Jacqui Salmon

Families...and So On, hosted by Washington Post families reporter Jacqueline L. Salmon, is a free-ranging and freewheeling look at the American family. This is the place to talk about the burning issues facing the 21st century family, such as whether the world really needs diaper-wipe heaters.

Join Jacqui to share tips on surviving family life, tell stories, throw out particular problems and then brainstorm solutions. She'll occasionally feature guest experts, such as leading researchers, doctors and parenting educators in the country, who will be available to answer your questions.

This week, Jacqui welcomes guest Jerry Steinberg, founder of "No Kidding," a club for people who choose not to have children. You can visit his web site at www.nokidding.bc.ca.

Jacqueline L. Salmon has been writing about suburban family life ("suburban" being a state of mind rather than a geographic location) for the last four years. She is married, has two children and (natch..) lives in the suburbs.

Jacqui's several lives as a mother have included stints as an at-home mom, working part-time and doing the mega-hour/mega-commute thing. She's also the co-author of three books on parenting and child development.

Below is today's transcript.

Jacqui Salmon: Hello all. I'm here with Jerry Steinberg, and we're ready for your questions. But first here's a little background. In the past couple of years, singles and couples who have decided not to have children have become increasingly organized and vocal about-as they see-being treated as second-class citizens in society and in the corporate world. "Family-friendly" work policies, such as parental leave, day care centers, family health care, are aimed only at parents, they complain. They also say they are often unfairly asked to carry the brunt of the workload, work later hours and otherwise help out their fellow workers who have kids. And this isn't just a vocal minority. 62 percent of U.S. workers are not rearing children under the age of 18. Well, there's the background. Now we'll join Jerry and jump into the fray.

Jacqui Salmon: So Jerry, what do you have against kids?

Jerry Steinberg: Absolutely nothing. In fact, I quite enjoy the company of children from time to time. But not 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. And I don't feel that I need to have my own children to make me a complete person.

Jacqui Salmon: Jerry, tell us about your organization and how it got started.

Jerry Steinberg: "No Kidding!" is primarily a social club for couples and singles who, for whatever reason, have never had children. Some of our members have decided for various reasons not to have children. Others plan to have children sometime in the future. They're just not ready right now. Still others haven't decided and they could go either way. And there are also some members who wanted to have children but weren't able to. And they've all joined No Kidding! to be able to socialize with other child-free adults-people who can talk about things other than children. People who can meet in an hour for lunch and not "two weeks from Wednesday IF one of the kids is feeling better, IF I can get a babysitter and IF I can find the money to afford lunch." People who can chat on the phone for half an hour without 30 interruptions. I formed No Kidding! back in 1984 because I discovered that all of my friends were married or getting married, had kids or were having kids. And it was becoming increasingly difficult to maintain our friendships. Their lives had become so busy and so exhausting they no longer had room for me. And I concluded that I needed some new friends-child-free friends. I tried to find a club for child-free people, and I got nowhere. So I decided to start one and see where it goes.

Jacqui Salmon: No Kidding! has really taken off. I was surprised to see the number of chapters you now have, including one in the Washington area.

Jerry Steinberg: You're surprised? I'm flabbergasted! For the first 10 or 11 years, the Vancouver chapter, which is where I live, stood alone. Once we got our Web site up, people started discovering us and contacting us for information about how they could start a chapter in their city. There are currently 50 chapters all over Canada and the U.S. and even on in Abidjan, Ivory Coast.

Jacqui Salmon: Join us and send in your questions NOW. We'll make every effort to get to them within 15 minutes.

Silver Spring, MD: Jacqui,
Let me commend you on your bravery having Jerry Steinberg as your guest. You will set off a fireworks show not seen since Phyllis Richman's discussion fight over Downtown or Bethesda as the preferred dining choice.
If it's one thing married people with children absolutely HATE, it's someone who doesn't have any. They say we are selfish, lazy, kid hating evil people who are responsible for the decline of "family values". I was told by my college roommate that I wasn't a "real" woman because I didn't have children. (I was 28). My boss at a CPA firm said that it was the single people who were screwing up the morality of the world. (Guess it wasn't the married men cheating on their wives). Never mind that as an overweight woman, most guys were simply not interested in me.
The fact is, many (not all) married people cannot bear to see anyone make a decision that they have not made, whether it be having children, living in the suburbs or buying a overpriced SUV, and in their arrogance, question it as invalid.
Wouldn't it be great if we could respect each other's choices? Oh, and let me say, I love spending time with my nieces and nephews. It's the self absorbed, arrogant ME AND MINE FIRST parents I can do without.

