This is the kind of weirdness you get when morality meets fascism meets poverty, a woman who seems to walk the walk (she adopted four other-race-than-her kids, who came from the same drug-addicted mom), but also walks the streets promoting paying people for going on birth control or getting sterilized.
I've never seen her, though apparently she's been in my neighborhoods recently. I don't know her real feelings, and disagree with the reporter's lead that she's asking drug addicts to "give up" their right to procreation.
The human body seems to be able to procreate even when it's suffering from toxicity, depression, hunger, illness - amazing. Equally amazing is that since creating reliable birth control methods, humans are so shy about using them. I'd take $300 to supplement my $600 annual contraception bill. Does what I do qualify me as an addict? Personally, I believe my lifestyle as-is would be detrimental to a baby, though I wouldn't ask the state to help me deal with it.
A critic of Project Prevention is quoted as saying that it "ignores the real problem."
Yes, people on drugs need much more than reproductive choice. But what's wrong with helping combat a real symptom? People on drugs tend to be unmotivated, you know. . .is this an appropriate nudge?
I don't mean to be flippant by suggesting children are mere side-effects of sex, though on a biological level, the situation is a straight-forward cause and effect. Who can argue that it's better for drug addicts to give birth to children than not? It's not like anyone is forcing them one way or the other.
And there's no abortion involved, so no one's dying.
It sucks, though, that Barbara Harris is teaching her kids that it's o.k. to post signs on public utility poles.