I heard someone say this the other day in a stand-up routine (I watch so many of them that I'm not sure which one it was), "We've got a minimum age to drink, fuck, go to war, smoke cigarettes, and drive. Why do we not have a minimum age requirement for having kids? That just makes no sense to me. If we imposed huge fines on having a kid before age 30 a lot of our problems would be solved."

Since, we're all incredibly open-minded people, I thought I would pose the question to see what you have to say on the matter.

Should there be a minimum age requirement for becoming a parent? If it were to somehow become magically ethical to impose such a restriction, what do you think that age should be? less

That sounds like a better idea, putting contraception in the boys. But it also seems like it could be seen as a way to keep the poor/disabled from reproducing, especially if they live in South Africa where no one can even think of saving up more than $50,000!

Interesting topic! less

That sounds like a better idea, putting contraception in the boys. But it also seems like it could be seen as a way to keep the poor/disabled from reproducing, especially if they live in South Africa where no one can even think of saving up more than $50,000!

Interesting topic! less

This is a terrible idea.

Age =/= maturity. I'd say future parents would have to get a parenthood course, and then tests about various subjects: caring for the infant, answering a children's questions, understanding a child's psyche, how to raise the child's self-esteem and be a stimulator in their lives, general knowledge to pass on, financial budgeting with a child, time monitoring with a child, how to let your child develop their own identity, how to not impair your child curiosity while still keeping them away from danger, etc.

There's too much parents raising bratty, snotty nosed potty mouthed kids around here. They don't even care for their children. They walk literally feets before them. I could totally kidnap one, have a nice walk, get them some icecream and bring them back to their parents an hour later, and the parents would barely notice. Children are not accessories or pets.

You can manage being poor and have children: breast feeding for as long as the child wants (not as long as society prescribes as socially acceptable), washable diapers, limiting toys (replacing them with human, parental interactions), transporting the baby with a baby scarf instead of a stroller, buying used clothing (they'll grow out of them soon enough anyways), etc.

You cannot manage raising a child while being stupid. Well, you can, but you'll raise some bigoted, bully asshole that won't bring anything good to the society.

Also, if you only have chidlren by age 30, most children would be born with major malformations or disabilities. That's not a life you want for your children... Also, there are 14 years old that'd probably be more concious of the nature of life than some childish 35 years old that had it easy all their life... :/ Think about it.

I do agree male should be fitted with contraception at birth, tho. It wouldn't be worse than child circumcision :/

There's something already invented in India that'd be perfect: it's some kind of material they inject in the appropriate canals and they can later dissolve them with a very simple injection. I wonder why it's not here yet...

Anyway, that's my opinion.

On another topic, I also find it terrible that children can't vote. If you explain them what's going on, they can judge fairly (with the information they have). It's unfair that the citizens of the future's voices are impaired...If we would take time to explain, leave them participate.. We wouldn't have such a disinteressed youth. I mean, ask any 12 years old about the elections, they'll probably say "I don't know" or "I don't give a shit". less

The Husband says that you should have to at least have $50,000 in the bank and own your own home before being able to have a child. He also believes that all boys should be fitted with contraception at birth that could be removed once those requirements are met.

Not a bad idea, in my opinion. less

The Husband says that you should have to at least have $50,000 in the bank and own your own home before being able to have a child. He also believes that all boys should be fitted with contraception at birth that could be removed once those requirements are met.

Not a bad idea, in my opinion. less

This is a terrible idea.

Age =/= maturity. I'd say future parents would have to get a parenthood course, and then tests about various subjects: caring for the infant, answering a children's questions, understanding a child's psyche, how to raise the child's self-esteem and be a stimulator in their lives, general knowledge to pass on, financial budgeting with a child, time monitoring with a child, how to let your child develop their own identity, how to not impair your child curiosity while still keeping them away from danger, etc.

There's too much parents raising bratty, snotty nosed potty mouthed kids around here. They don't even care for their children. They walk literally feets before them. I could totally kidnap one, have a nice walk, get them some icecream and bring them back to their parents an hour later, and the parents would barely notice. Children are not accessories or pets.

You can manage being poor and have children: breast feeding for as long as the child wants (not as long as society prescribes as socially acceptable), washable diapers, limiting toys (replacing them with human, parental interactions), transporting the baby with a baby scarf instead of a stroller, buying used clothing (they'll grow out of them soon enough anyways), etc.

You cannot manage raising a child while being stupid. Well, you can, but you'll raise some bigoted, bully asshole that won't bring anything good to the society.

Also, if you only have chidlren by age 30, most children would be born with major malformations or disabilities. That's not a life you want for your children... Also, there are 14 years old that'd probably be more concious of the nature of life than some childish 35 years old that had it easy all their life... :/ Think about it.

I do agree male should be fitted with contraception at birth, tho. It wouldn't be worse than child circumcision :/

There's something already invented in India that'd be perfect: it's some kind of material they inject in the appropriate canals and they can later dissolve them with a very simple injection. I wonder why it's not here yet...

Anyway, that's my opinion.

On another topic, I also find it terrible that children can't vote. If you explain them what's going on, they can judge fairly (with the information they have). It's unfair that the citizens of the future's voices are impaired...If we would take time to explain, leave them participate.. We wouldn't have such a disinteressed youth. I mean, ask any 12 years old about the elections, they'll probably say "I don't know" or "I don't give a shit". less

i disagree strongly with the last part. you give children the right to vote (children who just barely gained object permanence) and an already iffy political system would be harmed moreover. Best case they'll vote for whomever their parents direct. worst case, dear god I don't know. politicians pandering to twelve year olds, crooks elected by children swayed by promises of free candy and flashing bright lights.

our schools have abandoned civics and american history already, let's at least wait until people have hopefully had a chance to either learn about it on their own or gain life experience before letting them vote. less

I think one of the most important factors is providing for the child, a good steady job with a future should be one of the first requirements. This puts the age at 16, although at that age you are limited to where you can work. Maturity, ya that might help but that comes with age/experience. An education would certainly help but as a high school drop out I can tell you that is not a factor.

I think the biggest problem with the idea is the enforcement, I do not feel that anyone has the right to force a boy or a girl to use any form of contraception. When you add in religious beliefs that battle would get ugly. Nor do I believe that anyone has the right to tell a girl she has to get an abortion or give up a child just because she is not old enough. less

So much hype is made about teenage pregnancy that people forget that a good portion of those young adults are having children then on purpose, and that many who do have them, intentionally or not make fantastic parents regardless of age.

No two young people are going to be the same in terms of maturity or what they want out of their lives, so this suggestion is pretty bad.

Also, it would force people to abort if they didn't want to, and if fines were used to enforce the law, it would penalize the poor worse than the rich.

However, someone mentioned fitting boys with contraceptives at birth to be removed at a certain age. I think boys should be fitted with them after puberty if they want them (regardless of what their parents want), until they go to a clinic to get them removed because they want to try for a baby. less