Dear Editor,

Am I unreasonable to think that women and men need to start taking into account their income levels before deciding to have children they can’t afford to maintain?

Too often, mothers, and sometimes fathers, are seen on the news pitifully bawling with their hands on their heads, that “di Govament nah duh nut’n fi wi”. Yet they continue to have more and more babies they can’t afford to feed, clothe, or even send to school.

The examples are too many of unemployed young women having in excess of five children all with different men and without any form of child support. These poor children are always seen barefooted, in dirty clothes, and are most times not in school. Oftentimes, they are even seen on the streets begging every “Miss” or “Sir” that passes by for “just $20 to buy a bag juice or Cheese Trix”. And to make matters worse, these women continue to have baby after baby.

Now, tell me please, shouldn’t Jamaica’s harsh economic crisis be deterrent enough? I should think so. With the invention of various contraceptive methods, I thought women would at least start taking responsibility by not engaging in unprotected sexual intercourse. It doesn’t make any sense for women to continue to have children without a steady income. For insufficient or limited resources can limit the level of care, support and security one can given to children. This can, in turn, negatively impact their development in becoming functional individuals in society.

If women and men cannot afford to have more than one child, then simply don’t. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Or better yet, just nip it in the bud.

Evadne Brown

Knockpartick P O

ebrown14@stu.ncu.edu.jm