Fair Start Movement

Category: Children’s Rights

  • What is Total Liberation by Telling the Truth? Take Action.

    What is Total Liberation by Telling the Truth? Take Action.

    One way to change mindsets is to show someone what they thought and said in the past was objectively wrong, and in ways that likely harmed others.

    Work on antiracism shows this.

    The core problem driving ecological and political overshoot is a system of political obligation that requires compliance with legal systems without actually empowering constituents to be ecosocially self-determining in a measurable way, relative to a restorative and democratic baseline. 
    Top Down Power and Bottom Up Empowerment infographic
    That enriches some, while killing many.

    Fair Start is counsel in a lawsuit against Coca-Cola / Fairlife LLC trying to set deviation from that standard or baseline as what it first and fundamentally means to “harm” others. 

    We think the United Nations Secretary General should admit to using the same illegal standard, a standard that obligates subjects without empowering them.

    We are urging the Secretary General and other officials  to admit that their and all governmental authority, as well as the entitlements to wealth they protect, derive from and are conditioned on empowering those he and other officials claim to represent, and that without prioritizing Fair Start as the first human right, he has no authority. If he does not tell the truth, he will be using a fundamentally illegal standard for assessing and disclosing costs/benefits, value claims, and imacts, similar to what Coca-Cola has been using. 

    Governments can’t avoid climate liability by redefining conceptions of things like fraud, political legitimacy, or equity, and what it means to benefit at deadly cost to others. As we show here, there are objective measures for these things.

    A split infographic compares Current Family Planning with Fair Start Family Planning, listing differences in welfare, equality, and environmental protection for children, while highlighting how practices like legitimacywashing can undermine genuine progress.

     

    Fairness comes first. Governments and the concentrations of wealth and power that influence it have no authority or entitlement to create a failed system that kills millions of people and then use that system to measure the harm as a means of hiding their liability

    The Secretary General is the highest symbol of representative government, and if he makes clear the need for Fair Start reforms, change will follow. He can avoid equitywashing, or what is really constitutive reparations fraud, and join a community of truly obligated persons trying to constitute a just future. 

    The Secretary General should start by admitting that he benefited from an equitywashing system that illegally violated children’s birthrights and did more harm to the UN’s values, goals, and impacts than he did to further them.

     

    Challenging assumptions that hurt our future infographic

     

    By doing so, he can move towards the legitimacy of a neutral standard where some do not benefit at deadly cost to others, hiding harm to infants and animals on at least eight levels. 

    Admitting failure, and communicating an obligation to future children that overrides any obligation to governments and wealth-holders, is a linguistic act of constituting a better future.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

    Urge the Secretary General to do so here: Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General: Telephone – (212) 963-7160 | Fax – (212)-963-7055.

  • More Children, and Animals, are Being Abused Then Ever Before. Take action.

    More Children, and Animals, are Being Abused Then Ever Before. Take action.

    The United Nations has recently released a report that finds: 

    The world is at a “pivotal moment’ as violence against children reaches unprecedented levels worldwide.” 

    Recently, a Delaware couple sentenced to over 150 years in prison for “indescribable” torture of sons by a judge who called the abuse “the most extensive and persistent evil” he has ever seen.

     

    Child looking malnourished

    Video from surveillance cameras that monitored the large closet where the boys were kept naked and starving in horrific conditions did not tell the entire story of their suffering, the judge said.

    At the same time, more animals are being abused than ever before. 

    That means more animal suffering and dying in factory farms, and more companion animals suffering than ever before. 

     

    Abused animal tied to a fence

     

    TAKE ACTION: The fundamental driver of all child and animal abuse is an outdated system of family laws that prevent parents from being ready before they have kids, and encourages large families even in the face of environmental disaster. 

    Fair Start is moving to ensure the United Nations changes that by treating a Fair Start in life as the first and overriding human right, a right that will override domestic legislation around the world that ensures child  and animal abuse by putting growth over parental readiness and ecological restoration. 

    The basic rule for having kids should be to be ready, and not have too many.

    Will you assist us in taking action to demand the Secretary General of the United Nations admit that his authority derives from empowering those he claims to represent, and that without prioritizing Fair Start as the first human right, he has no authority? Fairness comes first. The Secretary General is the highest symbol of representative government, and if he makes clear the need for Fair Start reforms, change will follow.

    The Secretary General should start by admitting that he benefited from an equitywashing system that illegally violated children’s birthrights and did more harm to the UN’s values, goals, and impacts than he did to further them. By doing so, he can move towards the legitimacy of a neutral standard where some do not benefit at deadly cost to others, hiding harm to infants and animals on at least eight levels. 

     

    A split infographic compares Current Family Planning with Fair Start Family Planning, listing differences in welfare, equality, and environmental protection for children, while highlighting how practices like legitimacywashing can undermine genuine progress.

     

    Background 

    The Secretary General is using  an illegal standard/organizational model fundamentally designed to illegally harm children and animals by exploiting their vulnerability, and undo the value he claims to create in a way that risks millions of lives and will cost businesses trillions of dollars. The standard is illegally benchmarked around the needs of the  wealthy children of leadership, at deadly cost to vulnerable children using a false  assessment and reporting system.

    It’s the fundamental reason leadership is being enriched at deadly cost to mostly children of color. This goes beyond greenwashing and humanewashing to a more fundamental system of equitywashing that subverts civil rights and democracy, and allows free-riding benefits at deadly costs to others. He is using the same fundamentally false standard derived from the twentieth-century subversion of racial justice that is causing our current ecological and political crises to hide full liability for them, including harm to freedom and political legitimacy.

    The standard has been used by many of the public interest entities claiming to oppose destructive industries, entities that like those industries can show no capacity to actually constitute a just future through empowering relations.

    Challenging assumptions that hurt our future infographic

    The illegal standard is designed to:

    – Exploit unsustainable growth and levels of consumption that have now reduced the planet’s ability to support infant and animal health, the first objective measure of value. 

    – Treat children of color as deserving exponentially less resources and more risk, including the violence inherent in unrepresentative government.

    – Ensure each person has less capacity to influence their political system as democracy is slowly commercialized, in part because it does not derive and condition governmental authority and entitlement to wealth, and obligation to follow the law, on constituents being measurably empowered. And

    – It omits these facts from value claims, hiding conflicts of interest, and the preemptive right to legitimacy reparations that ensure a fair and liberating start in life. This allows the use of wealth made at cost to claimed values and impacts to drown out the efforts of others, through inclusive and constitutive communications, to actually further those values.

