Why?
I'm a big believer in the concept of prevention, especially when it comes to healthcare. Like, take your vitamins and you're less likely to get a cold. Take care of your diet and you won't have to get your stomach stapled when you're 50. Things like that. Our country has an issue with economic liability(ie we have too much of it). I liken my solution to a dash of population control mixed with a scraping of feminism and perhaps a garnish of common sense.
The primary focus of this discussion is the poor, those dancing about the poverty line.
This class of citizen we speak of is dependent, and tends to perpetuate such dependence. We are worried about the cost of the this health care bill(and rightfully so, fellow social security losers), but have we considered its potential cost-saving capacity?
No, I do not have a model to support this. I have basic micro and macroeconomics in my back pocket, sure, but attempting to cipher through THAT much data seems a job much more suited for...anyone else. SO, I'm going to make my grandiose statements with touches of logic here and there, and you, dear readers, will attempt to digest them(and hopefully not spit them out...ew).
Particularly if we're talking about the typical individual(or family) who wouldn't able to afford contraception otherwise, this idea has a solid foundation. Why? Because their offspring are an automatic economic liability(if not a social one as well, but we'll delve into that later) to...us. Their children's food will be paid for by us. The subsidies for schools, clothing, supplies, what-have-you, will be paid for by us. I'm not suggesting cutting any of these programs(I do have a dash of bleeding heart liberal lying around), but I'm suggesting the country would be better off if we had less demand for these programs. Fewer dependents. Fewer mouths to feed. I am also NOT suggesting some mass-sterilization of the poor either, just the ability of choice.
As I said before, it's all about prevention.
Freakanomics made an interesting comment on abortion's effect on crime rates in Eastern Europe. Fewer unwanted children who would likely recieve less than stellar child-care = fewer future criminals. Employing a similar tactic(and taking away a need for a messy, expensive procedure), let's give them the Pill. Poor people with the Pill = fewer future criminals. Fewer future gang members, drug runners, or simply maladjusted adolescents raising a ruckus in already thinly-stretched inner-city schools.
My idea is this: contraception for prevention. Yes, I'm calling you out, zealous pro-lifers(including the ones I sat next to at mass, went to school with, did precious youth group activities with). You have noble ambitions, I do not doubt this. I just can't help but feel you're being slightly less than realistic here. Although it may be considered preferable for the unmarried to not have sex, they're doing it. It's not even that so much as those who cannot afford children are having sex. Even those who according to Church doctrine are "allowed" to have sex(married couples) may be unable to support 18 years of uh, potential result. Should they not be allowed, then?
Try having a vote on that one.
And then there's the "why-not-just-use-condoms" argument. Condoms are a negotiable element of the act. As much as one might wish they were compulsatory, their mainstream nature(including the vast variety of colors, flavors, textures, etc) have not made them everyone's choice. For one, one must pay for them. And have them at hand when the time is right. This alienates the cheap and absented-minded of us right away. Also, it is the man's choice. Yes, women may ask, demand, and throw a hissy fit, which implies some sort of control, but is it ultimately the man's decision(as it is his anatomy). Give them the Pill, and this becomes less of an issue.
I'm not suggesting that every woman unable to financially support a child has to go on the Pill, but if they wish to be more responsible and take control of their reproductive future, I think they should be allowed the option. Ultimately, it's about supporting the importance of choice. Creating choice and opportunity.
Feminist side note: Family planning was one of the hallmarks of progress in the women's rights movement. Let's continue it.
Political side note: This is not to suggest I'm for or against this bloated bill. I just figure hey, why not get something useful out of trillion dollar expenditure that will bury me and my descendants.
No comments:
Post a Comment