Let the fireworks begin!!

Jerry Steinberg: A kindred spirit! I can't disagree with anything you've said.

Norwood PA: As a mother of a 30 year old son who isn't married and doesn't seem to be in rush, how can I answer those who make statements to me about how wonderful being a grandmother is and what I'm missing? If my son does marry and decided not to have children then I'll really need a good response. I think it's none of anyone's business if a couple decide not to have children.

Jerry Steinberg: My mother, very tearfully, lamented the fact that I wasn't going to make her a grandmother. And I told her, "Mum, I love you and I will do almost anything to make you happy-short of sacrificing my own life. Happiness means different things to different people. And for me, it's coming home to a quiet house and relaxing. For some others, it's coming home to a full, chaotic, noisy, messy house and jumping around with the kids." So I wouldn't simply suggest that you tell people that happiness is defined differently by different people. As long as your son is happy, you should be.

Jacqui Salmon: Jerry, even if our society IS biased toward families, don't you think that's OK. After all, many would argue, the family unit is what stabilizes our society.

Jerry Steinberg: I am a strong supporter of families. But I'll be damned if I am going to have my pocket picked by governments that want to bribe people into making more consuming polluters and I'll be damned if I'm going to be forced to pay so that you can pay a stranger to raise your children. I don't begrudge education taxes, school taxes, but I feel that there are too many people who believe that parenthood begins at conceptions and ends at delivery.

Jacqui Salmon: Well, just for the record, strangers don't raise my children. But I digress....

Boston, MA: I'm 27 and am personally still several years a way from the kids/no kids decision. I am curious about your opinions on day-care benefits for parents and other pro-family benefits. Do you feel child-free workers should have some kind of alternative benefits since they can't take part in these types?

Jerry Steinberg: Absolutely. It's discriminatory to grant a benefit to one benefit or group and deny it (or an equivalent) to another person or group. If parents are going to receive special benefits from their employers, non-parents should receive equivalent benefits. Why should non-parents work harder for less pay?

Cleveland, Ohio: A question for Jerry. My fiancée and I are going to get married in November. He already has two children, and we've decided we don't want any more. Pregnancy just doesn't appeal to me. But how do we tell people to back off and quit asking us when we'll have a baby? I want to be polite but firm, so they will stop bugging us.

Jerry Steinberg: Well, you could do what some No Kidding! members have done. Some No Kidding! members have turned it around and many who have chosen not to have children have concluded that people's pity would be easier to live with than their ire. So they've told people that they can't have children. And many No Kidding! who weren't able to have children got tired of the pity and are now telling people that they don't want children. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't! You might simply throw it back at people and say "That's an awfully personal question, isn't it?"

Jacqui Salmon: Jerry, don't you ever fear that when you're 80 years old, you'll be left with no children to care for you? Do you ever see a day when you--too late--regret your decision? Maybe not this decade, but when you're much older and need care from family members?

Jerry Steinberg: And they call us "selfish." What a terrible reason to add to the world's population-so that there will be some daughter or son to take care of me when I'm older. Who is taking care of elderly people today? I take my dog to visit elderly people in the hospital. The vast majority of them have sons and daughters and grandchildren and even great grandchildren, most of whom they haven't seen in 25 years. There are no guarantees in life! When you are elderly, what's to guarantee that your children will be ready, willing, able and close enough to take care of you?

Arlington, VA: It does seem to me that having children is a personal choice, right up there with whether you choose to work or not once you have children. I am unable to have children and for a variety of reasons we have chosen not to adopt. It seems to me that this is a personal decision, but I feel marginalized by the friends and acquaintances who have children, as if I have made an "evil choice". What is wrong with these self centered people? Why can't we all deal with each others' choices in a fair manner?

Jerry Steinberg: Sounds to me like you need some child-free friends, who won't question your lifestyle or choices.

Downtown DC: I guess this isn't really a question-- more of a cheer of support! I just wanted to say that I think it's wonderful that there's an organization that recognizes that not everyone needs to change their identity to that of "Mommy" or "Daddy" to be happy. Personally, I find the idea of having kids to be both repulsive and terrifying-- which is exactly why I don't plan to have any! I have incredible respect and admiration for those who choose to have kids. It's an amazing thing. But why can't they have the same respect for me?!

