I admit I am childless. I May not ever have kids (I am 30, but my hubby is 41, so we have some time to decide still). I do love other peoples kids and know that the next generation will be here when we are all gone.
I totally agree that child health and well being is a public health issue. I also agree that 8 weeks is not enough time. I think a year is not REALLY enough time. I would LOVE to see parents able to spend 18-24 months (or longer) home with an infant before sending them off to daycare and pre-school. Kids need it and deserve to have their parents around during those important years of development. (as do older kids, but I think that is another post)
Being able to afford time off is one of the MAIN reasons we have chosen not to have children. How do we support ourselves and our family on one income? I have met single parents who work, AND attend college. I am blown away at how they are able to do it. There is little support out there for families.
My point is that we have CHOSEN to be childless. We know what systems are in place. What options are available to us. How much it costs to care for children. And We don't have a social network that would support us, no Grandmas or Aunts and Uncles to watch the kids sometimes, or help us out with buying diapers and school clothes. It seems an overwhelming obstacle to be a good parent and remain comfortably middle class.
I am not saying it is a privilege to have children, only that people who choose to have kids are accepting the difficulties and sacrifice that go along with it. AND that there are very few truly accidental pregnancies. If you have un-protected sex, you should expect to get pregnant (and I theorize on some level are planning to).
It is sad that in this country that you get more support for your children if you are dirt poor, than if you are working a modest job. We all know parents who spend 50-80% of their income on child care so that they can go to work, just to have insurance. But some women who do not work collect checks and food stamps and Medicare AND get to stay home with their babies.
The point here is NOT to rag on welfare programs, because they are so important. My point is that they should be expanded to include more people. Why not provide WIC checks to all parents who request them for healthy foods for their kids. Why not cover all people, mothers, fathers, children... with govt health care so that if a parent stays home with his or her child, they are still covered.
This protects the children of parents who make bad decisions too. It is not a child's fault if the parents spend money on luxury items and cannot afford the doctor for the kids. and is a car and a cell phone really a luxury? A home computer? Clothing for themselves and the children? what about regular Take out dinners because both parents work long hours and dont have the time and energy to make dinner at the end of the day?
These parents who work hard need support too. The stay at home parents are the ones who have time to take interest in their children's educations, join PTA, Do Cub Scouts, Coach sports, pay attention to local politics...etc These are important parts of parenting that too few parents are able to perform.
I choose not to have children because I dont think I can be a good parent based on the support availiable. Not everyone wants to make that choice, and I respect that. Some people have better family support structures. some people have more energy and are willing to sacrifice more. And some people are too ignorant event to think about the consequences of having un-protected sex. But the govt should protect and support all children, children of good parents, children of bad parents, and children of parents who are doing the best they can. In otherwords ALL children. And that means supporting parents, which they are not doing well enough right now. IMHO Some places do it better (Canada, Germany...etc) some places do it worse (China).
no subject
I totally agree that child health and well being is a public health issue. I also agree that 8 weeks is not enough time. I think a year is not REALLY enough time. I would LOVE to see parents able to spend 18-24 months (or longer) home with an infant before sending them off to daycare and pre-school. Kids need it and deserve to have their parents around during those important years of development. (as do older kids, but I think that is another post)
Being able to afford time off is one of the MAIN reasons we have chosen not to have children. How do we support ourselves and our family on one income? I have met single parents who work, AND attend college. I am blown away at how they are able to do it. There is little support out there for families.
My point is that we have CHOSEN to be childless. We know what systems are in place. What options are available to us. How much it costs to care for children. And We don't have a social network that would support us, no Grandmas or Aunts and Uncles to watch the kids sometimes, or help us out with buying diapers and school clothes. It seems an overwhelming obstacle to be a good parent and remain comfortably middle class.
I am not saying it is a privilege to have children, only that people who choose to have kids are accepting the difficulties and sacrifice that go along with it. AND that there are very few truly accidental pregnancies. If you have un-protected sex, you should expect to get pregnant (and I theorize on some level are planning to).
It is sad that in this country that you get more support for your children if you are dirt poor, than if you are working a modest job. We all know parents who spend 50-80% of their income on child care so that they can go to work, just to have insurance. But some women who do not work collect checks and food stamps and Medicare AND get to stay home with their babies.
The point here is NOT to rag on welfare programs, because they are so important. My point is that they should be expanded to include more people. Why not provide WIC checks to all parents who request them for healthy foods for their kids. Why not cover all people, mothers, fathers, children... with govt health care so that if a parent stays home with his or her child, they are still covered.
This protects the children of parents who make bad decisions too. It is not a child's fault if the parents spend money on luxury items and cannot afford the doctor for the kids. and is a car and a cell phone really a luxury? A home computer? Clothing for themselves and the children? what about regular Take out dinners because both parents work long hours and dont have the time and energy to make dinner at the end of the day?
These parents who work hard need support too. The stay at home parents are the ones who have time to take interest in their children's educations, join PTA, Do Cub Scouts, Coach sports, pay attention to local politics...etc These are important parts of parenting that too few parents are able to perform.
I choose not to have children because I dont think I can be a good parent based on the support availiable. Not everyone wants to make that choice, and I respect that. Some people have better family support structures. some people have more energy and are willing to sacrifice more. And some people are too ignorant event to think about the consequences of having un-protected sex. But the govt should protect and support all children, children of good parents, children of bad parents, and children of parents who are doing the best they can. In otherwords ALL children. And that means supporting parents, which they are not doing well enough right now. IMHO Some places do it better (Canada, Germany...etc) some places do it worse (China).
My 2 many cents.