    We can ask the Secretary Genral: How were you accounting for your work being undone, each day, by violations of children’s birthrights as they entered the world? Would you be willing to derive wealth and authority back, and condition it on, ensuring such birthrights? If you could go back and make that change in our political systems, decades ago, to save millions of lives, would you do it? If you claimed to create value that was being undone by basic inequity, would you not be eager to reform that system and align with your claimed values?

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation.

  • What is Birth/Political Equity and Why Can’t We Be Free Without It?

    What is Birth/Political Equity and Why Can’t We Be Free Without It?

    The Cambridge Dictionary defines “equity” as the “value of a company, divided into many equal parts owned by the shareholders, or one of the equal parts into which the value of a company is divided.”

    But why do companies and shareholders have the authority to own equity at all? There is also – earlier on – the equity one has in one’s democracy, or the share one has in their political system that makes one relatively self-determining or free, as opposed to being determined by others.

    Generally, citizens receive their shares at birth, which vest when one becomes emancipated, and can vote. 

     

    Two panels compare family planning types. Left: diverse family illustration with bright colors, labeled Fair Start family planning with positive points. Right: grayscale crowd in a city, labeled Economic growth-based family planning with negative points.

    And because persons are generally considered politically equal, a rule that means each person gets one vote, one’s share of their democracy, first and foremost depends on the number of other individuals in it. That is why many thinkers have been concerned with the way growth dilutes the average person’s share, a fact hidden by formulas like representative ratios that are not based on empowering those subject to the law by treating them as equally empowered, relative to a neutral standard.

    But growth does not really account for other key factors that account for the equity, or level of influence, one has over one’s political system. What if that system has created macro changes in the environment so that persons are influenced, say by heat waves, against their will? What if one has a share, but because of structural racism and birth-based economic inequality, it really is not an equal share?

    Equity matters because it gives us some control over the systems in which we live, and that equity depends on the number of people with whom we share those systems, the disparities in the resources each of us may have, and things like the way we impact the physical environment around us.

    If one does not have equity in the political system, it’s hard to understand how they are free, or relatively self-determining. And there are hard parameters for what the amount of equity each of us deserves.

    Establishing a preemptive standard for self-determination, and political obligation 

    One way to consider birth/political equity, or what might also be called relative self-determination and autonomy, is to contrast it with the concept of population in the field of policy, a concept used by some to disenfranchise many.

    Partha Dasgupta is a brilliant theorist who has assessed optimal world population ranges. But, how do these persons actually relate to one another? What is the quality of those relations? How do we decide? 

    Fair Start’s main value-add to the world is to say that we should only bring kids into certain birth and development conditions, and that if we did that, the future would be better. And when we say “should,” we are the only organization in the world that has shown the “should” overrides all else because who we should be comes before what we do.

    Our first hurdle in ensuring that “should” is to overcome the idea that having kids is just about the freedom of the parents. It’s also about the freedom of the child and the community they form. And that second freedom is unique because all authority to govern and to own wealth derives from the inclusion of those subject to the governance or wealth as free and equal persons, with one person/one vote or equal self-determination. But by 1968, governments had taken equity out of reproductive rights systems, so that inclusion never occurred. Instead, economic growth became the standard. 

    Freedom was taken out of context, and the creation of power relations was privatized using an illegal – exclusive from self-determining political processes – standard. Challenging that standard can be controversial. In fact, one former ally organization removed content referring to this approach over traditional considerations of population, through the lens of reproductive autonomy, around the time of their receiving a significant grant. 

    One way to tell this story involves abortion. The illegal standard, even by the most liberal assessments, treats terminating a pregnancy as autonomy for the woman, even if she dies months later in a climate crisis heat wave, because she could not afford air conditioning, could not influence her political system to save herself, and did not have levels of trust to access her neighbor’s air conditioning, and was positioned that way because under fake “efficiency” standards she was treated as an economic input, etc. She was never free because she was never empowered, and in that situation, there is little reason to follow the rules.

    So just as Dasgupta has theorized optimal numbers, we can assess optimal qualitative relations, which we would practically create (whatever we do for equity after the fact) by ensuring no child is born beneath a particular line (or threshold: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-intergenerational/ ). That line, in many ways, represents the border of human freedom, and we could implement it in current policy measures by preempting baby bonds and similar legislation, using AI to set the line around a host of parameters that try to zero out harm, including the harm of taking the value of autonomy out of one’s political equity. 

    Here are many useful measures to inform how we draw the line:

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

  • What is the Fair Start Tell the Truth Campaign? 

    What is the Fair Start Tell the Truth Campaign? 

    The campaign simply urges anyone claiming to add value to the world to report their impacts in the context of children entering the world each day, relative to the conditions and relations which children’s rights – including their right to political equity – promise them.

    How were they accounting for the actual experiences and life trajectories of the most vulnerable, infants and the animals they will impact?

    When we do that assessing, we see how the ecological and political crises we face today came about, as those who seemed to be making the world a better place – on balance – were not.

    For example:

    Factchecking the Weeden Foundation

    Basic Fact/Value Checking the organization “Mercy for Animals.” Take Action.

    Factchecking Wikipedia and the Center for Biological Diversity. Take Action.

    Fair Start Fact Checking Animal Rights Philanthropist Brad Goldberg. Take Action.

    In this truth telling process we should all determine, and admit if need be, that we have quietly been using the same fundamental standard causing today’s deadly climate and political crises in order to hide our liability for those crises, and in a way that is costing millions of lives and doing more harm to our values and causes than we are doing good.

    Instead, we should all be backing policy reforms that ensure extreme wealth is reallocated so that no child is born outside of a system of reparations accounting – as the first and overriding human right or grundnorm. We should act so that children get a fair start in life, both ecologically and socially, via parenting delay, readiness, and equity reparations / family planning incentives measured inverse to privilege and positionality.

    Climate change and inequality are interconnected crises that disproportionately harm the most vulnerable, requiring immediate, systemic action. This is not a choice on a menu of public interest interventions. This work relates to the inescapable system of costs, benefits, and obligations we are all born into, the largest driver of outcomes, and the choice to exploit that system or legitimate it.

    Fair Start activists came together because in the nonprofits in which we have previously worked, our collectively violating children’s right to a fair start in life, and assuming children of color deserved much less resources and much more risk, was doing more to harm our values and missions than we did to further them. And in many cases those organizations went out of their way to hide this. Liability for this will be litigated soon in various fora, including climate tribunals in Africa.

