Are children a right?

Simple answer: NO.

I see this one getting ugly, but I will jump in anyway. No, children are absolutely not a right. I personally find it appalling when couples on government assistance continue to grow their family.

I have one daughter and would have loved to have a second child. It was an extremely tough decision for my wife and I, but we decided against it. Finances were not the only factor, but it was definitely a big factor.

Honestly no I don't think people should have as many child as possible if they can not afford it. Why would you have a child if you can not take care of it properly? I get sick when I see people who on government aid with 4 or 5 children. I have actually heard a woman say something about having more children so she'd get more tax return money. What kinda people think like this???

I think people should be responsible and know how many children they can afford and when enough is enough. But the sad thing is you have alot of young mothers getting pregnant, alot of small town kids where sex is the only thing to do...and they just don't know better.

While I think its important to use discernment and think beyond your own wishes when making important decisions like that.... a bigger question is do you want someone else to have the right to make that decision for you? What about the government... are you feeling ok with the government dictating whether or not you have children or how many??

I know I don't want others deciding what's best for me or my family.

No, no, no, no no, and what else...oh yeah, no.

But in all seriousness, children should not be a right. Sure, some people have the ability to have children, but not everyone should have them. Now, that's not to say if it's and unexpected pregnancy and you can't afford it that you should just give the kid up or have an abortion if you're willing to try. But I think it's horribly irresponsible to decide to have children if you KNOW you can't support them financially. You just don't deserve to have kids.

Just because we can make and have babies doesn't mean we should. This will probably make people mad, but whatever...I think someone is incredibly stupid and naive if they think having a child when you have nothing will solve all your problems. You'll still have nothing...plus an extra mouth to feed and person to clothe. I really think people who continue to have children when they don't have money should be sterilzed.

My $0.02...

Ummm, why is this a topic on a weight loss website? ... walking away too.

Because this is the chit chat, fun, and games forum.

EXACTLY!

Why are you posting this here?

I am sure there are a good number of people on here who have kids and are also receiving government aid. How do you think they feel reading this? Not everyone on food stamps/welfare is a leech on the system. The economy is bad, have you noticed?

I mean a situation where you want to have a child or children that you know you can't afford and you will need assistance. To me a lot of people feel it's their right to have children whether they can take care of them or not.

I'm actually in the process of applying for food stamps myself, since my husband was laid off... and yet, if I were to become pregnant right now, I would certainly keep my baby, knowing that I would also need assistance. And yes I do feel I have a right to do so.

Seriously, this is not the place for a conversation like this. Go take an ethics class or something if you must have this debate.

Ummm, why is this a topic on a weight loss website? ... walking away too.

Because this is the chit chat, fun, and games forum.

Nor is this really a weight loss website.

I know two families. One guy recently married a woman older than him that already had three children. But he wanted some of his own. He cannot even afford to provide for the three she had, he now has three of his own working on a fourth. Where this becomes a problem....

I know another family. They have i believe 5 or 6 children and there are rumors that another one is coming. Who really know. Problem is, their youngest two ages 2 and 5 i watch at work. They come in with dirty diapers, messy matted hair that smells. They are always dirty, hungry and tired. The 5 year old is not even potty trained yet. They youngest who is a little over two is almost like a newborn. Both of their social skills are certainly not up to par with what they should be. The two year old just stands around like a newborn just watching. Most two year olds will interact, hence the overused term terrible twos. This might be okay for one child that is below the levels, but all of them have social skills and educational skills that are sadly incredibly below their age level. Why? Because the parents cant even afford to take care of themselves yet only God knows why they want a handful of kids they cannot provide for.

My answer, if you cannot afford to support them it is certainly not an issue of having children because of love. More so a brag right.

Oh, oops - I'm in the wrong place.

I thought the post was "Are children alright?"

:grumble: :grumble:

I think that the right to NOT have children should be more emphasized than any right TO have them - I would feel much better about my tax dollars going to provide free universal birth control and family planning services for those who want them than I do about them going to subsidize families who have no intention of providing for themselves.

That said, I don't know how you regulate it in a way that doesn't infringe upon the right to privacy, etc.

The system is flawed and there's no real way to change it that doesn't hurt the children who didn't ask to be here in the first place. If you manage to figure out a solution for that one, you get a cookie. A big one.

This was a topic on the radio yesterday.

"Christina, has a terminal disease and has only been given 5 years to live. Her final dying wish is to be able to have a child and the doctors say that she will be healthy enough to bear a child within the next year. Unfortunately, her husband does not want to be a single dad after she’s gone so he doesn’t want to give her the last dying wish. What do you think? Should her husband grant her wish?"

http://www2.alice1059.com/listen/slacker-and-steve-dying-wish-part-1-927

My thoughts are that they shouldn't have the baby. :ohwell:

Agreeing with everyone else that I don't think this thread is going to end up all that good, but I'll give my view.

I think if you can't afford to have them you should wait until you can, nobody should be having several kids and relying on the government to support their ever expanding brood. It should be your responsibility when you choose to have them, "can I really afford to pay for them, without any help?"
However, there are some people out there who would genuinely make wonderful parents and would so love to have a child but know that they'll never be able to afford to fully raise one. (not just in the present time, but never) I really feel for those people, I'm not sure of the help parents in the US get, but in the UK everyone gets child benefit. I think that's great in that it will help some families who can afford to have a child, but would maybe be borderline, would be struggling alot financially without it. In some cases (those where the parents are stable and able to emotionally support a child to the full) they should have a right to a child. (not half a football team but a child)
Then again, there is adoption/fostering for those cases, in which you get financial help without needing to create another life, but then I can understand the desire for a child that is your own biologically.