8 ms·

What I took away from this article is that many low-income men have no real interest in being fathers or raising children. Yet, they tend to produce children a

What I took away from this article is that many low-income men have no real interest in being fathers or raising children. Yet, they tend to produce children anyway. We should focus on making birth control more accessible, instead of trying to make people take responsibility for raising children they obviously don't want. That guy who spends all his money on weed and booze while his kids go hungry? He should have gotten a vasectomy. We need to be asking why he didn't- was it a lack of education, or was the procedure too expensive?

whamlastxmas 2y ago
Mine cost me $1k up front, health insurance didn’t cover a penny. It’s really silly.
- criddell 2y ago
  When you think about it, it is kind of crazy. If a person can't afford that, then they definitely can't afford kids.
  - whamlastxmas 2y ago
    The sillier part is that it has to save the insurance company sooooo much money to reduce the number of parents, you think they’d be knocking on doors to see if people want them for free
    - criddell 2y ago
      It's the opposite. Insurance companies are regulated and the portion of the premium that they can keep as profit is limited. If they want to make more dollars, they have to increase the amount we spend on healthcare which lets them increase premiums. They would rather keep 20% of $10k than 20% of $1k.
amanaplanacanal 2y ago
Most doctors refuse to perform sterilization procedures on young people, at least until after they have had children. After all, what if they change their minds? My girlfriend couldn’t get hers done until she was over 30.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  This is a topic near and dear to my heart, because unwanted children leads to enormous suffering (which I have seen up close as a volunteer Guardian ad Litem, a legal advocate for children in the system). A recent thread on the topic of unwanted children at scale [1]. So I bought and operate a domain which points to the r/childfree subreddit wiki list of doctors [2] who will provide permanent birth control to people who want it without onerous conditions such as partner approval, being over 30, or having at least two or three kids first. I run marketing campaigns on socials with this digital property. Next steps are building a site to act as a "store locator" app for this data. My partner and I also contribute in r/sterilization for those seeking permanent birth control, helping folks navigate insurance (bisalps in the US are free under most insurance situations, and vasectomies are covered at 100% in 10 states) and logistics. High level, we should collectively be robustly supporting parents who want to be parents, but we must aggressively assist though who would rather not. 40% of US domestic pregnancies every year are unintended [3]. ~600k children are in the foster care system [4], very roughly half of which are adoptable but are never adopted. It costs ~$310k to raise a child from 0-18 in the US [5], and this does not include daycare or college costs. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40053774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40053774 [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/doctors https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/doctors [3] https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/unintended-pregnancy-united-states https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/unintended-pregnancy-u... [4] https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-kids-are-in-foster-care/ https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-kids-are-in-foster-ca... [5] https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Brookings_Cost-to-raise-a-child_inflation-adjusted-2.pdf https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Brookin...
  - mensetmanusman 2y ago
    Bandaid solutions to societal ills probably just prolong the suffering.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
codexb 2y ago
And yet, there were generations of children who were raised by fathers and had two-parent households. Access to birth control has increased at the same time that single parent households have increased. It doesn't seem to be having an effect. I also take issue with your claim that men don't want their own children. Again, we're talking about a change that happened in the 60's and 70's. Is your argument that all men suddenly changed to hate children 50-60 years ago? No. What happened is that divorce laws changed. Social expectations for men and women changed to be more sexually promiscuous. The legal framework that encouraged two-parent households was dismantled. The author covers the latter topic somewhat, but doesn't delve into the topic of the legal framework that enables one-parent households. There are a multitude of laws surrounding divorce and child support, which originated in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, that encourage single motherhood and make it extremely difficult for working fathers to raise children. For generations, it was possible for men to work and raise children when they were not working. Now, the responsibility of work is often used to deny fathers custody.
pwthornton 2y ago
A lot of men, particularly less educated men, have bizarre beliefs that vasectomies harm sexual performance or make them less of men. I saw the other day a person asking on the biohacking Reddit if a vasectomy would harm testosterone levels. Asking poorly educated, poorly read, and low-skilled men to make highly informed decisions is going to be a losing battle. I'm willing to bet the rates of vasectomy are highly correlated with education levels.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y ago
  There are chances for chronic pain though. A few people on HN said they wouldn't have done that if they knew what would happen
  - pwthornton 2y ago
    Yes. I had pain for a while. Mine was not a quick recovery, and I now sleep with a body pillow between my knees (although my back and hips like this). I do a lot of cycling, so I am sure that is part of the issue. Overall, I would recommend it. My wife and I didn't want to risk having more kids.
    - Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y ago
      That sounds like a huge negative to me. How much will it worsen with age? Really for males there is condom (big downside in feeling) or surgery with chronic pain as option. Great options.
      - klyrs 2y ago
        Chronic pain (pvps) has a 1-2% incidence rate, and can be treated in many cases. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5503923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5503923/ Options for women include childbearing, which bears risk of severe medical complications and death; hormonal birth control, which is mood-altering, causes weight gain, unsatisfactory sex; IUDs with risk of chronic pain; and condoms which always seem to magically slip off.
tomcar288 2y ago
perhaps some guys have kids because their wives/girlfriends required them to do so.
- mrguyorama 2y ago
  No woman can "require" a man to have a child.
  - smegger001 2y ago
    No but she can lie about the status of her birth control and guy cant (either your wearing a condom or your not and its easy to see). I have a friend that had a child with his girlfriend after she lied to him about having and IUD. She legally speaking raped him and had his child forcing him to be a parent against his will. Now if he leaves her she will get child support from him until their child is 18.
carlosjobim 2y ago
It's called eugenics and was widely practiced in the 20th century against the exact people you propose. Edit: Down vote as much as you want. Eugenics is the above. Doesn't mean I'm for or against it. It was promoted at the time as a way of protecting children from growing up with "unfit" parents.
- smegger001 2y ago
  The difference is eugenics involved forced sterilization against your will, where what people here seem to be calling for is a free voluntary sterilization option.
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    I think the lines are very blurred in reality. Doctors and social services didn't always sterilize by force. Many times it was a matter of convincing a person, or outright tricking them. Just the threat applied today of the government taking away your children unless you can provide a minimum standard for them, is enough to convince many people to not procreate. Ie eugenics with a different process. If you read the above paragraph and think "what's wrong with that", then you're in company with a lot of people who are not unreasonable. But it springs from the same idea as eugenics. Now consider the above paragraph applied to minorities or the indigenous population. Suddenly it is an awful thing. You can also argue that nobody should have the right to pass on hereditary diseases and conditions to a child. What do you do if they want to do it anyway? Etc, etc. There are arguments for and against. Well being of the child vs human rights of the parent.
codr7 2y ago
You have no right to judge like that, other peoples choices in general are none of your business because it's not your life; and come one, you obviously don't know the whole story. How about buying a bag of food for the guy instead? Get to know him and try to understand the path that led him there. Like, actually solve a problem, make something better instead of hating more.