    Background

    For years Fair Start activists in prior employment were paid well for public interest work, and gained goodwill among many, while enriching the families of those funding the work.

    And yet the vulnerable entities they claimed to represent – infants, animals, indigenous communities – are now, on many levels, worse off.

    How is that possible? 

     

    A split infographic compares Current Family Planning with Fair Start Family Planning, listing differences in welfare, equality, and environmental protection for children, while highlighting how practices like legitimacywashing can undermine genuine progress.

    By Intentionally Ignoring Growth and Inequity Nonprofits, Media and Business Leaders Created a Fantasy World of Progress That Prevented Real Climate Reforms, and Will Kill Millions

     

    The activists were using an illegal assessment and reporting standard that used manufactured numbers to asses outcomes – a standard that ensures birth inequity – which was derived from the successful subversion through family policy of Twentieth Century racial justice movements. The standard is the single largest variable determining death rates and other outcomes as the climate crisis and political apathy surrounding it intensify.

    The standard ensures our values operate abstractly, disconnected from the creation of power relations as children come into the world, hiding fundamental causation. It siloes social justice efforts into various categories like environmentalism, democracy, animal rights, etc., decoying them away from birth equity, and assessing and reporting impacts out of context.

    The standard allows for value and impact claims that are not pegged to an ecosocial baseline that actually protects human and animal health, allowing some to claim their behavior is sustainable, while enriching some children at deadly cost to millions of others. Social justice derives from birth equity, but for decades philanthropists have developed decoy branding around more downstream issues, enriching themselves on growth and inequity that was slowly undoing environmental and other efforts.

    The activists now working with Fair Start in previous employments used the funders’ wealth and influence to create a perception of value and impact that was never there, and in one case leadership scuttled litigation that would have revealed that fact, and tried to fix the underlying standard. 

    The illegal standard allows for a shell/ponzi scheme that hides political inequity under a shell of unsustainable – and for many, deadly – economic growth. The standard omits information to ensure false assumptions regarding entitlements and authorities, ensuring audiences assume the legitimacy of entitlements, state authority and traditional political borders rather than actually legitimating them through child rights and political equity. In doing so, it hides vast inequalities derived from birth, and blocks the primacy of black birth equity as an overriding human right.

     

    How Do You Destroy a Planet's Atmosphere? Tell Lies. Fair Start Certification Tells the Truth Infographic

    This is illegal because it violates the rule of law, but also positive laws surrounding child welfare, civil and animal rights laws, as well as the law of democracy. The standard works by weighting autonomy or self-determination outside of the context of one’s political equity or effective share in their democracy, which makes value assessments (and things like discount rates) wildly inaccurate.

    One’s arbitrary birth positionality, one’s draw in the birth lottery in terms of race, intergenerational positioning, nationality, etc., is assumed to be fate or the hand of some magical deity, rather than a product of bad policy now requiring offsets to ensure equity. That skews how we see the world, and in ways that ensured a climate crisis likely to kill those least responsible for it. Seeing things out of the context of our creation, in an abstraction of justice, versus a view from a physically constitutive standard, leads to horrible results.

    Study: Population growth cancelling out climate change progress

    While racial justice movements in the Twentieth Century made relatively cosmetic advances in terms of voting, education, housing, etc., birth inequity combined with ecocidal growth ensured a caste status that today will mean millions of persons of color will die in the climate crisis, and fundamentally because white wealth was illegally held back from black families.

    The standard, the one responsible for that outcome, is a form of punch down justice that assesses and reports outcomes as they are being undone by growth, with no functional protections for the most vulnerable. This standard assumes children of color deserve exponentially less resources, and more risk, in a system that is degrading their political equity every day.

    Anyone could see this standard at work, just by asking a few questions of the organizations making claims. There are now legal actions underway to eliminate the use of the standard. Allowing its continued use enables funders and public interest organizations to exploit unsustainable growth, political inequity, and the subversion of racial justice to profit at deadly cost to infants and animals.

     

    Challenging assumptions that hurt our future infographic

    The standard – which we rarely not talk about  – has been doing more harm to our causes and stated impacts than we have been doing to further them because it has degraded the capacity of the earth to ensure infant and animal health – the only true measure of value, while disempowering the average person, taking what their birth rights give them in democracy and selling back the rights as goods in an economy.  

    There is no accurate evaluation of values outside of that truth.

     

    Inequality info graphic

    The Tell the Truth campaign asks all: 

    How are you accounting in your value claims for children entering the world, relative to what their rights require? Do you realize that entitlements to claim ownership of wealth, or any governmental authority, is contingent on not violating those rights, and on empowering citizens so that representative governance is possible?  How would one get entitlements to protection, if infants and animals don’t get theirs? If one received the benefits of a system of values, including things like moderate temperatures, access to food and water, and relative security, would we not be eager to ensure those values also limited fundamental systems of entitlements so that others could enjoy them?

    More formally, Fair Start is seeking to override the illegal standard at the United Nations, arguing that our collective debt to those dying from climate and political systems from which we benefitted preempts or overrides conflicting policy choices. We begin Tell the Truth, in part, by urging organizations to publicly contrast their impact assessment and reporting standards against rights-based and restorative measures, the deviation from which is leading to things like higher rates of adverse birth outcomes like preterm birth, low birth weight, and infant mortality.

    Given this contrast, we urge those engaging in the campaign to admit that benefitting from a system that violated very child’s right to a fair start in life has done more harm to our values and missions that we have done good.

    We don’t get justice from injustice, or earn obligations from others by ignoring our own. And governments can’t come up with their own definitions of things like legitimacy, and define what things like fraud (which at base means benefitting at cost to others through misinformation), harm, and sustainability mean, in order to hide their liability for using a fundamental system of entitlements that kills millions of innocent people. There are objective measures for such things.

     

    Top Down Power and Bottom Up Empowerment infographic

    How can new standards be implemented? 

    Free persons will not follow rules in a legal system that does not give them the control over those rules, and Fair Start is organizing free persons to take action. All theories of political obligation require some measurable level of inclusion and participation by those affected by it.

    Fair Start ensures that level.

    The replacement standard is simple. Having children in not a matter of personal autonomy or freedom relative to the would-be parents. It’s interpersonal, impacting the children and the communities they comprise more than the parents. It’s capable of being constitutive, or deconstitutive, of a just society. If we assume that everyone should be relatively self-determining in that society, then the fundamental rule or standard by which to assess value and justice would require we offset each other equally, relative to a neutral position. That ensures accurate parental autonomy, balanced against other values, and the best standard for assessing climate policy, including climate reparations.

