On Single Mothers

Today as I was reading the paper while waiting for the bus, I was quite disturbed by a feedback comment submitted to 24 Hours regarding the NDP's Jenny Kwan's call to reinstate certain exemptions for single mothers. In response to the article, a person whose name we will not republish on this blog wrote back chastising impoverished women for daring to have children, and argued against the government making any effort to assist mothers who struggle to provide for their children. She writes:

I don't think single mothers should be getting government extras. If you can't afford a child on one income in Vancouver, don't have children or move to a more affordable area. Procreation isn't our God-given right...people still have to be accountable for their behaviors. So all of you women need to stop making excuses and deal with your own problems. The government can't be responsible for every man, woman and child. Where are the fathers of these children anyway?

What callous disregard for the children that this comment seems willing to throw under the bus in a rush to condemn women for having children at a time that she does not feel is appropriate. The suggestion that women who cannot afford children should not have them is not only patronizing in the extreme, but also quite useless: these women already have children. What purpose is served through this ridiculous moralizing? Does it help these children to inform their mothers that they should not have gotten pregnant in the first place? For that matter, is it the place of a complete stranger who knows nothing of a woman's situation to be dictating to her when it is and it not acceptable to have a child? The fact is, circumstances change, sometimes beyond our control. Family members get sick, creating an unexpected financial burden. Parents get laid off from jobs, resulting in an unexpected loss of income. There are many things that can lead to financial hardships.

It is beyond reprehensible to suggest that we should punish children by withholding financial support for their parents in order to impress some sort of moral lesson on the mother that she should not have had sex or become pregnant. Because if we content ourselves with saying "she shouldn't have gotten pregnant - she can deal with her own problems" it is invariably children who will end up suffering. Many single parents are faced every day with the choice of buying food for their families, or paying to keep a roof over their heads. By the reasoning espoused by the response - that it is not the responsibility of the government to assist these families - I suppose children should consider the financial position of their parents before having the temerity to be born. And as was noted above, it is entirely possible that a mother might have a child when she is experiencing relative financial stability, and then later find herself struggling to make ends meet due to unforeseeable circumstances. What do we say to these women? That they should have expected and planned for a recession in the economy before becoming parents?

The suggestion that mothers should simply move to more affordable areas is equally short-sighted. Is the commentator under the impression that there is currently a plethora of affordable housing in Vancouver that these mothers could easily access if they so chose? We currently have one of the highest costs of living and one of the lowest minimum wages in Canada. To suggest that struggling single mothers and their children have no place in Vancouver is horrible. Recently, we managed to find over $1 billion to pay for the Winter Olympics, ostensibly under the premise of showing to the world the love and pride we have for our country. What does it then say when we would deny disadvantaged children in Canada any assistance we can give them? Is that how we show our love for our country? By telling the children of our nation that they are neither wanted nor our responsibility to care for?

The idea that anyone should have the right to dictate to a woman when she should or should not have children is exactly the mentality that anti-choice advocates promote when they suggest that society should be allowed to force women to carry to term pregnancies they do not wish to. As supporters of reproductive rights, we must defend a woman's right to all her options, whether that is abortion, adoption or parenting. It is never the place of strangers to tell women when it is the proper time to have children, and it is my hope that readers of 24 Hours will have realized the deeply problematic nature of the comment.