Is having children a right or a privilege?

It’s never a burden to have children because they will be wiping your ass or growing your food when you are 80.

Having children is not a right nor privilege. It’s life.

IMO it is both, it is a right one has the privilege to have. More than anything else, children are a gift. As with other rights, it can be misused or abused if one cannot fully fathom the choice they make or the real world occurrences or outcome thereof.

It’s not fair, but it’s still a right. It’s very complicated. In America I think most people agree we can’t control people’s reproduction by force. But, also a lot of people want to encourage people who can’t afford to raise their kids to use birth control.

It is a necessity.
No children->extinction

But let us take it further.
How many children? At least a statistical average of 2 per family to sustain the population.
Since you are now excluding a vast number of families who “should not have children” due to financial reasons, you are severely diminishing the overall population’s ability to sustain its numbers, which means those who can afford children need to have more than 2 children to keep the population stable.
Does it not then follow that for those who can afford children, it becomes a duty to have them?
Should wealthy people be forced to have a statistically determined number of children?

@ragingloli The population on earth has been growing and growing. Would it be so bad to have some negative growth in some parts of the world?

@JLeslie
I am talking strictly about western countries, which have the problem of not having enough children, but having too many old people.
In Japan it is so bad, they are developing robots to take care of the elderly, because there are not enough young people to do it.

I agree with @JLeslie. Too many children being born already means exponential population growth and eventual extinction because it cannot be sustained.

China lifted the one-child policy in October because of a diminishing population… They now allow 2 children per household.

Many developing and third world countries are vastly overpopulated, and the people are starving to death. Would it be so terrible to implement a one child policy in those countries?

@ragingloli The US is still growing (although, it is at a low rate) and we have over 300million people! Even at a low rate it’s a huge growth number. I don’t know how much of the number is births, and how much immigration.

Maybe the bigger problem is country borders, but that’s too abstract to deal with.

Having to make babies to take care of the elderly is strange to me in a way, but I do understand the reality of it. I have a serious problem with needing young people to pay into the social security system to support the elderly, to me that is a poorly planned system, although I am very much in favor of social security for our retired citizens. Needing people to physically care for the elderly, makes me wince a little. It’s so imperfect. I just got through gathering all the information to have my aunt’s aide arrested for using her credit card without permission.

From what I understand aide agencies go into homeless shelters and recruit aides. Don’t get me wrong, there certainly can be women in their who want to work, who simply hit a bad time, and wind up on the street, but many many people in those shelters have mental illness, and other problems. Part of the problem in America is the low pay for these jobs. Another problem is the extended family being disconnected. I am totally screwed, because I don’t have kids, and either does my sister. I will probably have no one, no family, to help me when I’m older, and believe me I think about it.

It’s a right and a responsibility. I’m not sure where the privilege comes in,

I suspect that only a small percentage of births are planned. Often having children is neither a right nor a privilege, but an accident. Survival of a species requires that births occur as often as or more often than deaths. In the wild, the existence of predators, diseases, accidents and conflicts over resources requires reproduction as soon as members are sexually mature and as often as possible. However, though civilization over the centuries has diminished the frequency of deaths our primal instincts persist. A society that does not provide adequate employment with which to maintain a family, then that society should bear this burden.

It is a sacrifice and responsibility and certainly not a right. When a person cannot provide sufficiently then why should it be a right? Another thing that surprises me is parents’ expectations. While I agree that each and every child has a duty towards his parents and should help them when they grow old, many have been the cases where financially, socially and geographically grown children have not been able to take care of elderly parents.

@Bill1939 I would think the majority of the middle and upper classes in the western world plan their children. I might be wrong, but that’s my perspective as someone who has been middle class, or upper middle class most of my life.

Lots of people plan their kids.

Lots of people plan their kids when they’re financially stable, and then due to circumstances become no longer financially stable.

Of course, you can’t un-have a baby when you go down the class ladder.

“A society that does not provide adequate employment with which to maintain a family, then that society should bear this burden.”
@Bill1939 That’s an interesting response… But to what extent? Is it fair to ask others to help with 5 children, for example? As I mentioned above China just increased the allotment to 2 children. Is it responsible to keep having children you cannot care for properly? I feel too many children is a detriment as a whole, regardless of financial stability, because of overpopulation.

Very interesting question and I can see both sides of the argument. I know many people that have limited themselves to one or two children due to their financial situation. They don’t want to have more than they can afford. Not more than they can clothe, house, feed, maybe send to college.

I worked in Social Services. One of my coworkers pointed out to me once that he has one child, I have one child, but “the people in the lobby aren’t thinking that way.” He was referring to the fact that public assistance pays more for each child that you have. Of course it’s logical – more children mean more clothes, more food, more child care subsidy, maybe more bedrooms. However, at the same time, there’s little to discourage a person from having more. So I can definitely see both sides of this argument.

