A baby...or a Mercedes...?

Question

A quick search through the internet revealed that the average annual cost for a baby (first year and the basic level of care) costs approximately $12,000.

Over the past week, we have seen many questions about financial assistance for families - and it always amazes me that people go ahead and have children when they can't really afford them. It is their right, they feel. But when they can't support them, they want financial assistance from the government.

So here's my question...and I would like both a male and female perspective on this. If a young couple went out and leased a Mercedes (less than the annual cost of the childcare) - something they could clearly not afford - what would you think? Would you question their sanity or values if they put themselves in financial jeopardy for a luxury vehicle? And would you see the same problem with them going ahead and starting a family?

I realize a car and a baby are different - but financial difficulty is the same for both...

Hey folks...a couple of things....

1. I am well aware that a car and a baby are very different, and not on the same level. I believe I stated that...

2. I am also aware that not everyone plans a pregnancy. I believe I was pretty clear about the cases where people CHOOSE to have a child when they cannot afford it.

3. I will not apologize for having a negative attitude toward maternity leave. Why shouldn't a single woman have an opportunity take a year off (at a reduced pay, as with maternity leave) to just do whatever they wish - and then have their job guaranteed for them when they come back. My problem with maternity leave is that its not available to all - and thats not fair. And don't get me started on my tax dollars going to pay for the daycare!

People who cannot afford children should be regarded in the same way as those who make foolish financial decisions (like a mercedes). Yes, children are wonderful, but they don't feed or care for themselves...

Answer 1

There is little doubt that people who would do this are irresponsible at the least. It's nice to say that one wants a child much the same way that we say we want a nice car. However, the reality of it is that both require high initial cost as well as upkeep cost. If the burden is unbearable and no planning is involved then those responsible for making the choice should bear the consequence of the choice. People ought to take responsibility for their actions even if that responsibility leads to their doom.

The fruits of my labor are my own and nobody elses'. I, as well as millions of others, have done nothing to deserve having our property taken away only to give it to others who didn't earn it. Paying for someone to stay at home and take care of a baby is wealth redistribution: a socialist concept. I have no right to go out and tell people how to spend their money do I? So I don't see where governments get off telling me how to spend mine. Government needs to butt out of the pocket book of it's citizens as much as possible and that includes paying for those who have children and can't afford them. No matter how hard or daunting the task people need to start taking responsibility for their choices without government redsitributing funds . I am not saying that people shouldn't recieve help nor seek help. I argue that the help people do get should come from organizations that are run by people who are willing to help and not from a government who uses legal force to play Robin Hood with my, and others', finances. One is benevolence, the other is robbery no matter how you look at it.

Sorry for the passionate response, it isn't meant to offend. However the bigger the government gets, the less money all people including the poor have to spend on things such as children. So seeking government assistance is creating bigger government, creating more taxes, and thus shooting oneself in the proverbial foot as that money comes from one's own paycheck. Hope that is on topic and answers the question. :)

Answer 2

To answer directly: I would think that the couple had made a poor decision, and that negative consequences resulting from that decision were to be expected. I would also hope that the couple learns something in order to prevent repeating the same mistake over and over again.

I understand what you are saying, but I think it bears repeating that birth control is still not 100% effective, and some couples may find themselves expecting a baby that was not planned, so they try to make the best of it.
I also want to point out that the cost of prescription birth control often creates hardship for a low income family, so they use less effective OTC methods, if anything at all.
Access to free/affordable clinics still leaves much to be desired, especially in areas where public transportation is not available.

I also think that most people do not research costs to the level of detail necessary when planning their families, adopting pets or even when buying a new car. A ball park estimate provides a basis for the decision and then they deal with the consequences later. Live and learn, as they say.

Answer 3

I was going to leave a smart-*** answer and say that you can't get a mercedes by having sex ... but ... anyway -

There are a few major differences:
1) Having babies is a very strong biological drive for some people.

2) A car loan is paid off in 5 years at max, but a child costs at least 18 years. What happens if a couple plans well, has a child, and then faces unexpected difficulties 5 years down the line? They could sell that older mercedes, but they're still trying to figure out how to feed their very young child.

3) The situations are not analogous. A mercedes is a luxury. Children are not. Would you say the same thing about someone with $12,000 of unexpected medical bills?

4) I am on public assistance (food stamps and WIC, not welfare), and I freely admit it. I'm not ashamed. Why? First of all, these programs were legitimately designed to help people like me. Second of all, I'm a grad student who's almost done with my Ph.D. In a few years, I'll start paying back everything I've taken out of the system (and more) in taxes. I don't mind. I hope that it helps someone else develop a successful life. Technically, I could've waited until I finished my Ph.D. to have kids, but I started late - I'd be above 35, and I was not willing to take those kinds of risks with my family.