    It allows an accurate measure of the loss of freedom we are seeing as the climate and related crises unfold.

    It’s physically impossible for nations to be free, as in relatively self-determining, without elevating measurable birth equity and children’s rights as our first and overriding obligation. Being a free or self-determining nation is impossible if we start by violating children’s rights to self-determination. In doing that we become other, rather than self, determining. Being free means treating future children as means and not ends, and measuring harm from to them a neutral or zero position, rather than the hiding fundamental liability that attaches to generational wealth.

    Law and obligation are first about how we are positioned relative to others, not how we act, so our language has to be constitutive, answering these questions – and admitting undoing relative to truly fair and sustainable measures – in order to form actually obligatory relations with future generations that free all. Where else would these obligatory relations come from? If government derives authority from its constituents, there is no other source. Hence we can use the Tell the Truth campaign to see who chooses to be unjust, fall outside the scope of legal – by which we mean inclusive – social protections because they refuse to pay the costs they owe each of us for the loss of our freedoms, and who by so doing saddle their adult children with their death debt.

    Our theory of change is that language has to be accurately obligatory and inclusively self, as opposed to other, determining. That’s what it means to constitute a nation, or have supreme obligations – from the bottom up – to others. To do so outside of that process would be physically impossible.

    There are dozens of ways to implement this reform, including reforming the civil rights obligations at one’s workplace . 

    An Open Letter to ReproAction and the Center for Reproductive Rights: Abortion Rights Can Override Governmental Authority

    Again, we begin Tell the Truth, in part, by urging organizations to publicly contrast their impact assessment and reporting standards against restorative measures described above. Given this contrast, we urge those engaging in the campaign to admit that benefitting from a system that violated every child’s right to a fair start in life has done more harm to our values and missions that we have done good.

    The Tell the Truth campaign is the most just and effective reform possible, deriving our fundamental obligations to others from preemptive obligations to communicate in a way – admitting how we were determining the lives of others and not just our own – that frees us. Using an arbitrary birth lottery to determine who is empowered in life, and who is disempowered, is unjust. We can use the Tell the Truth campaign to see who chooses to be unjust, this fall outside the scope of legal – by which we mean inclusive – social protections because they refuse to pay the costs they owe each of us for the loss of our freedoms.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation.

  • Fair Starts in Life Mean Telling the Truth, and Finding Common Ground with Others

    Fair Starts in Life Mean Telling the Truth, and Finding Common Ground with Others

    Deal with the cause not the symptom. 

     

    A comparison chart of Current Family Planning vs. Fair Start Family Planning. The left side lists negatives of current planning; the right side highlights positive outcomes of fair start planning for welfare, equality, and environmental protection.

     

    The one question to move towards justice: If one were claiming to create market value, public interest impact, or to exercise authority as government officials or those entitled to their wealth, please ask that person how they were accounting for children entering the world relative to their rights (and especially to political equity) as they made their claims?

    Just the same way we have equity in a company, we have equity in our democracies. Our share depends on how many others are in it, the varying levels of influence we and they have, the impact on the environment around the democracy and how it makes us each less self-determining, etc.

    How does that variable impact the accuracy of our value claims?

     

    Challenging assumptions that hurt our future infographic

    The answer is that few of us were accounting for such things, because no one ever told us that how we measure value and impact, and derive governmental authority and entitlement to wealth, is actually conditional on empowering people and not harming them.

    Instead world leaders in the Twentieth Century assumed entitlements and authority they should not have, which fundamentally led to the crisis. 

    Leading thinkers like Cass Sunstein and Martha Nussbaum have assumed the same, for decades.

    Instead free persons who whish to make choices for themselves, rather than making choices for others, will admit they were not accounting for this, and that they operated based on the false assumptions noted above.

    Those who do not  admit the error choose to free ride on unjust systems of birth positionality, and they threaten us all. It is physically impossible to be free, as in self-determining, if we cannot ask and then assure that persons are created, developed and emaciated in ways that offset equally their capacity to influence political systems equally, relative to a neutral position or objective standard for evaluation. Those entering the world are either not empowered, or we all have no choice but to be subjected to their power and influence – including in the degradation of the environment around us

    Fact: Our benefitting from growth economics built on violations of children’s birth rights did more harm than any of us did good. We don’t get to legitimate nations by having zero functional protections for children as they enter the world, and thus for the nonhuman world they will impact. The growth those violations enabled has degraded the capacity of the Earth to support infant health, the only true measure of value.

    We can’t get to justice from injustice and constitute a just future without actual or measurable equity in birth and development. How do you constitute a just nation? Through language – by admitting and Telling the Truth about justice undone daily by birth inequity – which is language that accurately captures our first obligations, deriving back and conditioning wealth and authority on our actually being obligated to empower people.

    Fair Start is a permanent, universal method for just resistance to and freedom from illegal power, which is any power that is not derived from the people.

    Inequality info graphic

     

    Why Fair Start? 

    The Fair Start Movement was formed to engage in fundamental fact checking and reparations recovery, rooting out reparations fraud enabled by the assumptions above. We identify those who use of the same fundamentally illegal standard of entitlements that caused the crisis, often because they are avoiding liability for the crisis, and for the life-saving and legitimating reparations they owe. Abstracting from the creation of power relations, from the birth and development of kids, ignoring the undoing of our work, makes justice performative.

    Fact: Decades ago, world leaders collectively violated children’s right to a fair start in life, by using unsustainable growth and loss of political equity to degrade eco-social birth and development conditions beneath a key threshold, all based on separate but equal family planning policies that assuming children of color deserved much fewer resources and much more risk.

    So we can ask anyone claiming to add value to the world: How were you accounting for your work being undone by violations of children’s birthrights? Would you be willing to derive wealth and authority back, and condition it on, ensuring such birthrights? If you could go back and make that change in our  base systems decades ago to save millions of lives, would you? If you claimed to create value that was being undone by basic inequity, would you not be eager to reform that system and align with your claimed values? 

