4 ms·
> The reason why they don't have pretty often is because they can't afford abortions. When I lived in such communities, access and cost weren't significant iss
by anamax 16y ago
> The reason why they don't have pretty often is because they can't afford abortions.
When I lived in such communities, access and cost weren't significant issues. Young girls wanted to have children. They got status and other social rewards for having children. (The sad ones said "a baby has to love me".)
They didn't see having children as a cost because, for them, it wasn't.
- rdtsc 16y ago> Young girls wanted to have children. It has been postulated that American welfare assistantship programs are somewhat to blame. I think it has been discussed here (sorry to repeat it, and for not quoting -- I forgot who mentioned it). Basically the programs to help "single mothers" was created to help widowed mothers support their family. Eventually some women realized that having a baby is not that bad as they can take advantage of the "single mother" status. There is sort of a logical reasoning behind it. Now, not that every girl goes through that logical reasoning and decides on having a baby. Rather with time this choice of having a baby become "encoded" in the culture as something else "it is cool" or "it bring attention" or "status". Girls see other girls get attention and acquire status when they have children to they want to emulate. Basically in this particular case, the welfare system completely backfired and instead of just helping, it started expanding the population segment that would take advantage of a particular feature.
- chopsueyar 16y agoWhat particular case are you referring to, basically?
- rdtsc 16y agoSpecific welfare help for "single mothers". The law was written more with the intent to help widows with small children. But it turned out that many young un-married girls could also just have a baby and take advantage of the same program. At some point having a baby became a good way to get decent welfare assistance.
- anamax 16y ago> It has been postulated that American welfare assistantship programs are somewhat to blame. I don't know how significant such aid was with the folks that I knew. I think that a bigger factor was the culture. In most cases, they got their basics from family, so the assistance went for "luxuries". It's not enough for real luxuries, but it's enough to buy "stuff". I don't think that the "stuff" was a big motivation, but its unclear why society should provide it.
- starkfist 16y agoI don't know why it's such a bad thing to give welfare assistance to young single mothers. This should be extended to all mothers regardless of marital status or age. Parenting in America has turned into a scary, expensive headache, rather than the normal way of perpetuating the species. Americans complain that "only stupid people are breeding" but we do almost nothing to make having kids easier for non-stupid, gainfully employed people. In contrast, places like Norway, Japan and Australia basically pay women of to have children, regardless of social status.
- anamax 16y ago> I don't know why it's such a bad thing to give welfare assistance to young single mothers. We really want to discourage single motherhood because it's pretty crappy for the kids. Yes, there are other crappy things for kids, but that's not an argument for creating more.
- todayiamme 16y agoThis is extremely off topic but I really need to say this. >>>When I lived in such communities<<< I am happy for you. I know you must have gone through a lot of pain, but it makes me happy that you survived and thrived. Take care.
- anamax 16y agoI was physically in those communities, but, thanks to my parents, in a different culture. There are often multiple cultures in a single area.