> In discussions about low income families I often see somebody comment along the lines of blaming the parents for making bad choices and choosing to have child

> In discussions about low income families I often see somebody comment along the lines of blaming the parents for making bad choices and choosing to have children they couldn't afford/care for/want. This is used as a reason not to provide any social support to those families as they see it as rewarding bad behaviour. But these children didn't make those choices and they now exist in their circumstances through no fault of their own. Is it really unexpected/surprising? Ever since population sizes grew large enough for paternity to matter, where children didn't just fall into a common pool, we've cared more about our resources contributing to our own children's outcomes and not those of others. Children born in poverty are just at the extreme low end of the spectrum, but anywhere on that spectrum there's economic disparity between families affecting the probabilities of outcomes for their respective children. It's arguably irrational to care about someone else's children in this scenario, when you have your own. They're competitors, you want to give your children as much advantage as possible and disadvantage everyone else's, if you're playing aggressively. As the population continues to grow larger, there's only increasing pressure on parents to be aggressive, if they're paying attention.