    Facts:

    • The concentrations of generational wealth funding and driving public interest claims omit the daily undoing because that would show the liability of those funding the work to first fund birth equity.
    • To be obligated, if we assume all are political equals in the sense of each person having one vote, would begin with our being born, raised and enabled to be measurably self-determining, which means our vote offset others equally, relative to zero.
    • No one has to follow laws in a system that doesn’t actually empower them. All legal obligation derives from language, and ours should mutually empower – not disempower – at the base. Language that accurately reflects and forms obligations has to be accessible to the people who are engaged in the discourse – meaning it definitely is not reflected in traditional national constitutions which do not communicate well to the average person.
    • People, not documents like written constitutions, constitute nations by ensuring rights-based conditions and equitable relations in the birth and development of each child. But in the Twentieth Century world leaders evaded their obligation to reconstitute nations as such under human rights regimes, ignoring child welfare until after children had been born, and the conditions and relations were largely fixed.
    • This is not capitalism or socialism, or any left v. right ideology. It’s about inclusive legitimacy, versus  illegitimacy.
    • Violence, fundamentally, flows from the use of it by nations that do not represent their constituents because they did not empower them as such, including them into the social contract. Instead, almost all have, for decades, used children as economic inputs rather than empowered constituents.
    • Because Fair Start is an overriding form of justice, the adult children of wealthy families that do not pay the costs of their benefits inherit their parents death debts.

     

    The Fair Start Tell the Truth campaign just asks the questions above.

     

    Top Down Power and Bottom Up Empowerment infographic

     

    The growth those violations enabled has degraded the capacity of the Earth to support infant health, the only true measure of value. This is exacerbated by vast inequity and political disenfranchisement that inhibits the ability of the average constituent to change our current trajectory, using a shell/ponzi scheme that slowly degrades democratic influence in favor of economic growth, identified as such by Nobel laureates, which has caused the deaths of millions of innocent persons around the world. All of this loss of freedom and welfare is measurable by widely accepted metrics used for assessing sustainable development

    Fair Start activists in prior employment used wealth, and false assessment and reporting standards, to create a fantasy world of social justice impacts based on entitlements that made our claimed mission impossible, drowning out the truth that hid the drivers causing the world we are experiencing today. Many others did the same.

    How Do You Destroy a Planet's Atmosphere? Tell Lies. Fair Start Certification Tells the Truth Infographic

    Reporting public benefit impacts out of context is harmful because it allows some kids to benefit at deadly cost to others, hiding violations of children’s rights that cost millions of lives and trillions of dollars, harming families and businesses throughout places like Uganda.

    Total Liberation 

    Much of the work of Fair Start was inspired the animal liberation work of Direct Action Everywhere, which treated animal personhood a serious matter of social justice, relative to more performative work of other animal protection efforts. But if we assess animal protection work in the context of the most vulnerable, animals impacted by children born into the world who deprived of their birthright development conditions, the impacts at a macro level are infinitesimal, undone every day by inequitable growth.

    Instead we can orient from a more macro level that treats humans as they animals they are unifies justice at the base, through Fair Start reforms that treat measurable inclusion and empowerment as the first obligation. This is better than using racist and unsustainable assumptions justifying birth inequity, assumptions that undo the work we do for animals, every day.

    Do you believe all kids deserve a fair start in life, yes or no? If yes you will back this reform. We can either confront those lying to protect wealth made illegally and at deadly cost to others, and use that money to ensure justice and save lives, or not. The choice is easy.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

  • Inception of Seeds for the Future Project

    1. Seeds for the Future began in 2023 under RAFUG as kitchen gardens tied to child reparations accounts. The idea was an Afrocentric view of decentralizing power into women using women care groups for future generations.

    2. It moved to Nigeria, Tanzania, and Kenya in the forms of school supplies, agroforestry, and school fees, respectively, all tied to a birth and developmental equity reparations under Esther Afolaranmi’s work at the UN: https://fairstartmovement.org/fair-start-file-update-to-un-human-rights-council-petition-our-overriding-right-to-nature-and-equity/

    3. Next month RAFUG will launch a policy effort in India, showing how it could save countless lives.

    Seeds For the future began in early 2023 under Rejoice Africa Foundation as kitchen gardens, agroforestry, women sensitization on family planning and doing child saving in responding to wealthy redistribution, signs of climate crisis and family planning policies. We used Afrocentric model of Women Care groups with decentralization system.

    Rejoice Africa Foundation got passion not to let others out in doing seeds for the future and we formed a unique coalition of organizations from Nigeria, Kenya and Tanzania and now initiating in India which share one common goal: To change family planning systems to prioritize a just distribution of resources to ensure all children are born and raised in conditions that reflect the ideals of the Children’s Rights Convention, both ecologically and socially. This has become especially challenging given the horrific impact of the climate crisis on children, even before they are born. However, the climate crisis is also an opportunity to pivot towards just and equitable family planning, given the move towards reparations from wealthy nations to the Global South, the

    Growing number of studies that show the efficacy of investing in young women as a means of

    Reaching sustainable development goals, and the impact of ensuring direct funding to young

    Women as a means of building their communities. Investing directly in children works, and is

    Increasingly part of regenerative planning.

    Unlike most other nongovernmental organizations, our coalition believes the Cairo Consensus on population and development is outdated and does not adequately address the two greatest threats to our future: The climate crisis, and massive economic inequality driven by family policies, both in the United States and abroad. Rejoice Africa and its partners have developed specific baselines for the compensation required to address these issues.

     

    Fundamental justice means changing the way we plan our families and raise our children.

    Our response is to introduce seeds for the future and equitable family model, which better reflects the International human rights regime and its commitment to self-determination. This model is now the subject of several successful peer-reviews, and dozens of positive articles in news outlets around the world. It is consistent with the calls by leadership at the United Nations for changes to population and development policies so that rather than counting people, we are working to make each child count. The formula for child-centric families is simple: Parental delay and readiness, a fair distribution of opportunities for all children, and a universal ethic of smaller families. Reparations and focus them on the birthright entitlements of the majority of people: Those who will live in the future.

    The Cairo Consensus helped create the climate crisis and massive inequity and heaps the costs of climate change on those who are least responsible for it. Improving upon it will result in balanced ecosystems, and equal opportunities in life. The crises we face today could have been avoided with a more ecocentric family planning system, one truly compliant with the Children’s Convention.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

     

  • Variations in Doing Charity

    More charities are coming out without validation of how they give charity and so far DBL is identified as culprit of this error because of the following which makes it out of standard.

    First P – Prevention, DBL does not have a formula and matrix on how they intend to prevent unborn children from the climate crisis where they have not included birth entitlement. This has increased death in the vulnerable communities and left Judith dead in the same situation. Because parents of Judith did not have capacity to prevent her from dying of malaria and instead Judith died in error of Symptom-like measures on the ground which rooted in charity based giving in preventing harm.

