Fair Start Movement

Author: Carter Dillard

  • We Can Still Do Better For Our Kids

    We Can Still Do Better For Our Kids

    Yes, Having Kids suggested that Prince William and Kate might forgo having a third child. We did so to encourage them to set an example of the most effective thing possible to mitigate climate change and protect the future.

    And yes, it appears the Royal family, and what CNN calls the world’s strongest brand, is getting bigger.

    That’s OK. Having Kids wishes Prince William, Kate, and their kids all the best.

    The truth is that we don’t have to always rely on celebrities to lead by example. Changing this world for the better does not happen overnight.

    This week Having Kids will feature two everyday families, families like you and me, families without a lot of money or prestige. But these families care deeply about all of our futures, working to create a sustainable world that nurtures us all. They are showing their concern and dedication by choosing a smaller family, and choosing to save resources and work with other families to plan a fair start in life for every child.

    We can all do the same.

    We always hear that children are the future, But what does that really mean? It means how we plan families today will determine whether our world will be hotter, more crowded, and filled with people who never got a fair start in life, or greener, cleaner, safer, and filled with people born into loving homes where they got what they deserved.

    It’s our future. Let’s build it together.

  • The Times on Etiquette around Childlessness: A Better Option?

    The Times on Etiquette around Childlessness: A Better Option?

    The title of Anna Goldfarb’s New York Times piece (“What to Say When People Ask Why You Aren’t Having Children,” August 8, 2017) implies that she’s embarking on an examination of the ethics of procreation. But instead, she repeats the trite mantra you’ll hear on trash television and at the grocery check-out: Family planning is only about personal fulfillment, and is a highly personal topic that should be considered off limits for discussion.

    That mantra is simply false. People forgo having children for many altruistic reasons: to protect the environment, restore biodiversity, to retain time and money in order to do public interest work, etc. All of our decisions about having kids profoundly impacts others – that’s the whole point. If we care at all about the future, then we all have a stake in family planning decisions. The topic is inherently interpersonal.

    Why would publicly thinking about our collective future be considered off limits?

    The topic is inherently interpersonal, starting – obviously – with the potential child. Rather than trying to close public forums, why not seek common ground? Specifically, why don’t we have a discussion about what future we want? Why not collectively plan an escape from our current crowded, polluted, divided, unequal, and relatively uneducated world?

    Beyond the Isolationist View

    Goldfarb’s article rides upon the isolation model of family planning. This model focuses only on what parents want in the short term, rather than on what children and society need in the medium and long term. Isolationist views break the link between vital needs and available resources, and ignore the fact that having children is the most public thing most people will ever do.

    Furthermore, the isolation model completely disregards the fact that children are born entirely vulnerable, dependent on the people around them. By focusing only on the parents’ wants, rather than the child’s needs, we have created a society where children are not guaranteed a minimum level of well-being. Arguing that having children is a private matter also eliminated the opportunity for parents to cooperate in their decision making to achieve the best outcomes for every child. Because of the lack of organized, collective action dictated by the isolationist model, the caring and thoughtful people who forgo having children don’t have as great an impact as would otherwise be possible.

    In short, the isolation view harms everyone’s future and denies many children a fair start in life – a deprivation that tends to pass down over the generations. The Fair Star model breaks that cycle.

     

     

     

  • From a Having Kids member. . .

    From a Having Kids member. . .

    Granted, our leadership pulled out of the Paris Agreement, but we can all still make decisions to protect the planet and each other. We can do better than our failing government. We live in a different era than our parents, in that we are now presented data regarding climate change and the carbon footprint of humans, especially those in developed nations. If one accepts the data, the decision to come up with a new plan doesn’t seem so absurd. There is a knee-jerk reaction to the Fair Start model, but if we can get past that, the model helps open us up to think about more factors than previous generations may have.

    Personally, I currently have no kids. I have been part of Plan International USA (not affiliated with HK) for nine years, where I provide monthly donations to a community and hear back from the Plan-sponsored child. The first child was in Cambodia and the current child is in the Philippines. It’s rewarding to hear about community improvements, from latrines to school supplies.

    The success of family planning can be seen in nations like Thailand, where the population has remained at a steady level for decades and its citizens have enjoyed greater access to federally-funded healthcare and education than some of its neighbors. Also, per capita income has nearly doubled since 1971, when the policy officially launched. 

    So long as the methods are noncoercive, I don’t see a downside to the Fair Start model. On the contrary, as the White Paper (draft) articulates so well, there are many upsides at the micro and macro levels.

    About the Fair Start model:

    Today many families are adopting the Fair Start family planning model. First, they try to give their child a fair start in life by having a smaller family where they can invest more in their child. Often they also foster or adopt one of the many children eagerly waiting for parents. Second, they a public role model of these choices. Finally, these families join public advocacy campaigns to shift resources from extractive centers of power like governments, corporations, and wealthy families in order to democratically empower children and future citizens by incentivizing better family planning by all parents. Why? All parents know that the quality of their own child’s life will depend on the decisions of other parents regarding having and raising kids.

