Fair Start Movement

Author: Carter Dillard

  • New York Times: Be Responsible When Dealing With Family Planning

    New York Times: Be Responsible When Dealing With Family Planning

    The New York Times Style Magazine, T, recently posed this question: “Given the State of the World, Is It Irresponsible to Have Kids?” Could it have framed the query, which goes to the heart of family planning, differently? Given the power of framing, how we first think about a question is crucial to the answers at which we will arrive. We could frame the question more comprehensively and ask: “How Did Our Family Planning Policies and Culture Create the State of the World Today?”

    That approach would allow us to avoid making the same mistakes that lead us to now worry about having kids, and also avoid the cognitive dissonance of seeing the decision to have children as disconnected from the future the act of having kids collectively creates.

    Given the impact family planning has on climate change, child welfare, equity and other things that define the state of the world and the future, we should force ourselves to expand our thinking and frame important issues broadly enough to capture what matters. TAKE ACTION: URGE THE NYT EXEC. EDITOR TO CONSIDER THEIR APPROACH MORE CLOSELY: @deanbaquet

  • Animal Rights Starts With Better Family Planning

    Animal Rights Starts With Better Family Planning

    Any success in animal protection during the past century has been overridden by the suffering, death, and extinction human population growth has caused. Since the modern advent of animal rights the number of animals driven into extinction, tortured and killed for food or fur, used in horrific experiments, bred in puppy mills, and exploited and harmed in every imaginable way has exploded.

    Having Kids teamed up with UK-based Population Matters on an article urging animal advocates to act on the trend that could derail the entire movement: the ballooning human population. 

    TAKE ACTION: Add your name to our call for the United Nations to recommend smaller families.

    Animal protection has always been a factor in Having Kids’ fight to change how people think about family planning. After all, it is humans that drive the demand for industries causing animal suffering on a massive scale. But the intersection of animal protection and a small family ethic is very rarely acknowledged by animal-focused groups. Our new article explains why advocates must change that.

    Some animal-focused groups are already recognizing the need for change, including In Defense of Animals, which recently signed on to Having Kids’ letter to the United Nations for World Population Day.

    By 2100 world population could vary by billions of people, depending on whether the average woman in the world today has one child more or one child fewer in her lifetime. From plummeting biodiversity and more habitat loss to increased demands for animal agriculture, the path we choose will have an immense impact on animals.

    Read the full article on Animal People Forum for a full explanation of why family planning reform is central to any movement to improve life for animals. 

    TAKE ACTION: Add your name to our call for the United Nations to recommend smaller families.

  • Population Control or Responsible Parenting? Take Action to Protect Your Future.

    Population Control or Responsible Parenting? Take Action to Protect Your Future.

    Bernie Sanders grabbed headlines this week by saying that he would consider policies around population control, given our degrading environment.

    Why does the debate matter? Smaller families working together to plan a fair start for every child is the best way to protect kids, our environment, and our democracies – ten to twenty times more effective than anything else we can do. And yes, parents have a moral right and responsibility to protect their kids. If the government won’t do it they will.

    What does that mean? They are morally obligated to protect children’s future by targeting concentrations of resources that could be used to fund Fair Start family planning, targets that – given the state of emergency – have no legitimate claim to the resources they are hoarding. Candidates and celebrities should be talking about a peaceful process for this form of intergenerational justice – not about the misnomer of population control. Instead it’s about becoming free and equal people, through Fair Start family planning – the first and overriding human right. 

    Family planning is the only form of truly fundamental change. Period. Engage with the candidates and with celebrities, make them answer the hard questions by any mean effective, tell us how you did it, and we will publicize your story.

    Tell Candidates to Answer the Real Questions

    Population is not some amorphous thing. It’s about us, it’s about the people around us, and the children being born every second around the world. It’s about creating a “We the People,” where free communities self-govern, and make the rules they live under. Candidates are either promoting that process through Fair Start family planning, or they are degrading our environment and our democracies by ignoring future generations. These are the key questions: What is the minimum standard of living each child should be guaranteed before they are born? How will we level the playing field between kids born rich and born poor, and instead give every child a fair start in life? How will we encourage smaller families where we can invest more in each child, and rebuild a safe and natural environment?

    TAKE ACTION: Tell Bernie to start talking about kids’ right to a fair start in life. It’s about people, not population. What standard of living do the candidates children enjoy, and wouldn’t it be great if every child had those things? Bernie – tell us how you will make that happen through better family planning policies. Tweet him @BernieSanders, or engage with him in person.

    TAKE ACTION: Tell Naomi Klein to drop the false dichotomy – population is not an exogenous issue. It’s the “we” in all of her statements. The state of the world today, the people in it, the inequality, the climate crisis, etc., are all the product of family planning policies of the past. Humans don’t fall from the sky. Let’s start to get ahead of the problem. You cannot be egalitarian and not change our current isolationist model of family planning to Fair Start family planning instead. Tweet her at @NaomiAKlein, or engage with her in person.

    Tell Celebrities to Start Modeling Responsible Behavior

    It’s not just about politics. Celebrities have a massive influence on family planning decisions around the world, and while some – like Harry and Meghan – are stepping up, others – like the Baldwins – are not. Celebrities probably have a greater impact on family planning decisions than politics. They need to answer the questions posed above too.

    TAKE ACTION: Tell the Baldwins to explain publicly how they intend to help all families give their kids a fair start in life. Tweet Alec at @AlecBaldwin, or engage with the couple in person.

    The future is defined by the people being born today. Step up for your and your family’s future.

     

     

  • Why Do Women Get Pushed to Have Kids? Ask the People Doing It.

    Why Do Women Get Pushed to Have Kids? Ask the People Doing It.

    The science is clear that delaying pregnancy, planning ahead, and working together to invest more in every child is the most effective path towards sustainable development. 

    So why are women still getting asked when they will be having kids?

    The regressive view of women as mothers-in-waiting persists partly because so many public figures are pushing it. 

    Jeff Jacoby is one of the loudest voices pushing women to have more kids, and to thereby accelerate climate change, species extinction, and a host of other ecological ills. And it’s not just about nature. Unsustainable family planning is the hidden cause of social crises as well, from rampant child abuse to growing inequality. 

    So why should women have more kids, according to Jeff, who criticized Meghan and Harry for  declaring they would stop at two kids for environmental reasons? Jeff, who himself only has two kids, had this helpful bit of information:

    The Talmud records that when the enslavement of the Hebrews in ancient Egypt grew unbearable, their leaders advised couples to stop having babies — why raise more children to face a life of slavery? Eventually one of those leaders was persuaded he was wrong, and that childrearing should go on even in the teeth of murderous oppression. So he and his wife had another baby. That baby, named Moses, became the liberator who led his people to freedom.

    Jeff goes on to claim that the solution to population-driven climate change is to create more people in the hopes that one of the children will have a solution to the problem. He then credits population growth for a lot of modern advancements. In reality, progress comes from investing in people, not just creating as many as possible and hoping for the best.

    Not All Women Will Be Mothers 

    Regardless – the point is this: Jeff is ensuring a culture where women are pushed to be mothers. He’s doing it for religious reasons, while hiding behind nonsense arguments, and at a time where doing so is a manifest threat to the welfare and freedom of future generations. That goes beyond free speech to something worse than climate change denial – towards encouraging the exacerbation of a manifest threat to our species.

    Parents who care about their kids should stand up to mouthpieces like Jeff. What does he tell his kids, Caleb and Micah, about climate change? Does he tell them that the destruction of our atmosphere is God’s will? Does he tell them that child abuse, vast inequality, and levels of education that bring down democracies come from above? Jeff should answer these questions. Why? Because he’s forcing his view on your kids future too. What we do now will impact the wellbeing of future generations in ways not seen before.

    Ask Jeff to answer these basic questions by tweeting him at @Jeff_Jacoby or message him on FB at https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jeff-Jacoby/123656506578, and stand up to the men who push women to have kids, and thereby endanger our future. 

     

  • Wajahat Ali and What it Means to Invest in Children

    Wajahat Ali and What it Means to Invest in Children

    Everyone at Having Kids was happy to see Wajahat Ali’s TED Talk “The case for having kids.” The presentation breaks the taboo that surrounds talking about the need for better family planning policies and closes with a plea to invest in current and future generations. It is clear to us that Mr. Ali loves children and wants the best for them. We do, too, so we reached out to urge him to build upon his important work and consider the details of what it means to truly invest in children.

    Read our letter to Mr. Ali about investing in future generations.

    Urging people to simply “have babies” plays into the pyramid Ponzi scheme mentality of using future generations as tools for economic growth. Mr. Ali’s talk, however well intentioned, could do more harm than good. Only truly human rights-based family planning policies will set our children free from a system based on greed. Poor family planning is the norm, and it causes real harm every day. Children are born into starvation and horrific abuse, the gap between rich and poor is widening, and climate change is only beginning to wreak havok.

    Our Fair Start family planning model is designed to invest in future generations. We can shift the world’s thinking from isolationist family planning focused on what parents want, toward an approach that helps everyone. We need a more comprehensive and cooperative focus that considers what children and the community need. The Fair Start model creates a system that maximizes child welfare, equity, and sustainability.

    We are asking Mr. Ali to use his status as an influential public figure to keep breaking taboos around discussing family planning. We are also urging him to be clear that helping future generations doesn’t mean just “having babies.” It means planning a Fair Start.