    Second P – Protection, DBL has come up with inequality in protection of the generation from climate crisis and their charity giving doesn’t meet bottom-top protection, instead its following top-bottom protection in addressing the climate crisis and this has been errors for many nonprofits that ignore decentralized system in family planning reforms.

    Third P – Promotion, DBL is not doing first P and second P in meeting third P in improving life for all human and nonhuman beings on this planet earth instead is promoting wellbeing of people only who deserve a right to food, shelter, education and basic healthcare which are not meeting UN standards and Fair start standards and doesn’t meet family planning reforms. Not promoting birth entitlement, equal wealth redistribution, not promoting admit the truth and pay reparation.

    DBL doesn’t want to use decentralization in executing Their work and doesn’t have a clear formula and method of giving charity to people in need. In short, DBL doesn’t meet eight metrics and doesn’t clear accountability for growth and climate crisis.

    this has caused lack of access to fund for the real cause of the indigenous people and resulting into increased climate crisis symptoms witnessed by the increase of death of people due to diseases caused by variation in climate change

    A story of the death Mbabazi Judith

    “Mbabazi Judith a three year old, a daughter to kansiime Rovina and mushabe Joseph from

    Rutoma village in isingiro district western Uganda. Mbabazi Judith was the seventh child in the family, and second last bone.

    Rovina the mother said on 8/April/2024 , Mbabazi Judith started vomiting, fever and diarrhea and immediately I took her to the st Theresa clinic for treatment , when I reached their , mbabazi Judith was very weak and dehydrated clinic removed Malaria blood sample and it was positive .

    On examination Judith had pallor of mucous membrane in the eyes. Clinic also tested

    Hemoglobin level and the results came that Mbabazi Judith also had anemia in Malaria.

    I did not have enough money for all the treatment and the clinic in charge referred me to the government hospital for treatment. I didn’t have money for transport and decided to borrow shillings ten thousand shillings for transport and it was not enough. I started walking for 5 kilometers until I reached the main road to board a car to the government hospital.

    As I was in the journey half way, Mbabazi Judith started convulsing and gasping in five minutes, Mbabazi Judith breathed last breath. The car stopped and removed me with a dead body and I did not have money to go home. I started walking and walked for 15 kilometers to reach home and reached late in the evening. Started organizing for the burial of Mbabazi Judith. Judith died because I was poor and did not have money”  

    While Women Care Group modeling standards are based on the 3Ps (prevention, protection and promotion) and Rejoice Africa Foundation urges DBL to use 3 Ps in doing work.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

  • A Unique Coalition for the Seeds for the Future Project

    The Seeds for the Future initiative began in early 2023 under the Rejoice Africa Foundation’s guidance, encompassing endeavors such as kitchen gardens, agroforestry, women’s sensitization on family planning, and child savings, all in response to signals of climate crisis and evolving family planning policies. Employing an Afrocentric model of Women Care groups within a decentralized system, our foundation laid the groundwork for transformative change.

    Driven by a fervent determination to ensure no one is left behind in sowing the seeds for the future, we forged a distinctive coalition comprising organizations from Nigeria, Kenya, Tanzania, and now India. This coalition shares a singular mission: to revolutionize family planning systems, prioritizing the equitable distribution of resources to ensure every child is born and nurtured in conditions that uphold the ideals of the Children’s Rights Convention, both ecologically and socially.

    Esther’s UN work and Esther’s ICCR research underscores the urgency of our mission, particularly in light of the dire impacts of the climate crisis on children, even before their birth.

    However, amidst the challenges lies an opportunity for transformative change. As momentum builds for reparations from wealthy nations to the Global South and evidence mounts regarding the efficacy of investing in young women for sustainable development, our coalition stands at the vanguard of progress. Unlike conventional non-governmental organizations, we reject the outdated Cairo Consensus on population and development, recognizing its inadequacy in addressing the twin perils of the climate crisis and economic inequality.

    Fundamental justice means changing the way we plan our families and raise our children in the News letter

    Our response is anchored in the introduction of a seeds for the future and equitable family model, aligning with the principles of the International human rights regime and its commitment to self-determination. This model has garnered acclaim through successful peer-reviews and extensive coverage in global news outlets. It resonates with calls from UN leadership for a paradigm shift in population and development policies, emphasizing the value of each child’s life.

    Dickson from Kenya Amboseli love organization echoes the plight of marginalized communities like the Maasai in Kenya, underscoring the historical injustices that have stripped them of their land and livelihoods. The failures of the Cairo Consensus to address such injustices only exacerbate the climate crisis and inequity, burdening the most vulnerable. He said and I quote “Kenya recognizes over fifty tribes of native people. The Maasai were the dominating tribe at the beginning of 20th century. They are one of the very few tribes who have retained most of their traditions, lifestyle and lore. In common with the wildlife with which they co-exist, the Maasai need a lot of land. Unlike many other tribes in Kenya, the Maasai are semi-nomadic and pastoral: they live by herding cattle and goats.

    Ashoka from India said ….” The move follows on two letters to Prime Minister Modi urging him to take action to ensure the nation complies with human rights requirements, as detailed in a recent filing before the United Nations Human Rights Council.

    The new organization argues that India is out of compliance with human rights requirements, and in a way that risks countless lives.

    ●India faces unprecedented future deaths, in the millions of those least responsible, due to a combination of the climate crisis and current family planning policy.

    ●A new NGO is challenging the status quo family planning policy, urging India to get ahead of the curve and comply with human rights systems that correctly base political legitimacy on birth equity-based family reforms using the Children’s Convention as a guide.

    ●The reforms would entitle massive family planning entitlements to make sure children are only born in safe conditions and use climate loss and damage liability to start the process which could save countless lives.

    The organization further argued that given calls for population policy reforms, recent attempts to reform family planning systems, the call for family reforms made by the Supreme Court, as well as the import of its rulings on access to family planning, this is an issue that should not be ignored. India should consider itself bound by international human rights and obligations to future generations when devising a new policy, which it needs desperately. The best human-rights based guidelines for that policy are described in filings now before the United Nations, and which treat Article 16 of the International Bill of Human Rights as the most basic norm – or Grund norm – around which all family and population policy must orient.” 

    Ayubu from Tanzania said…….” Women and children are considered to be among the most vulnerable groups of people in the

    World, especially in the developing countries. The challenges faced by women and children are unprecedented and often worsened by extreme situations such as climate change. Climate change is one of the leading causes of food insecurity. Food-insecure areas are often drought-stricken and hard to live in because of the shortage of food and water. For women in

    Tanzania most especially, this is a big challenge because they are often left in charge of feeding their families. This means that the absence of water or food makes their lives more complicated as they have to travel long distances or spend more to purchase foodstuffs and water. For the children, this affects their health and nutrition needs. It also puts them at risk of missing classes due to hunger or because they have to fetch water from far places.

