Chuck Schumer to unveil Avonte's Law, to put tracking devices on autistic kids


#1

U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer wants to outfit autistic kids with tracking devices.

nydailynews.com/news/politics/avonte-law-put-tracking-devices-autistic-kids-article-1.1591701


#2

Well it’s voluntary, according to the article it basically expands the current program for Alzheimer’s patients to include kids with autism.


#3

What a misleading headline!

From the article:

“The program would be completely voluntary for parents and run by local law enforcement,” a release from Schumer’s office said.


#4

It is a wonderful program.

Our neighbor had Alzheimer’s and she was quite the escape artist.

The police would find her and return her, no questions asked.


#5

Correct.


#6

I could see Down’s Syndrome, but autism?


#7

Autism is a large spectrum, but there are certainly plenty of autistic kids with a propensity for running off without letting someone else know. I could see my son doing that. We can’t take our eyes off him for even a moment most of the time.


#8

Catholic social principles of subsidiarity and “tracking devices” on citizens.

Wikipedia states:

Subsidiarity is an organizing principle that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority.

Thankfully United States Senator, Charles Schumer who is now involved with this concept has reassured us.

“The program would be completely voluntary for parents and run by local law enforcement,” a release from Schumer’s office said.

WHY have government involved at all? Parents can already do this on their own if they so desire.

If this is going to remain “local” why already have a US Senator involved?

Why involve “police” (“run by local law enforcement”)?

What about next year or the year after when some parent opts out and their autistic kid has a “went missing” issue. Will/should this Government program be made mandatory then?

What assurances are that it won’t be and why should I believe those assurances (we were promised our social security numbers would be private too. Try getting a bank account without giving your SSN or many other things–yet we were assured and it was even “law”).

Who pays for these programs? These things are never free. Who pays also when these programs get expanded?

And why not include ALL children (why stop at autistic kids)? After all, we see plenty of non-autistic kids have disappearing acts?

What about adults? Why stop at the kids?

What about laws that exempting Congressmen? Should we have those? We do with our new Government health care. Why not exempt politicians’ kids from this program too.

What about when abuses occur? Does government hold themselves accountable?

Who pays for “enforcement” when the laws balloon and people don’t want to comply?

Should we send those parents to jail? Fine them? What if they don’t pay the fines? What can we take away from those parents to make up for unpaid fines (Can we garner their wages? What if they are on welfare? Can we take that?).

What about when a fickle Judge broadens the rules? We’ve seen that before. Why not “broaden the rules” with this program?

Would it be reasonable to just let individual parents decide these issues for themselves without government interference according to Catholic social principles of subsidiarity?


#9

It’s worth looking into. People who are mentally ill don’t always know where they are at.

I just hope supporters of this will proceed with caution. This is the US government we are talking about, after-all. :o


#10

SuperLuigi. You stated:

People who are mentally ill don’t always know where they are at.

Agreed. But why would that necessitate more Government? Especially when people can already do this without more Government expansion into our lives?


#11

Well usually it’s because it’s easier to reunite lost people who can’t necessarily speak for themselves with their families by having a database that is easily accessible by law enforcement across jurisdictions.


#12

Cider. You stated:

Well usually it’s because it’s easier to reunite lost people who can’t necessarily speak for themselves.

But this can already be done without the Government and laws.

We are not talking about the ability or ease of uniting people. We are talking about a “law” here (that’s WHY it is being called “Avonte’s Law”).

And I am saying, “Is a LAW necessary?”

And I am also saying: “Is a LAW the best way to approach this issue?”


#13

I agree completely with Cathoholic.

You don’t want the government involved when it comes to your children.

Haven’t we learned any lessons? Keep the government out of your business and away from your children. And don’t be fooled by their false compassion and concern for your children. It always starts out under that guise, but never stays that way for long.


#14

Apparently it’s voluntary, and well it should be, if for no reason other than the fact that some autistic kids or teens would fight any kind of tracking device until they had it off, no matter what they had to do to get it done. That’s one thing about autistic youngsters, they can react negatively to something you wouldn’t expect and might do something truly harmful to themselves in order to rid themselves of it.


#15

All the law is doing is allowing parents of autistic kids to have access to the tracking program that is already in place for Alzheimer’s patients. Right now they can’t use it, the law will allow them to do so if they choose to.


#16

Ridgerunner. You said.

Apparently it’s voluntary, and well it should be

Why should it be voluntary (I agree it should not be mandatory)? You can hear it now: “If mandating this saves one life, it will be worth it!”

I have no problem with this being voluntary or mandatory incidentally. The issue I’m trying to bring up is WHO gets to decide? The parents? or . . . The Government?

We can have it “voluntary” without Government interference, and we can have it “mandatory” without Government interference (“Your father says you must wear this ankle tracker and you WILL wear this ankle tracker”).

I still don’t understand why we need Government involved?

Cider said:

All the law is doing is allowing parents of autistic kids to have access to the tracking program . . .

But they ALREADY have access to tracking programs in place without expanded Government.

And what about the other questions and issues legislating in this area would eventually force (here)?


#17

I’m not advocating it. But I also don’t think it’s the end of the world either.

And having said that, I’m not discussing this anymore. I’m not invested either way.


#18

I don’t agree with the “slippery slope” argument. If they start trying to push to make it mandatory, then I would be upset. Now – not so much. :shrug:

And I have a son with autism, so I would be directly affected.

Certainly, parents could opt to get some sort of GPS tracking device themselves. But then they would be the ones paying for it. And not everyone can afford that. Sure this is another thing that taxpayers foot the bill for. Add it to the pile. But really, a tracking device is far cheaper than paying for an all-out search and rescue team.

I’m all about minimizing government interference – most definitely when it comes to my children. But I don’t see anything of great concern in this instance.

It’s not even a law yet. A Senator is just proposing it. It may not even go anywhere.


#19

This proposed “law” does not mean much to me one way or the other.

My point has never been about this proposed law so much as it is about this principle.

I am using this proposed “law” as an example to think about the larger principle. That’s the point. The Catholic social principle of subsidiarity.

What is subsidiarity?

As I mentioned earlier,

Wikipedia states:

QUOTE:

Subsidiarity is an organizing principle that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority.

When the principle of subsidiarity is violated, there are consequences.


#20

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.