    By using the Fair Start model as a guide, families are simply saying this: “If you plan a smaller family with more investment in each child, we’ll do the same. We’ll also help each other, whenever we can, to make sure all our kids get a fair start in life.”

    In the long term, Fair Start family planning is the best way to promote human rights and build resilient populations that can thrive in future environments. Studies also suggest it is the most effective way to improve child welfare, create equity, and protect animals and the environment, all at the same time. It’s the key to the future we want.

  • The Royals test balloon results: Lots of Work to Do

    The Royals test balloon results: Lots of Work to Do

    When Having Kids sent a letter to Prince William and Kate Middleton respectfully offering up the Fair Start model as an alternative to the free-for-all of current family planning models, we mostly received positive reactions. And that was before the most recent terrifying climate change news from the United States government!

    But we also drew threats of violence, racist and eugenicist rants about why white and wealthy couples should have lots of kids, and climate change denying bloggers who seem creepily obsessed with celebrity babies (and who use news of them to sell their advertisers’ products). We also heard from Trump supporters who never questioned the possibility that replacement fertility is not a great a baseline. They think that even though family planning will define our futures and the futures of our children, it is “nobody’s business.”

    It is clear that many people are simply in denial that the “nobody’s business” approach to (not) planning our families is exacerbating climate change and endangering our own children. They are also turning a blind eye to the immorality of some kids being born with everything and some kids nothing.

    And they are also ignoring one simple fact: Caring and thoughtful parents are not going to stand by and ignore the fact that better family planning is quite possibly the single best way to mitigate climate change. These more responsible parents are not going to sit back and enjoy the last of nature while condemning their kids to a denuded, dangerous, crowded, and overheated world simply because people like the Duggar family get famous by having kids. 

    These more responsible families are speaking out and moving us towards better family planning. They are not waiting for the government. As these families set this positive and life-affirming example, Having Kids will help their voices grow in number and strength.

    Asking public figures to lead by example is one way to take action. We are moving beyond the Royals, asking other figures to speak out in favor of smaller families working together to plan a fair start in life for every child. Please be a part of this work!

  • The Royals: Will they be more like Trump, or Thoreau?

    The Royals: Will they be more like Trump, or Thoreau?

    The Royals: Will they be more like Trump, or Thoreau?

    Recently Having Kids wrote an open letter to Prince William and Kate Middleton asking them to consider adopting the Fair Start model. Among other things, we noted a simple fact based on math and exponential growth: Large families of three or more children are not sustainable. Three kids each have three kids, each have three kids, each … you get the picture. It evoked a powerful response from some: “Mind your own business – it’s a matter of personal freedom.” Lessons learned (apart from the fact than many parents are really angry and openly racist): A lot of people think about freedom the way Trump does. For them personal freedom includes the right to harm others – to degrade our environment, to endanger our own children’s future, to exacerbate inequality, etc. Trump’s version of freedom is doing whatever he wants to do – like a petulant and greedy child.

    Instead, Thoreau’s version of freedom was transcendent, like a child being emancipated into adulthood, or the becoming of someone with a deep empathy, who therefore wanted to and was able to control his behavior so as not to harm others.

    Why do these different versions of freedom matter? It’s very important that we use the right version of freedom when we think about family planning.

    Remember the story of the social contract, the historical basis for many modern systems of human rights and democracy? In essence, the story justifies today’s systems of government by treating them as the product of free and equal people voluntarily or consensually coming together to make the rules they will live by. The story tried to maximize human freedom. But – and this is crucial – that story relied upon people who were able to control their behavior so as not to harm others. In other words, people who were more like Thoreau than Trump, or Trump’s followers. How do we make sure future generations actually do grow up, and are more like Thoreau than Trump?

    What if rather than thinking of the social contract as something that happens at a particular point in time, we instead temporalized the process to account for how we “come together” with future generations? Incoming generations might demand some minimum level of well-being at entry that would be consistent with child welfare laws and the Children’s Rights Convention, as well as a fair start relative to other incoming children. Extant members of democracies would also want to consent to incoming generations, their new fellow citizens, which would give a powerful reason for them to invest heavily in the development of those generations as democratic co-rulers. All persons would want, in the process of bringing in future generations, to preserve nature so that humans would be able to consent to coming together. In other words, so that there would be places, states of nature, or neutral political positions from which to consensually come together and to which persons could withdraw. Finally, in this process would-be parents would want to be assured a right to have children, and the help they need to give their kids a fair start, and a better life.

    Our current family planning models do nothing to assure these things, and help us become emancipated or free. The Fair Start model does. Lessons learned? It’s time, more now than ever, to rethink the way we plan families.

     

    [button link=”https://fairstartmovement.org/faqs/”] More about freedom in family planning [/button]

  • Families Making a Choice – Meet Astrid and John

    Families Making a Choice – Meet Astrid and John

    [et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Post Text” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]

    Jon and Astrid waited until their careers advanced before having their two boys because they wanted them to have the best start in life possible! Consequently, they’ve decided not to have more kids because of their belief in ohana, the Hawaiian concept of the intentional family rather than the biological one, which emphasizes the notion that families and their friends are bound together and all members of the ohana must cooperate and help one another for the benefit of every member. Jon and Astrid have elected to use the time and resources that would have gone into creating a larger family to help the families around them, the ones that will help determine the world their own children inherit. They are aware of the relationship between the family size choices we all make today, our world’s environment, and kids’ quality of life. They are hopeful that other families will join them too!