     Sometimes food insecurity leads families to move to other food secure places which is often cumbersome for children who have to leave during school times. Therefore, food insecurity brings about a lot of uncertainty and affects the lives of women and children who are already affected by climate change results.

    Esther from Nigeria said “…….in a slum, where many children live below the poverty line, education takes the back seat. Poverty, underdevelopment, mass illiteracy, ignorance, urban backwardness and conservatism has caused many in slums to be deprived of their basic right to education and limited access to education means many children will be stuck in a cycle of poverty.

    In many slums around the world, children are unable to attend school regularly due to a lack of resources, including school supplies. Without these resources, children are unable to participate in classes and may fall behind their peers. Additionally, a lack of access to education can perpetuate the cycle of poverty in these communities.

    in conclusion, in rewriting the narrative, we envision a future where balanced ecosystems and equal opportunities prevail. By embracing an ecocentric family planning system aligned with the Children’s Convention, we can mitigate the crises we face today and cultivate a more just and Sustainable tomorrow. Through our coalition’s collective efforts, we sow women care group in the seeds for the future project of hope and equity for next generations.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

     

  • Women Care Groups Leading Afrocentric Model in Saving the Next Generation

    Care group model helped Seed for the future project to identify and sensitize the real voiceless young women from the grassroots communities in Africa and pilots done in Uganda, Nigeria, Kenya and Tanzania as Coalition and its growth to other countries and regions that were harmed over the years of wealth distribution injustices.

    This work has roots in the first forms of democracy and can drive decolonization of wealth to liberate many in measurable ways. The United Nations failed to ensure sustainable and equitable family systems, which is now killing millions as the climate crisis unfolds.

    The United Nations in 1968 finalized a paradigm of privacy isolating us from each other in the act of trying to constitute – through having children – equitable future relationships. This was done because a few wealthy families had a disproportionate impact on the standard and wanted to avoid covering the cost to children’s rights, and to benefit from the growth-based investments not having to invest in kids would ensure. This was done even though the act of having kids is more interpersonal than personal, and by ensuring isolation and subjectivity, the UN set in lace the collective action problem of inequity as not having an equal and influential share in determining the rules one lives under, and thus halting the unwanted influence others have over you.

    The UN not telling this truth is killing innocent persons, skewing the baseline for live-saving climate loss and damage funding, including the preemptive nature of birth and developmental equity, the prioritization of certain claims, the amounts owed, and how the funds must be used.

    What should have been done and can still be done today to fix this? One can create social contexts that overcome the collective action problem and break the veil of subjectivity, ones that invert entitlements (as was done to address famine), so that mothers and would-be mothers can all see how having kids and creating new members of the community will impact all and the future. In short, the use of a social context leads to the discerning of objective values we all share and are hidden by the UN process, and as such delay, the moving of resources from the wealthy to impoverished, relocating in some cases, smaller families, etc. – and this can all be expedited with child and future child savings accounts around which collective action can be based.

    Small and less consumptive white families in wealthy nations will model and assist in funding the change. Delay, readiness, redistribution, share equity to get to autonomy, nature, etc. – these are the terms of a truly universal and intergenerational social contract.

    Humans can only constitute the future through the language of obligation and the linguistic creation of power relations, and the fundamental mistake we all seem to be making is that our obligation is inverted: It would be physically impossible to be free unless we see ourselves as first obligated to persons who will parent, rather than first ruled by those at the top of the influence pyramid, e.g. officials, the wealthy, CEOs, celebs, etc., because all entitlement to influence – and ensure criteria other uses to assess what is true and valuable – derives from the governed and their primary equitable positioning. The latter should only have influence to the extent the creation of others ensures measurable (eight metrics as least) equity.

    Whereas the United Nations and its members exploited isolation and birth and developmental positionality to fill factories and shopping centers with workers and consumers, this collective process will fill town falls, surrounded by nature, as the life of self-determination – not exploitation as economic units by in an economy that first requires democracies defined by measurable equity to be regulated – that justifies governance.

    For example, the United Nations has recently recognized the right to a healthy environment, but on the day the General Assembly did so it was quickly undoing the right with subtle family policies that did more harm to the environment and the humans and nonhumans that comprise it than the UN was doing good. 

    The family policies work by giving would-be parents a sense of autonomy that ignores all the interpersonal impacts of having kids, one that ensures inequity and growth.

    What the UN did is common. Most claims of public benefit are inaccurate because the key values/variables claimed (whether it is protecting animals, children, democracy, etc.) are actually hidden in/ absent from the premise (who we should be, which precedes what we should do) and being undone, but in ways humans have trouble perceiving because the changes move so slowly. The recognition of a right is a charade unless the UN enables crowd-sourced implementation of a right to the creation of power relations consistent with the right to a healthy environment.

    These are facts, ones which enriched some at deadly and impoverishing cost to many, as the hiding/absence infects our thinking and conversations, making us unable to connect situations like redlining and urban heat in the U.S. to deforestation and poverty in Africa. In both situations the aligned values of nature and equity are absent from the first necessary premise of who we should be, and even the most ardent activists cannot see it.

    Donations or reparations that are instead treated as one of many forms of influence (use of contact networks, prestige, civil disobedience, one’s skills, etc.) that logically are first obligated towards creating and maintaining the system that physically creates and maintains just power relations, which can be measured. Prioritizing our various forms of influence – above taxes or recognizing any entitlements to own wealth – makes us part of a system where we constitute or treat others as we would like to be treated – one which mimics the sort of entitlement change that has significantly reduced famines. Doing so includes the key values/variables in the premise of who we should be. One is either moving in the direction of being part of such a system or a threat to it – there is no middle ground. Those who choose to use their influence to back a system that does not include others as empowered equals, whatever they say, are harming equity.

    It seems care groups are doing from below what written constitutions could not do from above – actually empower people with self-determination in a measurable way. The situation of women lacking basic needs in their lives causes physiological torture and force them to get early married, teenage pregnancy and gave birth too many children in the act of looking for the basic needs. Women cannot stay with basic needs; they are vulnerable if a younger woman lacks basic needs might end up doing negative things.