I keep thinking of @Bill1939‘s response:
“A society that does not provide adequate employment with which to maintain a family, then that society should bear this burden.”
Bill – did you happen to look at the link I posted above for the 10 poorest countries? Overpopulation is a huge problem, yet because the society (in these cases, third world or developing countries) needs money desperately, the food grown in those countries is all exported. It simply isn’t possible for their society to support anyone, so not only are they growing their problems exponentially by continuing to have children they can’t support, but those children are starving to death.
Is it still their right to continue to bear children? And you feel it is the responsibility of their broken societies to support those children? What happens when they simply cannot?

@jca People who don’t get government help have less money when they have a kid, their own money is now tighter. People on public assistance get more. No wonder the thought process is different in the two groups. Not that everyone in each group thinks exactly the same, I’m just talking averages.

This is why I think we should reduce financial help if someone has a baby while on public assistance. Then I also think that might be a horrible idea. The thing is, I bet if we rewarded no baby born, there might be fewer. A monetary reward. Maybe that is better than taking money away.

@JLeslie I believe that’s how it works in China. You are fined for having children.

@AdventureElephants Yes, in China they are, or were, fined, but it had nothing to do with being on the government dole. Average citizens who can pay their own way were fined for having a second child. It does mean it was unfair against the poor in a way, because people with money could afford the fine. People out in rural areas were allowed to have more than one baby I think.

I’m suggesting giving woman bonus money each year for not having a baby if she is on some sort of government social service. I used to think give her less money if she has a baby, but I know that will never happen, so now I think give her more money as an incentive if she doesn’t have a baby.

That’s a novel idea, @JLeslie, but I can imagine people not on social services (i.e. people paying taxes) getting upset that welfare recipients are receiving more money, etc.

I think that’s a great idea! The amount of tax $ used for welfare is a small % competitively. People refuse to acknowledge that. I’m all for paying an incentive to not add burdens to our society.

@jca I see your point, but the baby costs tax payers more probably. The problem will be that right wingers will say it’s incentive to have abortions, or something like that.

I don’t know if the money actually works out or not. I’m just theorizing that it might.

In the past I suggested it for girls in high school. Give them money if they graduate without a baby. It would be done unfairly too, because if there was a program like that, it would be offered in place with high teenage mom rates, which probably is in lower income. I’m not sure of it though. I know girls at all income levels who have become pregnant in their teens.

@JLeslie: I hear you, I agree with you. I think what people might say is not that it is an incentive to have an abortion, but that it’s more money out of our (the taxpayers’) pockets and into theirs (the recipients’). Yes, you’re right that it’s probably cost effective in the long run but people (in my opinion) won’t see it that way. They’ll see it as “more money thrown at people for not working.”

@AdventureElephants and @JLeslie I doubt that a financial incentive to not have children would work. At issue is lust versus greed. Rewards for not having children or penalties when they happen would only be applied to women. Men, on the other hand, are free to cast their seed without consequences. Most women who have children want only to raise them as best they can, though a few work the system by having children.

@AdventureElephants makes a good point regarding the financial limitations of many societies. Unfortunately, in most instances the wealth of a country has largely been exploited by empire building nations who turned the business of running them over to a small class of wealthy people that profit while the majority suffers. It is the responsibility of their broken societies to support those children. We know what happens when they will not or simply cannot provide support, rebellion and suppression.

It’s a privilege, not a right.

@Bill1939 I’m not even focused on working the system. I’m focused on a cultural problem of not planning pregnancies. How can make people think? Choose? Plan?

It all depends upon the belief system of those in the situations of producing children.
A big difference will be felt by all if Planned Parenthood and medical facilities which offer an alternative to having an unwanted child.
Adoption or fostering of older children is not a national concern.
If the child isn’t brand new, each year they age, their desirability drastically reduces any chance of being matched with a family.
A large percentage of uneducated individuals don’t know the problems if it doesn’t effect their microcosm of a life.
It is a status symbol for others to father, er, sire as many children as possible. A woman’s fertility is a matter of pride for some.
Large numbers of unmarried parents live together without being legally married in order to be able to collect aid and receive governmental subsidies towards better housing.
If there were numbers collected for how many relatives (usually grandparents) are raising the offspring of their own children, the numbers would render many silent.
As school systems are severely restricted on ‘what’ may be taught in the classes as far as self-care, reproduction, and consequential information, things are doomed in some badly needed areas.
There is also a new social awareness towards having higher birth rates to increase the numbers and propagation of particular religious belief systems. Nothing new, however for some faiths, it is currently being highly emphasized.
Unless releasing giant x-ray sterilization measures within public forums where large numbers congrigate, this question will still boil down to whom you ask.
Until somebody hits a button, somewhere.
And, then it won’t really matter, will it?

@ragingloli I feel bad for Japan, their population is decreasing cause not enough people are being kids. I think their letting foreigners bear some Japanese kids, cant remember where I read about it at.

In my opinion about the whole “having kids thing” I feel as though its a choice.
Its up to the two people that love each other, have everything together, a good place to live, and good pay can have kids if they want. Its a choice. You can have kids, adopt, or have none at all an just be alone by yourself and just be a straight up workaholic. Its up to you. But the worst thing though, is if a female isn’t even able to bear a child. That is depressing news to find out for any woman. Oh, an also a man as well, if things aren’t working down their to help with the kid making process.