One thing really annoying that I’ve noticed working in the white collar industry is that some people get a free pass all the time on important things, just because they have kids. For example, in a different team who often has to step away during business hours and becomes unreachable, simply because they have kids. There’s always some sort of excuse with them. Have to go pick him up from the bus stop, have to go pick him up from school because they got in trouble, dance recital during the middle of the day, always something. But when it comes to ordinary normal people who don’t have kids, it feels like there’s a lot more scrutiny. Why do you need a doctor’s appointment in the middle of the day? Why do you need to go pick up a prescription at lunch time, like why can’t you work through lunch?

But also, when it comes to employment, it feels like there’s a lot of preferential treatment for people with children. Oh that person has kids / children! They need the job a lot more. They have a little girl! Clearly they need it more than the the person who has a disabled spouse, because kids are way more important than an adult dependent! We can’t fire this person, they have kids! Let’s choose someone who doesn’t have a family. Like, stuff like this. Why is there so much preferential treatment to people who have children? Is this some sort of utilitarian thing? The least number of people affected?

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    In a way, yes. Good healthy families are a core of a functioning society. However some examples you gave:

    Why do you need a doctor’s appointment in the middle of the day?

    Unless you’re in a society where doctors are available in the evening, this is a silly question

    Why do you need to go pick up a prescription at lunch time

    Again, depends on the pharmacist’s opening hours

    like why can’t you work through lunch?

    This is just stupid completely

    They need the job a lot more. They have a little girl!

    This makes sense, as again, someone with a child needs to provide for a family

    Clearly they need it more than the the person who has a disabled spouse, because kids are way more important than an adult dependent!

    This is stupid and a disabled spouse or any dependent should also be taken into consideration

    We can’t fire this person, they have kids! Let’s choose someone who doesn’t have a family.

    This makes sense. Some people need more money than others. That’s a basic fact. You or I would find more value in £1000 than a billionaire would.

    Society flourishes when there are more middle class families flourishing. (By “more” middle class, I mean raising people to the middle class and maintaining those who are as well.) It is natural order that we should make society an easier environment to have a family in, rather than harder. Lest you end up like Japan or China with a declining population

    Society was wrong when it started to hate women who had more kids and lived off of child benefits (and maybe a husband’s wage helping as well). If they’re actually doing a decent job at parenting, let them.