    Global north wealth people, foundations and companies harmed women from the global south and her child’s future. Would it be wrong for a young woman with little wealth or income intending to become a mother to demand birth equity resources – resources that simply ensure a level playing field for her child and thus offset the harm from a wealthy family that externalized the deadly environmental and social costs of its wealth upon the child she wished to have?

    What if that family exploited that birth inequality and growth to not only harm her future child, but ensure that child would be likely to work for little money for the wealthy family and their children? What if the young woman were black, and whose child would have 9/10th less wealth than white kids because they would be black, and the white family she asked could afford to share by choosing to have fewer children?

    Start by stopping the harm and demanding climate restoration though birth equity as human right. Then start paying them back in the most effective through Care group model in the spirit of doing these reparations in decentralized form in transparency and accountability in responding to climate crisis and human rights and provide quick results in a short period of time. In paying to plan to keep the children’s women will have a safe environment.

    The Care Group model, with its emphasis on identifying and sensitizing the marginalized and voiceless young women in grassroots communities, has been instrumental in addressing the long-standing injustices caused by wealth distribution disparities. These disparities have pushed women in these communities into a cycle of deprivation, leading to early marriages, teenage pregnancies, and excessive childbirth as they seek to fulfill their basic needs. This situation not only inflicts physiological torment on these women but also makes them susceptible to engaging in negative activities in their quest for survival.

    It’s crucial to recognize that global wealth imbalances have often harmed women in the global south and jeopardized the future prospects of their children. In light of this, is it unjust for a young woman with limited wealth or income who aspires to become a mother to demand birth equity resources? Birth equity resources seek to level the playing field for her child and redress the harm caused by externalizing the environmental and social costs of wealth accumulation onto her child.

    What if a wealthy family, responsible for this externalization, not only perpetuates birth inequity but also ensures that her child is likely to work for minimal wages for their family and heirs? Moreover, what if this young woman is black, knowing that her child will inherit significantly less wealth than white children due to racial disparities, and the white family she approaches could easily alleviate this disparity by choosing to have fewer children?

    The path towards rectifying these injustices begins with halting the harm and advocating for climate restoration as a fundamental human right through birth equity. Simultaneously, it entails repaying the debt owed to these marginalized communities effectively, and the Care Group model provides a promising avenue for achieving this. By implementing reparations through this decentralized approach, we ensure transparency and accountability in responding to both the climate crisis and human rights violations. This method also delivers rapid results in a short timeframe, creating a safe and conducive environment for the children these women wish to raise.

    In essence, urging wealthy individuals, foundations, and corporations from the global north to adopt the Care Group model in their family reforms. Reparations efforts are a means of addressing historical injustices, restoring dignity and opportunity to marginalized women, and fostering a more equitable and sustainable future for all. It’s a call for collective responsibility and action to rectify the imbalances that have perpetuated suffering for generations.

    The care group model directly promotes decentralization with decolonization of collective action to problems through talking to each other in democratic system unlike the nuclear families in the global north, and also demoralizes non-human decolonization Animals to have freedoms.

    How will the Care group model help future families?

    • The Global North countries model on family planning endorsed by the United Nations simply isolates parents and parents-centered decision making resulting in errors in the global south model and Care group emerged to fix this error.
    •  The isolation has caused a terrible climate crisis and inequality in today’s generations.
    •  Care group modeling will allow Parents- children discussing and prioritizing when producing children based on their family planning reformation of policies that allow children all rights according to children’s UN convention.
    •  Will enkindle in all families with the sense of socialization and promoting working together in nuclear families.
    • Care groups use rules that protect vulnerable voiceless women and children through investing in them and conserving animal freedoms in protecting nature to prevent crises present.

    Why the Care group model?

    1. A Community-Based Approach: The Care Group model is fundamentally community-based. It involves the formation of small, local groups of women who share similar life experiences and challenges. These groups serve as a support network for one another and work collectively to address common issues. In the context of reparations and family reforms, these groups would be a vital resource for affected women. They provide a platform for women to share their stories, access information, and collectively advocate for their rights.

    2. Education and Awareness: The Care Group model places a strong emphasis on education and awareness. Trained community health workers or facilitators play a crucial role in disseminating information on a range of topics, including reproductive health, childcare, nutrition, and financial literacy. In the context of reparations, these facilitators can help women understand their rights and the resources available to them, empowering them to demand equity and justice.

    3. Skill-building and Empowerment: Beyond education, the Care Group model focuses on skill-building and empowerment. Women in these groups can learn practical skills such as income generation, which can help them become financially independent. Reparations efforts can incorporate skill-building programs to equip women with the tools they need to secure a better future for themselves and their children.

    4. Advocacy and Collective Action: The Care Group model encourages collective advocacy and action. Women in these groups can come together to voice their concerns and demands. In the context of reparations, these groups can be powerful advocates for justice, demanding accountability from those responsible for historical injustices and seeking restitution for the harm caused.

    5. Monitoring and Evaluation: The Care Group model also includes a robust system for monitoring and evaluation. This ensures that the programs and initiatives being implemented are effective and responsive to the needs of the community. In the context of reparations, this means that the impact of reparations efforts can be closely tracked, and adjustments can be made as needed to ensure they are achieving their intended goals.

    6. Sustainability: One of the strengths of the Care Group model is its focus on sustainability. By building the capacity of women within communities, it creates a lasting impact that extends beyond the duration of any specific program. In the context of reparations, this means that the benefits and support provided to women can have a lasting and positive effect on their lives and the lives of their children.

    7. Partnership and Collaboration: The success of the Care Group model often relies on collaboration with local organizations, governments, and NGOs. When applied to reparations, partnerships can help ensure that resources are mobilized effectively, and a coordinated effort is made to address climate injustices and promote birth equity.

    Coalition is aware of how environmental leaders are responding to the climate crisis and one of them suggested that their birth benefited them at the cost of others and working together to bring children into the world and avoid the problem that is arising from their errors.

    None of the leaders want to participate in this conversation of saving the next generation, they are just ignoring because of supremacy.

    Care groups can fix these crises, if environmental leaders can adopt and participate in the Care group model in responding to climate crises in a decentralized system of operation.

    the Care Group model offers a comprehensive and community-centered approach to addressing the needs of marginalized women and their children in the context of family reforms and reparations for future socialization in families working together in addressing the climate crisis. It leverages education, empowerment, advocacy, and sustainability to create lasting change and promote birth equity and climate justice. Care groups focus on the vulnerable and how entrants impact the entire group to children above threshold therefore reversing the exploitation into growth to save the next generation.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation