Various statistics that I’ve seen over the years have claimed a maximum 40% chance that a child I intentionally father could have some form of MS, and those odds are too high for me.

My big boppin’ days need to end with authority.

it’s agreed…there are many people who really and truly need government assistance of some sort or other, either because they’re going through some sort of a crisis (i. e. divorce, illness, loss of a job, etc.) and need a leg up until they’re able to get back onto their feet, the elderly, or people who are mentally and/or physically handicapped in some way or other, or who’ve had severe problems with substance and alcohol abuse and can’t work. Those are people who really NEED help, in a big way.

I don’t think, however, that teenaged pregnancy is something that should be encouraged, because, often, teens who become pregnant not only cripple their own chances for a normal, productive life and getting some sort of an education, but all too often, their children often end up living the same kind of life as they get older. That is because most teenaged girls who end up that way don’t come from a background where an interest in any kind of education thrives, nor do most of them finish school, due to lack of interest. As a result, they’re often uneducated, unskilled, and end up totally dependent on government assistance for themselves and their child, because there’s no other way for them to go.

I also think that most teens aren’t mature enough to handle pregnancy and parenthood, and it’s often disastrous for both mother and child. Teenage mothers run the risk of undermining both their own physical/mental health, as well as that of their baby, since mothers who are that young aren’t completely matured physically, either.

Better birth control methods, plus open and frank discussions between teens and their parents (and/or other adults they can trusts), plus more adequate and extensive sex education about consequences of sex, and pregnancy, are also in order.

Now let’s continue:

You’re disabled, should you be allowed to have children? Completely ignore the monetary issues here, just the base question. Yes, otherwise you’re saying a group of people are unworthy of reproducing because they are physically defective.

Put money in: Do you know many people who don’t get money back in some form or other from the government after having children? Really? I’m not entirely sure on the state of play in the United States over taxes, but over the pond in the United Kingdom, we get tax breaks for having children. Is that fair on people who don’t have children? Those who choose not to have children are choosing not to contribute to the burden on society and the economy including the cost of their education.

Is it fair for anyone to have children whilst living on government subsidies? Most people do in one form or another, tax payers and those who don’t earn enough to pay tax alike. Reducing the population of the may be okay in the short term, but it will make things much harder in the long run, since economics is a zero sum game.

So, is it fair for disabled people who live on government money to reproduce? Yes. Anything less than a clear concise positive is prejudice against a subset of people, and we know prejudice =/= equality.

Equity is what we should be striving for. Equally only works if everyone has the same start.

Hey Kacy,
I couldn’t agree with you more. We have very few rights and to make matters worse for us, there are people with physical disabilities who know how milk the system for every penny. I think that your opinion helped me state my opinion. As a person with Osteogenesis Imperfecta, I’ve battled medical problems and discrimination throughout my life. So I get really ticked off that a person with a physical disability wants to be treated like everyone else, lives off the tax payers’ money because the person is supposedly too disabled to gain full time employment yet isn’t too disabled to procreate. To make it worse, the person wants the government’s system designed to help people disabled and non disabled live a better life, also care for his/her child even if they can’t care for themselves. How is the right? Sounds hypocritical to me. What do you think?

Hello there, Mik. Thank you for expressing your thoughts. Let’s really look at the article and its meaning. The title is SHOULD and therefore, it’s an opinion piece. It’s my opinion. I have Osteogenesis Imperfecta and I’m very well aware of the challenges we face as a community living with physical disabilities. I work. I am a teacher. I pay taxes. I want to express this point of view. You see, when I hear about a friend who has a physical disability and is told that he can’t get the services he needs because there isn’t enough money, I start thinking, “If my other friend with a physical disability who was unemployed and living off tax payers’ dollars can have a baby who will also depend on tax payers’ dollars, then why should my first friend be denied services due lack of funds?” When a person with a physical disability living off the tax payers’ money, chooses to have a child who will also be depended upon the system, is it fair? If the person didn’t have a disability and did the same exact thing, our society would be up in arms about it. Calling them moochers and free loaders. But it appears that people think that it’s ok for a person with a disability to do it. Why? Is it out of pity? I thought we didn’t want pity. I thought we wanted to be treated like everyone else. So I decided to bring this topic up. But people read it and instead of saying, OH she said SHOULD as in it’s her opinion that this action is something she doesn’t approve? People are making it seem as if I am asking for them to have an abortion or to do genocide or what not. It get totally spun out of control. I am far from ill informed. I am very aware that there are people with physical disabilities who know how milk the system the same way there are people without physical disabilities who know how to milk the system. Two wrongs don’t make a right. I prefer we use as much tax payer money to help people with physical disabilities like my friend who needed someone to help him get dressed every morning to go to college, interview for jobs and move on. Perhaps you will have a better understanding of my view. But either way, THANK YOU FOR YOUR AUDACIOUS COMMENT.

We all have a right to reproduce, and that includes disabled people. We must take into consideration the fact that we live in a society that is less accessible to disabled people, that disabled people have less chance of an education or finding employment and that disabled people are still not fully equal in the eyes of the UK legal system before going down this awful road of judging people through the lens of the right wing ideology.

It saddens me that that a magazine for disabled people could even run such an awful piece of discriminatory crap. You expect it from the likes of the Mail but please. “For disabled people” my arse.

You should all be ashamed. So much for solidarity and working together for a better world. A sad day for disabled people everywhere. It’s not shock journalism, it’s pandering to the lowest common denominator and just proves that this writer has no knowledge about the history of disability.

One of the saddest, most depressing pieces of ill informed writing I have ever had the misfortune to read. I will not be coming back to Audacity Magazine again if this is the kind of stuff it publishes. Hey Audacity Editor, just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

Bob, actually I don’t think it’s right if the woman is disabled or not. If a person is living off the government, she shouldn’t have kids. Regardless of their ability or disability. Therefore, the article is merely pointing out that we can’t have our cake and eat it too. We should be criticized for doing wrong the same way people would criticize an able bodied person for doing this. That is the point of the article. But I’m reading many comments of people supporting these actions because able bodied people are doing it. So basically, people are saying that two wrongs make a right? I think both wrongs are wrong. PS Thanks for sharing your views.