    Sincerely,

    Erika and Willow, and Carter

    The Phelps-Mathews Family
    The Phelps-Mathews Family

    Join Erika and Willow by tweeting @WajahatAli and politely asking him to consider the Fair Start model.

  • What the United Nations Must Do Right Now

    What the United Nations Must Do Right Now

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”3.22″][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”3.25″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”3.25″ custom_padding=”|||” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”4.7.7″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]

    Having Kids is calling on United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to issue a new U.N. family planning statement, recommending a focus on children’s well-being and their need for a sustainable future.

    A better family planning model and policies – with a focus on smaller and more equitable families – is the most effective solution to most of the world’s crises today. 

    Several new developments underscore the need for truly fundamental change. Current and downstream attempts to deal with climate change are failing, as demonstrated by the recent events in France and elsewhere, and the United Nations own reports. The United States recently determined that climate change will shrink the U.S. economy and kill thousands.

    Simply stated, the current family planning model used by the United Nations is the fundamental source of the problem, ensuring unsustainable population growth in a way that degrades equality, democracy, and our environment. This archaic model was developed before we learned what we know today about climate change, the disproportionate impact of early childhood development on human wellbeing, the way birth conditions and early childhood can exacerbate inequality, etc.  

    The current family planning model makes our future less secure, healthy and equitable than it should be. Many better models have been proposed, including one by leading political theorist Sarah Conly, and Having Kids’ own model, the Fair Start approach (detailed here). To begin the process we have asked public figures to take action and speak out, but the United Nations should lead.

    “This is an opportunity for the United Nations to do what it was founded to do, and protect the world from dire threats through the promotion of human rights,” said Anne Green, the Executive Director of Having Kids. “There is no time left to dawdle with less effective downstream solutions. Our leaders will be held accountable for failing in this crisis – they must act now.”

    Read the full letter here.

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • Shocking Child Abuse in Florida – Having Kids Offers Solution

    Shocking Child Abuse in Florida – Having Kids Offers Solution

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”3.0.47″][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”3.0.48″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”3.0.47″ parallax=”off” parallax_method=”on”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”3.0.74″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”]

    Today the national child-protection organization Having Kids called upon Florida Governor-elect Ron DeSantis to adopt a policy of preventing child abusers from having additional children. Together we can end child abuse.

    Read the full letter here.

    On August 19, 2018, the 4-year daughter of Jacqui Lyne Carter was brought into an emergency room in Jacksonville with severe head trauma. While the child’s mother Carter, told investigators that her daughter had simply hit her head from moving around excitedly in a bouncy chair, a medical examination showed a very different story. A CAT scan revealed multiple skull fractures as well as multiple brain bleeds. Medical reports from the hospital revealed that this young child had both “old and new skull fractures.” This type of skull fracture and brain damage was not from an accidental “bump,” but clearly “indicative of a blow to her head with force.” Even more horrifying, exams revealed not one, but two fractures, indicating at least two separate forceful blows to the girl’s head.

    In 2016 alone, Florida Department of Children and Families received more than 225,000 referrals for child abuse and neglect. Even more alarming, there were a staggering 126 fatalities from child abuse and neglect in Florida in 2017 – twice as high as the national average. Florida’s child maltreatment reporting rate has consistently exceeded the national average and Florida is in the top 10 states in the nation for reporting by calculating children investigated per 1,000 children in the general population. In fact, per a study by the SAS Institute that followed a 2005 birth cohort for 10 years, approximately one in every five children born in Florida in 2005 were reported at least once to the child welfare system within 60 months from birth. Florida’s child population has increased by 1.8% from 4,031,098 in 2007 to 4,105,129 in 2015 compared to a 0.5% decrease in the United States’ child population. Florida’s poverty rate for 2015 was 2% higher than the comparable national average.

    Having Kids is urging DeSantis to develop policies, and encourage legislation, that enables judges to issue Fair Start Orders. This would allow courts, at the judge’s discretion, to issue an order to prevent offenders in the most egregious child abuse and neglect cases from having children for a limited time period as a condition of his or her probation. Having Kids Executive Director Erika Mathews said this: “We offer child-first Fair Start family planning as a way to actually protect children, by preventing child abuse at the source – poor family planning.” “If we want a better world, we have to start thinking ahead.”

    Tweet him at @RonDeSantisFL and ask him to pursue Fair Start policies. 

     

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • We Have a Right to Better Male Birth Control. Who’s Standing in Our Way?

    We Have a Right to Better Male Birth Control. Who’s Standing in Our Way?

    Women have shouldered the costs of birth control for too long. They live with the side effects, risks, and responsibilities of obtaining and using it, or they risk pregnancy. Men face no such consequence. Perhaps that is why surveys report that men have a lower tolerance for the associated side effects. Given that men cause 100% of unplanned pregnancies, isn’t it time for them to share some of the responsibility?

