3 ms·

I agree -- it seems like many of the responders here are unaware of just how much privilege they have. (Or maybe they're just not in the US.) You can't just ta

I agree -- it seems like many of the responders here are unaware of just how much privilege they have. (Or maybe they're just not in the US.) You can't just take a nap you need to pick a child up or the boss expects you at the next shift or you'll end up with DSS/Police at your door, or unemployed. Is this right? No, of course not, but it's reality. Hell, many people are driving vehicles that are very unsafe, which also poses a risk to others, for the same reason -- they have no choice.

echelon 6y ago
I empathize, but this is still rationalization. Having children is a choice, and sometimes people back themselves into untenable situations. You can't use children as an excuse to put the lives of others at risk. Realize what you're saying here. People driving cars they can't afford to upkeep are also risking themselves and others. Yes, it sucks. I empathize. I shouldn't be throwing stones. But if I'm a juror on a vehicular homicide case I'm not going to think less of deaths that were caused because the defendant had children to take to school. It would be more compelling than a DUI case, but it doesn't bring people back to life.
- quicklyfrozen 6y ago
  Almost no one should have children then, as very few of us have sufficient resources to guarantee we can support a child for 18+ years. Just having a child in the car is distracting and puts others at risk, but we accept that. And once the child is there, and it becomes a struggle to meet the schedule, then what? Give them up? Obviously this line of thought has devolved pretty far from the original point as someone who can afford a car with driver drowsiness detection can probably afford to make different choices. It's just the idea that no one should ever drive when they have even a slight risk of falling asleep seems quite unrealistic, at least in the US. Personally, I can find myself a bit tired by the end of the day. I've never felt at risk of falling asleep while driving, but I'm human, so can't say with certainty that it will never happen. Maybe a driver aid will lull some into driving when they know they shouldn't, but I still think it will be a net win (just like seat belts).

echelon 6y ago

I empathize, but this is still rationalization. Having children is a choice, and sometimes people back themselves into untenable situations. You can't use children as an excuse to put the lives of others at risk. Realize what you're saying here. People driving cars they can't afford to upkeep are also risking themselves and others. Yes, it sucks. I empathize. I shouldn't be throwing stones. But if I'm a juror on a vehicular homicide case I'm not going to think less of deaths that were caused because the defendant had children to take to school. It would be more compelling than a DUI case, but it doesn't bring people back to life.

quicklyfrozen 6y ago
Almost no one should have children then, as very few of us have sufficient resources to guarantee we can support a child for 18+ years. Just having a child in the car is distracting and puts others at risk, but we accept that. And once the child is there, and it becomes a struggle to meet the schedule, then what? Give them up? Obviously this line of thought has devolved pretty far from the original point as someone who can afford a car with driver drowsiness detection can probably afford to make different choices. It's just the idea that no one should ever drive when they have even a slight risk of falling asleep seems quite unrealistic, at least in the US. Personally, I can find myself a bit tired by the end of the day. I've never felt at risk of falling asleep while driving, but I'm human, so can't say with certainty that it will never happen. Maybe a driver aid will lull some into driving when they know they shouldn't, but I still think it will be a net win (just like seat belts).