethical dilemma.

Comments: "especially women but maybe men too" So,

rich women + poor men = ok,

rich men + poor women = not ok?

"But they wouldn't be allowed back on the dole once they had kids." So it is good to help poor adults, many of which made choices that led to their current positions, but kids who had no choice in their situation must suffer? Think you have that reversed. We need a system that will provide for the kids, and not the parents. LIke shelters that have beds for kids, but parents sleep on the floor.

Muffie, this does target people by social class, but the message isn't "that their children are undesireable because they are poor." The message is "you can't have children if you can't afford to take care of them." If society has skin in the game (taxes -> welfare), then society should have some kind of say. I think we need a system that discourages people on welfare from having kids, but not one that makes the decision for them.

As for corporate welfare, it is a huge problem. It is just so much more complicated, most people can't see it going on. Also, we have so many rules to govern morality that people have lowered their standards and many people act as if actions that are legal are also moral.

It would be unethical, but collecting back child support would be ethical, and probably get a ton of people with children off of welfare. It would be nice if the time and energy and money spent on who is smoking a cigarette and where was spent on collecting back child support.

No, completely UNethical, and in fact fascist, because it assumes that the state OWNS another human's body.

On the surface I like this idea. Kinda goes along with the idea of drug testing welfare recipients, we want to make sure you are not abusing the system.

If such a treatment existed, I believe it woul be unethical not to do it and encourage people who are clearly having trouble feeding themselves, else they would not be on welfare, to have to feed another person.

No.