finally, compulsory parenting classes backed with parenting orders.
The state has a strong moral, practical and financial interest in the raising of its future citizens. This is why most liberal democracies offer extensive and costly child support systems (including child-support payments, free nursery care, parental leave arrangements) to aid parents in raising young people who can be active and respectful members of society. Louise Casey, Government Respect Co-ordinator, argues that the best results come from preventative action: “I think we have got to do everything to make sure we are tackling not just anti-social behaviour today, but preventing the next generation of people growing up with signs of anti-social behaviour in the future.” 1 Compulsory parenting classes could be a means to ensure the cohesion and prosperity of its future generations by raising the standard of parenting they receive.
Mandatory Parenting Classes? - Circle of Moms
Financial considerations alone do not give the state the right to interfere in the raising of children and do not provide sufficient motivation for imposing a model of parenting. State intervention should be motivated by the best interests of its citizens and paternalistic measures should be avoided when possible in all liberal democracies. In 2003 Lord Irvine criticised Blunkett’s plans for compulsory parenting classes as "an extreme example of the nanny state" and a violation of human rights.1 Moreover, even if the implementation of parenting classes were unobjectionable, one would need evidence supporting a positive correlation between attending parenting classes, good parenting, and fall in anti-social behaviour.