    [/et_pb_text][et_pb_cta admin_label=”Action Button” button_url=”https://fairstartmovement.org” url_new_window=”off” button_text=”Take Action” use_background_color=”off” background_color=”#18aacc” background_layout=”dark” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_button=”on” button_letter_spacing=”0″ button_use_icon=”on” button_icon_placement=”right” button_on_hover=”on” button_letter_spacing_hover=”0″ saved_tabs=”all” button_bg_color=”#ea593c” button_border_color=”#ffac9b” button_font=”|||on|” button_icon=”%%20%%” button_bg_color_hover=”rgba(234,89,60,0.8)” title=”Sign the Fair Start Declaration ” /][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • PIELC 2017: One Cause, One Voice … One Child?

    PIELC 2017: One Cause, One Voice … One Child?

    [et_pb_section admin_label=”section”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Post Text” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]

    What is PIELC? “Over the last 35 years, the Public Interest Environmental Law Conference has brought together thousands of activists, students, and professionals, from a diverse array of communities and cultures, to advance efforts for environmental and social justice.” 

    This year Having Kids presented at PIELC, making the irrefutable case that the best way to protect and restore the environment is by promoting smaller families that work together to invest more in each child.

    Want to make the future better for children and others? Don’t be afraid to talk about family planning, and urge families around you to use the resources they would have spent having an additional child to instead help a different family give their first child a better start in life. And as brave families make this choice, lets all tear down government and corporate barriers – like unfair tax policies and corporate benefits – that stop other families from doing the same. 

    [/et_pb_text][et_pb_cta admin_label=”Action Button” button_url=”https://fairstartmovement.org/mission-values-and-vision/” url_new_window=”off” button_text=”Learn More” use_background_color=”off” background_color=”#18aacc” background_layout=”dark” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_button=”on” button_letter_spacing=”0″ button_use_icon=”on” button_icon_placement=”right” button_on_hover=”on” button_letter_spacing_hover=”0″ saved_tabs=”all” button_bg_color=”#ea593c” button_border_color=”#ffac9b” button_font=”|||on|” button_icon=”%%20%%” button_bg_color_hover=”rgba(234,89,60,0.8)”] [/et_pb_cta][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • Kids and Climate Change: What Do We Do?

    Kids and Climate Change: What Do We Do?

    [et_pb_section admin_label=”section”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Post Text” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]

    Recently, NPR asked a very important question: should we be having kids in the age of climate change? Professors at Johns Hopkins have been asking this question for a very long time. Their conclusion is that we can, but we should significantly limit the number of children we have in order to reduce carbon emissions and give populations susceptible to climate change their best chance.

    And that’s what the Having Kids model is all about. It’s about asking smaller families to work together to plan a better future for every child. That means that potential parents should think about their future children and the community that their children will enter. They need to ask the question, “What would give my child, my community, and other children the best quality of life?” They will quickly find that limiting their family size and contributing resources to their community to help create a safe place for their child to grow are the best options, especially in the face of climate change.

    The statistics NPR cites on the carbon emissions of large families, relative to other lifestyle choices, are sobering. Below are a few examples of how much carbon dioxide (in metric tons) is saved over a lifetime (80 years) by a typical American for certain actions, including not having one child.

    • Increase car’s fuel economy from 20 to 30 mpg: 148 tons
    • Reduce miles driven from 231 to 155 per week: 147 tons
    • Replace single-glazed windows with energy-efficient windows: 121 tons
    • Replace ten 75-watt incandescent bulbs with 25-watt energy-efficient lights: 36 tons
    • Replace old refrigerator with energy-efficient model: 19 tons
    • Recycle newspapers, magazines, glass, plastic, aluminum and steel cans: 17 tons
    • Reduce number of children by one (with emissions fixed at 2005 per-capita values): 9,441 tons

    Source: “Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals” by Paul A. Murtaugh and Michael G. Schlax

    For too long, parenting models focused on the choices of the parents without putting them in the context of a larger community. These models didn’t emphasize the needs of future children. Having Kids wants to change the conversation. We want potential parents to think critically about the needs of their child, the world they want to bring their child into, and how they will ensure that world becomes a reality. We want to see a world where the impacts of climate change are prevented, and where every child can be guaranteed a high quality of life.

    [/et_pb_text][et_pb_cta admin_label=”Action Button” button_url=”https://fairstartmovement.org/model/” url_new_window=”off” button_text=”Learn About the Model” use_background_color=”off” background_color=”#18aacc” background_layout=”dark” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_button=”on” button_letter_spacing=”0″ button_use_icon=”on” button_icon_placement=”right” button_on_hover=”on” button_letter_spacing_hover=”0″ saved_tabs=”all” button_bg_color=”#ea593c” button_border_color=”#ffac9b” button_font=”|||on|” button_icon=”%%20%%” button_bg_color_hover=”rgba(234,89,60,0.8)”] [/et_pb_cta][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]