My philosophy is that kids are great-- as long as you can give them back to their parents!

Jerry Steinberg: And I'm sure you make a wonderful aunt/uncle, as I do!

Jacqui Salmon: Hey, what happened to all those parents out there? Isn't ANYONE going to defend their pint-sized family members?

Washington Grove: Two questions:

1. Are there really any problems associated with not having kids, beyond being expected to give a little for the benefit of the people who do? Don't the childed view your group as similar to people who can walk complaining about the handicapped getting the good parking spaces?

2. Although childlessness is not exactly the same thing as singlehood, there somewhat related. Does our modern feminist society take a different view of single or childless women -- independent, not caught in traditional gender roles -- than men -- unable to commit, Peter Pan syndrome?

Jerry Steinberg: To me, feminism is all about giving people choices. In order for a person to be truly free, they must be free to make their own choices. 50 years ago, if you were a man, you could be almost anything you wanted to be. If you were a woman, your choices were severely limited-teaching, nursing or mommy. Why do some people insist that EVERYONE must drive a Chevrolet. Why can't people accept alternatives?

Atlanta, GA: Don't have kids, just got married, want them one day. Sorry if the tone got misinterpreted, but you sound pretty hostile. I mean, you should want families to prosper. If this includes tax breaks for them, then it should. What I find appalling is people who say: well, I don't have kids, so why should I care if the schools are good or not? As a member of society, you should want others to be educated, since if they're not, they may be the ones who rob you at gunpoint since they have learned no other way to earn a living (just one example I've seen).

Jerry Steinberg: Exactly. Prisons are overflowing with under-educated people. I fully endorse and support a publicly funded education system. But enough is enough. Why should parents work half time, get paid full-time, while non-parents work overtime for the same pay? For example, vacation date selection: Parents are often given first dibs so they can be with their families. Non-parents are often left the dregs. Meetings: Parents are often allowed to arrive late, leave early or skip meetings all together, while child-free workers are expected to be there on time and stay to the end.

Jacqui Salmon: Well, as someone who worked part-time for years, I don't recall ever being presented with a full-time paycheck for part-time work.

Silver Spring, MD: Jacqui, that's exactly the mentality we question - why does someone have to "defend their pint size family members"? Unlike many parents, we are not attacking someone's choice to parent. Just don't attack us or trivialize us for not parenting. What a long way we have to go for parents to respect those of us without children!

Jerry Steinberg: We should be mutually respectful. I'm not asking parents to subsidize my choice, why should I have to subsidize theirs?

Fairfax, VA: I fully support people not having children. In fact, I often tell folks that in my opinion, having kids just isn't worth it. The expense, the aggravation, the mental anguish, and the time-consumingness of it all is just too disruptive of one's career and goals. I have two children of my own and hope that my efforts have reduced the competition for them. In fact, I know of three couples who've opted to be childless after hearing my kvetching (though I can't claim total credit), so that's at least three potential competitors out of the running! And, yes, I'm aware of my total hypocrisy, but when it comes to my children, I'll give them any edge that I can. Thanks, Mr. Steinberg. Keep it up!

Jerry Steinberg: Thank you!

Child Free in Bethesda: The people to whom I'll listen about children are the ones that are honest. I think most parents are deluding themselves when they say "parenting is so completely fulfilling, you'll never wonder again how to fill up an emotionally empty life!" I want RESPECT. I don't go around saying to the child-burdened "Oh, I'm so sorry for you and the terrible mistakes you made.". I keep my mouth shut.

Thanks for all you do, Jerry.

Jerry Steinberg: Again, we need mutual respect.

McLean, VA: Here's a parent! I waited until my mid-30s to have children, so I know the pleasures of both. I can't relate to the negative feelings expressed here at all. When I take my children (now 9 & 10) out in public, they know how to behave. We've traveled the world together, and no one has complained about their behavior. I'm saving money for my own old age; I wouldn't presume to count on them. I have friends who have children and friends who don't. I don't talk much about my kids with either set of friends. Our friendships are based on other common interests. Whatever happened to tolerance for others? Why all this hostility? Perhaps those who are hostile are less happy with their choices than they claim.

Jerry Steinberg: If I had had friends like you, I probably wouldn't have felt the need to start No Kidding!