Answer 4

When a person or couple makes an unwise choice, such as leasing a luxury vehicle they really can't afford, they have the option to change that. They might have to pay a fee or some such thing, but they are not 'stuck' with the responsibility of leasing that car for all eternity. When a person or couple chooses to have babies that they really can't afford to support, there is no real GOOD option, they are 'stuck' with that child for life. I believe the only similarity is poor decision making, the repercussions are very dissimilar.

Answer 5

I actually would judge someone that has the child and can't afford it more harshly, because they haven't considered the child's well being. A car is a car, but when one decides to bring a child into the world they are becoming responsible for a life and it is irresponsible to make this decision without considering your ability to support that child.

My cousin is a prime example of people that should not, can not, and do not support their children. He has three children from three different women. And cannot support any of them. He is so much more irresponsible than someone who buys a car they can't afford, that he makes me entertain the idea of forced sterilization based on IQ and finiancial basis.

Answer 6

Cars depreciate instantly (when registered, even being driven off the lot) and pretty rapidly (especially Benz') whereas children are an investment that hopefully will yield a rich payout lasting a lifetime.

Responsible parents do plan in advance, but we're only people and sometimes the best-made plans just don't pan out.

Also, there's all kind of creative things people can do and do-do to maximize their resources. I have friends whose incomes are far lower than mine, such that I don't know how I could possibly survive on their incomes, but they seem to do just fine living modestly. And their kids are well adjusted and happy.

People who are comparatively poor can still be rich in love and relationships. But, asking for handouts or becoming a burden on the government, by choice, is another thing altogether.

EDIT: Certainly, planning children when government assistance is needed to feed them is absolutely irresponsible.

However, planning to have a child knowing that there is no stable, loving family environment to care for him/her is likewise irresponsible, and more likely to have worse long term implications than needing government financial assistance.

Answer 7

Many people lease cars, buy homes, etc. that they can't afford. Its dumb, but if someone wants to do that, I would rather they do that than have a baby they can't provide for. You can have your car repossessed. You can't give your baby back.

Additionally, the reasons for having a child are different than the reasons you buy a nice car, whatever. You can't really compare the two.

Edit: There is maternity leave, paternity leave, and family medical leave. Your tax dollars don't pay for that. There is nothing wrong with you taking a year off if you can afford it to go search the world, but I don't think that leave should be built into your job. Sorry.

Answer 8

Great question. I am a teacher and have wondered this several times. What it comes down to is a lot of "accidents". Quite a good percentage of children are not panned, at least I hope not. Unlike the possibility of a new car, the possibility of a child requires responsibility.

Answer 9

As my parents say, "If everyone waited to have kids until they could afford them, NOBODY would have kids."

There are lots of reasons people have kids. I know I'm risking repeating other peoples' answers here, but oh well. Children aren't always planned. Not all religions believe in birth control. In my case, I always wanted children but felt I couldn't afford them, and then my biological clock started ticking. My husband and I KNEW we could afford it if we made some lifestyle changes, which we weremore than willing to do, and are expecting our baby in just 8 weeks :)

And, some people are okay financially when their children are born, but life happens. When I was a preschooler my dad broke his back at work. He was out of work for almost the entire season (he's in painting and construction). Then my mother became seriously ill and couldn't work either, for a couple of years. I don't think that was irresponsible of them. Sh*t happens. Don't assume to know anything about someone else's life situation.

A car can't love you back, and a relationship with a child of your own is (in my opinion at least) so much more rewarding than any "thing" you can purchase.

Answer 10

you do realize that sometimes babies aren't planned, right? while i am pro-choice, i don't feel like a woman should have to abort or give up her baby because she may need a little help financially. Birth control is not 100 percent effective- i got pregnant and i was VERY careful. i am not on welfare, but if my son was starving and i needed help, HELL YES i would look for help. just because you don't have kids or want kids doesn't mean that we shouldn't help others in need. that is part of being a human being. and besides, the kids didn't ask to be here-ultimately, assistance is for the kids. also, people fall on hard times. you never know what happened to them! maybe the parent just went through a rough divorce and has no money. maybe they were injured at work, have no health insurance and they need some help to get back on their feet.

i've noticed that in your answers you are usually against things like maternity leave, and basically anything that benefits parents because you don't have kids. i have to admit, that irks me a bit.
i don't care if you have kids, some people shouldn't. but if we all had the attitude that we shouldn't help others that don't directly benefit us, this world would be even more sad than it already is!

finally, you can't really compare a child to a car. no details needed on that statement.