    The good news is that many millennial men indicate that they do want options and the ability to choose for themselves. Education can also help to dispel concerns that may have led to the unfavorable opinions in survey results.

    A birth control pill for men and other long-acting and reversible contraceptives would drastically cut unwanted pregnancies. These options could be game-changers when it comes to solving the world’s biggest problems. Family planning is the most effective way to address climate change, child welfare, and economic equality. There are several new methods, including a gel and a pill, that could be approved more quickly with better policies and more funding.

    What’s blocking these new technologies that could solve some of the world’s greatest problems? In one word: men.


    Resistance to Societal Changes

    The patriarchal systems that run our country and which have been in place for thousands of years rely on control of women’s bodies. By increasing reproductive freedom for all, women gain greater power in their household, the workplace, and in society. And that threatens the influence of cultural norms and institutions.  


    Economic Interests

    The men who shape our society and policies are subscribers to the “bigger is better” approach to the economy. This economic view relies on unrestrained population growth to create more consumers and taxpayers. Those like Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio push for more babies because they falsely claim that “it’s good for the economy”.

    These unsustainable “capitalism at all costs” policymakers are the ones making decisions on the progress of male contraceptive, from the prioritization of testing and approvals, the allocation of funding, the determination of acceptable levels of risk, and tolerable side effects.

    In creating these pro-natalist economic policies, they didn’t consider the impact that these pro-growth policies have on the environment, equality, or the needs for children. And we’re all paying the price.


    Greater Reproductive Freedom for Men

    The Parsemus Foundation shows there is a demand from men for greater reproductive freedom as shown by these quotes from their site:

    “I want control of my fertility that is safe, convenient to use and totally effective. That way I can be in control of my life rather than putting it in the hands of women and government agencies.” – S. Gee, South Korea

    “Having control over when I have children is the foremost thing in my life. I place great value on having freedom of choice and freedom from worry…” – Anonymous, South Africa


    Breaking Down Barriers

    Our culture is unquestionably imbalanced in terms of gender equity, which begs an important question. If there’s a product that makes life easier for men, will there be fewer hurdles in accessing it? Considering that the majority of decision-makers are men, it’s not a big leap to assume that would be true. In such a case, increased acceptance, affordability and access to male contraceptive would create pressure for easier availability to women, pulling the rug out from much the resistance to women’s reproductive rights.


    The Big Picture

    You and your kids have a right to a world that is not ravaged by climate change, and environmentally and socially destabilized through massive population growth. The male pill and other contraceptives could go far towards preventing that scenario.

    Our archaic “bigger is better” child tax credit system pays the wealthy (along with everyone else) to have children. Why not shift that funding toward the development and clinical trials of male contraceptives for a more economically and environmentally sustainable future? That’s one of the many questions Having Kids will be asking members of Congress in the months to come.

  • Time for Guaranteed and Sustainable Child Income

    Time for Guaranteed and Sustainable Child Income

    Cory Booker is right. It’s time to target inequality, and baby bonds, as he proposes, are a great way to do it. But what if we could create more equity for kids and protect our environment – the environment our children will need in the future, at the same time? We can. 

    Today the national child-protection organization Having Kids called upon the District of Columbia to adopt a sustainable guaranteed income for children in the District, one pegged to better family planning. The idea is simple: The District can reach many of its goals at once by promoting smaller families so that communities and families can invest more in each child. The policy is centered around every child’s right to a fair start in life, and is designed to address the greatest threats facing the District and nation, including inequality and climate change.

    Can Washington D.C. make a difference by itself? It can for its residents. But it can also lead by example and set a trend – a line of dominoes – for the rest of the nation.

    Read the full letter here. 

    The policy urges the District to adopt a stable community model, where the financial resources formerly required to support growth could be directed to other beneficial investments. Rather than focusing on blunt and unsustainable economic growth, the Having Kids GMI proposal shrinks the wealth gap by specifically contemplating (1) household resources per capita, (2) level of access to public services such as health and education and (3) above all, the relationship between a child’s fair start in life and prospects for success.

    Several studies show that smaller families are the best way to confront climate change, as well as other and related environmental crises. Research also confirms the disproportionate impact of early childhood development on human wellbeing and inequality later in life.

    The current family planning model in use makes our future less secure, healthy and equitable than it should be. Having Kids Executive Director Anne Green said this: “We offer the child-first Fair Start family planning model as a sustainable and equitable alternative. The Fair Start model is cooperative rather than isolationist, is based upon binding sources of international law, and provides a clear human rights-based solution to our biggest problems and a path forward.”

    Tweet @MayorBowser and ask her to adopt sustainable income for kids that is tied to family planning.