whamlastxmas 2y ago

Mine cost me $1k up front, health insurance didn’t cover a penny. It’s really silly.

criddell 2y ago
When you think about it, it is kind of crazy. If a person can't afford that, then they definitely can't afford kids.
- whamlastxmas 2y ago
  The sillier part is that it has to save the insurance company sooooo much money to reduce the number of parents, you think they’d be knocking on doors to see if people want them for free
  - criddell 2y ago
    It's the opposite. Insurance companies are regulated and the portion of the premium that they can keep as profit is limited. If they want to make more dollars, they have to increase the amount we spend on healthcare which lets them increase premiums. They would rather keep 20% of $10k than 20% of $1k.

amanaplanacanal 2y ago

Most doctors refuse to perform sterilization procedures on young people, at least until after they have had children. After all, what if they change their minds? My girlfriend couldn’t get hers done until she was over 30.

toomuchtodo 2y ago
This is a topic near and dear to my heart, because unwanted children leads to enormous suffering (which I have seen up close as a volunteer Guardian ad Litem, a legal advocate for children in the system). A recent thread on the topic of unwanted children at scale [1]. So I bought and operate a domain which points to the r/childfree subreddit wiki list of doctors [2] who will provide permanent birth control to people who want it without onerous conditions such as partner approval, being over 30, or having at least two or three kids first. I run marketing campaigns on socials with this digital property. Next steps are building a site to act as a "store locator" app for this data. My partner and I also contribute in r/sterilization for those seeking permanent birth control, helping folks navigate insurance (bisalps in the US are free under most insurance situations, and vasectomies are covered at 100% in 10 states) and logistics. High level, we should collectively be robustly supporting parents who want to be parents, but we must aggressively assist though who would rather not. 40% of US domestic pregnancies every year are unintended [3]. ~600k children are in the foster care system [4], very roughly half of which are adoptable but are never adopted. It costs ~$310k to raise a child from 0-18 in the US [5], and this does not include daycare or college costs. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40053774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40053774 [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/doctors https://www.reddit.com/r/childfree/wiki/doctors [3] https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/unintended-pregnancy-united-states https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/unintended-pregnancy-u... [4] https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-kids-are-in-foster-care/ https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-kids-are-in-foster-ca... [5] https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Brookings_Cost-to-raise-a-child_inflation-adjusted-2.pdf https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Brookin...
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  Bandaid solutions to societal ills probably just prolong the suffering.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

