Should there be a law against having more children that you are able to financially provide for?
402663
I could go off on a tangent but the short answer is if you can't feed them don't breed them.
336310
I know one law is that you can't have more that two female children, but that's all I know.
708784
That's called eugenics, and has been tried in the US. It failed. See the link below for information about the eugenics program in Virginia - this is just one example.\n\nWe need to use social pressure, as they do in China, to discourage over-population. Particular cultures and socio-economic strata have a disproportionate number of children. We need to teach all Americans that they should only have one child each - that ensure a  zero growth population.\n\nExtra children should be taxed; there should be no tax incentives for having children. Similarly, welfare benefits for larger families should be reduced.\n\nOver time, this will lead us all to a more prosperous nation.
1028628
when u have enough money to support the kid
737455
A Great idea, but difficult to enforce.  We would end up finding a lot of babies in trash cans and in orphanages because people who could not afford to breed in the first place and were too lame to use birth control would dispose of their babies to avoid the tax.\nSad, but true.
274831
Yes, that is all taken into consideration. See the site below where you can get an approximate idea of what your child support would be.
82115
no if they cant support any already having more would just make it harder
285767
No and this should be set by the courts. Talk to your local governing body for child welfare or who instructs you to pay the money.
168109
I understand the logic behind it, but it is wrong to control how many children a couple can have.  I can imagine it shatters many couple's dreams and some kids may feel lonely as an only child.  \n\nBut the worse thing is that some people kill their kids!  Especially if it's a girl (because they feel a son is more valuable).  How sad.
374301
I agree that we should have some kind of law that prevents women from having children that they cant take care of but instead of aborting babies something should be done before they get pregnant like some kind of birth control they have plenty new advances. It would save the goverment and tax payers and a child from going without or maybe worse if a mother is having a baby just for the money then they will be neglected,abused. Sorry to everyone that thinks that is cruel but give it thought its not cruel to stop a child from having a child.
1098492
While it's not fair, in many states when the noncustodial parent pops out another child the custodial parent has to cough up even more money each time the child support is reduced. So the custodial parent is paying to subsidize the non-custodial parent's reproduction choices.
178041
I believe that there should be a law and a test to procreate.  We have to pass a test to drive, to PAY for an education and sometimes to hold a job;but any jack@#$ can have responsibility of and reproduce a child.
1083010
Shouldn't your question be "How many unwanted pregnancies could not be terminated because of right wing policies?"  Such as cutting birth control planning budgets, screaming that we are giving teens condoms and the morning after pill so we need to do away, bombing clinics that provide all types of birth control and may offer clinical abortions.  Welfare was reformed, under the Clinton admin, by the way, you have to work, assistance to needy children is a thing of the past.  Mom has to go work for minimum, struggle to pay day care and any other costs.  Welfare used to be for single parents with children, so that children could have the benefit of a parent for the first four years of life and then mom had to go to work. But that has not been the case for well over a decade.  You have to be severely disabled to receive any cash assistance.  By the way, do you have any idea on how expensive it is to be poor?
294236
The rationale is that the raising of children is good for society - so must be supported by all, whether or not you have children.  That is the reason too why the tax system pays for schools, not just the parents.  Other people's children will be supporting you in your elderly years, right?
389513
I totally agree with you- they should make some sort of rules or make the wife's have a damn good reason about the getting pregant to begin with- pregnancy is not a mistake and baby's arn't exactly cheap or a pet. I give people credit- they are definatly not stupid enough to not know what birth control and condoms are, they are getting pregant for a reason because most of them have like 3 or 4 kids. I mean how can you have 3 or 4 kids by mistake? You'd think they'd learn the first time, but then again I guess the more kids they pop out the more they get from welfare. I know someone who uses her kids as an excuse not to get a job, go to college or even to get her liscence~! I don't know why she claims she cares about those kids if she can't even drive them to the ER if something happens to them!  But yet she can get married- I was about to ask her how she can A) afford it and B) how can you? remember you have kids? She wanted me to help with some of the expenses too- and I don't think that is my place. I totally argree with you on that 100% and I think the government understands there's ALOT of cases of this happening- so why won't they enforce some rules? But then again- it's like asking to bring our gas prices down again. America Land of the Free.
956344
Yes by the simply natured that their is only one and not two parents to deal with the issues that child-rearing need.  However, that does not mean that a one-parent families cannot be a successful model to rear children in.  \n\nRespectfully!!!
704950
I agree.  Another good approach would be to give incentives to people to not have kids.  For example: if someone is a criminal, a crackhead, violent, or otherwise unfit....we pay them a large sum of money to get sterilized.  That way it's not against their will and the government stays out of it except by the subject's choice.  If they're on crack or meth, they'll want the money.  Fewer neglected kids and a more stable society.