Moral Responsibility

[Koustubh]

I am not clear just what a parent's moral responsibility entails. Assuming that the welfare of one's child is a value, it would be a value like several other (a successful career for instance). A rational person prioritizes his efforts by weighing his values. What does moral responsibility mean over and above this?

[DavidOdden]

I am not clear just what a parent's moral responsibility entails. Assuming that the welfare of one's child is a value, it would be a value like several other (a successful career for instance). A rational person prioritizes his efforts by weighing his values. What does moral responsibility mean over and above this?

The most important addition is the integration of facts of reality, which leads to this hierarchy of values. For example, if in fact your job is so important to you that you can't spare 20 minutes to play catch or talk basic epistemology and number theory with the darling little rugrat, you should consider whether reality tells you that you should not be trying to raise a kid. But you should also not destroy your life for the sake of a questionable improvement in the life of your spawn, for example, you should not sell all your possessions and move into a tent in order to send your average child to a really expensive Clever Kids school. When you make a choice, that should be a long-term choice, meaning that if you decide to have a child, that should mean that you recognize what is required to raise a child and have compared that to what you know that you can do. You may, of course, be wrong on both accounts.

I think some people make the mistake of seeing "having a child" as an intrinsic good, an end in and of itself, so they can't relate their current actions to some long-term goal. If you conceptualize child-having as "the creation of a fully-functioning rational adult", that, coupled with recognition of the reality of children, entails a bunch of oughts with respect to the child. Those are your moral responsibilities. Willfully shrugging off those oughts is irresponsible.

[Koustubh]

So the choice to have a child is like any other choice. It must be evaluated based on its possible consequences and making the choice results in responsibility for those consequences. The fact that having a child involves bringing a new (and not yet rational) human being into existence is relevant only in evaluating the choice and does not lead to any new principle.

[Wanze]

I'm coming into the conversation a bit late, mostly because I'm new to the forum and I still have training my wheels on.

One thing that I wonder, is whether one's understanding of what it means to be a parent, enters into the equation. For instance, I waited until I was in my mid-20's and financially secure, before I had my one and only child. He is healthy, but is somewhat trying (because we are both rather stubborn). I freely admit that in retrospect, even as an "intelligent" and financially secure adult at the age of 25, I did not fully entail what it meant to be a parent. Therefore, at the time that my wife and I made the decision to have a child, it was a highly ranked value. However, I now realize that the demands made by that value, are burdensome in a way I had not anticipated. I am presently shouldering the responsibility of his fathering as best I can, but I admit that I fall short at times. Does my ignorance, or lack of understanding, nullify any of my moral obligation? I would think not, but I can imagine other situations where ignorance could absolve you of your moral obligation (at least I think I can).

[softwareNerd]

... I freely admit that in retrospect, even as an "intelligent" and financially secure adult at the age of 25, I did not fully entail what it meant to be a parent....

I guess that a large number of parents (if not a majority) would say the same. Before we had a kid, many people told us how it would change our lives, and we imagined all the ways (little and big) in which it would, only to find out -- later -- that we had not imagined even a small percentage of what it takes! But, that's probably a topic for a different thread.

Does my ignorance, or lack of understanding, nullify any of my moral obligation? I would think not, but I can imagine other situations where ignorance could absolve you of your moral obligation (at least I think I can).

Past ignorance cannot absolve one of the moral responsibility to take care of a child. On the other hand, you do not have a moral obligation to drop everything else you value and live solely for the sake of your child. What I mean is this: before you had a child, you anticipated that you were putting this value into your life, but would also giving up certain others (at least in terms of time spent). Then, when the detailed reality of being a parent dawns, one might realize that it is impossible to do all the things you wanted to qua parent and also all the things you thought you would still do apart from being a parent. One definitely does not have a moral obligation to put aside everything else in life, in order to be the perfect parent.

While past ignorance does not excuse current inaction, it could excuse past decisions. So, for instance, if one does something for one's child, thinking it is in his interests, and later finds out that it is not, one cannot fault oneself, except to the extent that one genuinely skipped doing due diligence.

[DavidOdden]

Does my ignorance, or lack of understanding, nullify any of my moral obligation? I would think not, but I can imagine other situations where ignorance could absolve you of your moral obligation (at least I think I can).

I assume that by ignorance, you mean simple ignorance and not that a person was engaging in deception. Your moral obligations are partially predicated on the premise that you're not being defrauded. What kind of context did you have in mind where the fact of ignorance nullifies a moral obligation? I can't think of a clear example. Maybe the question is whether you actually have the obligation. My decision to adopt-a-dog 4 years ago doesn't create a perpetual future obligation to feed and walk him, but my current decision to keep him does.