codexb 2y ago

And yet, there were generations of children who were raised by fathers and had two-parent households. Access to birth control has increased at the same time that single parent households have increased. It doesn't seem to be having an effect. I also take issue with your claim that men don't want their own children. Again, we're talking about a change that happened in the 60's and 70's. Is your argument that all men suddenly changed to hate children 50-60 years ago? No. What happened is that divorce laws changed. Social expectations for men and women changed to be more sexually promiscuous. The legal framework that encouraged two-parent households was dismantled. The author covers the latter topic somewhat, but doesn't delve into the topic of the legal framework that enables one-parent households. There are a multitude of laws surrounding divorce and child support, which originated in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, that encourage single motherhood and make it extremely difficult for working fathers to raise children. For generations, it was possible for men to work and raise children when they were not working. Now, the responsibility of work is often used to deny fathers custody.

pwthornton 2y ago

A lot of men, particularly less educated men, have bizarre beliefs that vasectomies harm sexual performance or make them less of men. I saw the other day a person asking on the biohacking Reddit if a vasectomy would harm testosterone levels. Asking poorly educated, poorly read, and low-skilled men to make highly informed decisions is going to be a losing battle. I'm willing to bet the rates of vasectomy are highly correlated with education levels.

Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y ago
There are chances for chronic pain though. A few people on HN said they wouldn't have done that if they knew what would happen
- pwthornton 2y ago
  Yes. I had pain for a while. Mine was not a quick recovery, and I now sleep with a body pillow between my knees (although my back and hips like this). I do a lot of cycling, so I am sure that is part of the issue. Overall, I would recommend it. My wife and I didn't want to risk having more kids.
  - Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y ago
    That sounds like a huge negative to me. How much will it worsen with age? Really for males there is condom (big downside in feeling) or surgery with chronic pain as option. Great options.
    - klyrs 2y ago
      Chronic pain (pvps) has a 1-2% incidence rate, and can be treated in many cases. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5503923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5503923/ Options for women include childbearing, which bears risk of severe medical complications and death; hormonal birth control, which is mood-altering, causes weight gain, unsatisfactory sex; IUDs with risk of chronic pain; and condoms which always seem to magically slip off.

tomcar288 2y ago

perhaps some guys have kids because their wives/girlfriends required them to do so.

mrguyorama 2y ago
No woman can "require" a man to have a child.
- smegger001 2y ago
  No but she can lie about the status of her birth control and guy cant (either your wearing a condom or your not and its easy to see). I have a friend that had a child with his girlfriend after she lied to him about having and IUD. She legally speaking raped him and had his child forcing him to be a parent against his will. Now if he leaves her she will get child support from him until their child is 18.

carlosjobim 2y ago

It's called eugenics and was widely practiced in the 20th century against the exact people you propose. Edit: Down vote as much as you want. Eugenics is the above. Doesn't mean I'm for or against it. It was promoted at the time as a way of protecting children from growing up with "unfit" parents.

smegger001 2y ago
The difference is eugenics involved forced sterilization against your will, where what people here seem to be calling for is a free voluntary sterilization option.
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  I think the lines are very blurred in reality. Doctors and social services didn't always sterilize by force. Many times it was a matter of convincing a person, or outright tricking them. Just the threat applied today of the government taking away your children unless you can provide a minimum standard for them, is enough to convince many people to not procreate. Ie eugenics with a different process. If you read the above paragraph and think "what's wrong with that", then you're in company with a lot of people who are not unreasonable. But it springs from the same idea as eugenics. Now consider the above paragraph applied to minorities or the indigenous population. Suddenly it is an awful thing. You can also argue that nobody should have the right to pass on hereditary diseases and conditions to a child. What do you do if they want to do it anyway? Etc, etc. There are arguments for and against. Well being of the child vs human rights of the parent.

codr7 2y ago

You have no right to judge like that, other peoples choices in general are none of your business because it's not your life; and come one, you obviously don't know the whole story. How about buying a bag of food for the guy instead? Get to know him and try to understand the path that led him there. Like, actually solve a problem, make something better instead of hating more.