Wash, DC: Want to weigh in on some issues:

1. I agree the decision to have/not have kids is personal, and hate when people ask all the time.

2. Your rationale for not supporting fed. funded daycare flies in the face of social policy. I'm all for stay-at-home moms, but the reality is that some parents are single parents (not by choice) and have no choice but to have their child in daycare. Who ultimately suffers if there are no funds? That's right, the kids & society. It's like saying, well, I'm well off enough to afford my retirement, why should I pay into Social Security to support someone who couldn't do what I did?

For the record, I am the last of my friends to marry & have kids (1st one on the way), yet I have friends who are married w/ kids, not married (& never will be), etc. and we all get along without anyone judging the others' lifestyles. Why does everything have to be Us vs. Them? Yes, people on BOTH sides criticize the other, but do we have to constantly perpetuate our differences?

Thanks for letting me vent.

Jerry Steinberg: I feel that single parents need extra help, but why should we subsidize day care for two-parent families? Do they really need that vacation in Hawaii? And do I really have to contribute towards it?

Jacqui Salmon: Vacation in Hawaii?? That's a low blow, Jerry!

Should be working, VA: You are kidding me, right? I can't help but chuckle at this defensive, derisive attitude of yours - who exactly is ostracizing the childless out there? Where is all this defensiveness coming from? As a single working parent, I can say I have never excluded/jeered at/intruded on my single, childless friends' lives with my issues or opinions. And I don't know too many other parents who do, either. We're all just trying to get by in life. LIGHTEN UP!

Jerry Steinberg: Who fills in for you when you stay home with a sick child? Who pays extra taxes (fewer deductions) so that you can benefit from tax policy? Who pays extra health insurance so that all of your kids can be covered? It's the child-free. You're welcome.

Germantown, MD: Jerry,

I have recently become a mom and find I am now closer to my parent friends and have drifted some from my single/non-parent friends, so I can certainly see the benefits of an organization like yours for non-parents (we do tend to drone on about our children). I have two questions:

I respect people who choose not to have children (in fact, I think it is more respectable than people that have kids because they feel they "have" to)and would never think negatively about someone that makes this choice. If you (and your organization) are open-minded, don't you think comments like "coming home to a full, chaotic, messy house" are somewhat negative and condescending?

Also, what types of "equal" benefits do you think employers should give? My non-parent co-worker had major surgery that took her out of the office for four weeks and I covered a project she was working on - how is that unequal? I can see not wanting to pay extra taxes so I can send my child to daycare (which I do not do at this moment), but what inequities are you working to combat?

Jerry Steinberg: While non-parents DO get sick, and have to miss work, parents do so much more frequently, either because of their own health or that of their kids. When an employer establishes an on-site day care center, everyone pays for it-a very few benefit from it. Municipal taxes are based on property values, not the number of residents. Who puts out more garbage, who uses more water? The family of two? Or the family of six? Parents get a better bang for their buck.

Arlington, VA: I once got into a terrible argument with my sister over the fact that college professors get free tuition for their kids (A perk that sounds fine, btw, I have no problem with this in general). However, I asked her what was the equivalent that the childless professors got and she was stunned that this would even be thought of.

Jerry Steinberg: Completely one-sided, isn't it?

Cap Hill: To the McLean parent:

Jerry is right--we need more level-headed people like you. Unfortunately I understand why people get frustrated with other parents who are not as reasonable as you. For instance, some parents here in my office regularly bring their young children to the office and accuse me of being "anti-kid" because I didn't want to hold their little darling--at the office, when I'm trying to get work done.

The other thing that makes me nuts is the arrogant response I get when I say that I haven't decided yet whether or not I want to have children (I'm a 28-y-o- woman): "Oh you will, just wait. You just don't know better now." That is an exact quote, by the way.

Jerry Steinberg: When the child-care provider (the stranger being paid to raise one's kids) can't take the kid/kids, parents often bring kids to work, which is both distracting and dangerous. It's hard to concentrate on the conversation when a toddler is re-arranging your files or checking to see if the yellow push pins on the bulletin board taste different from the red ones! Adult workplaces are dangerous places for kids.

Arlington, VA: I don't have children of my own, but I don't seem to see anything wrong with parents receiving some additional benefits. Back in the days when one-earner households were common, workers received a 'family wage' that allowed them to live on one income. That notion has since evaporated. Most families in the DC metro area simply must have two incomes in order to support themselves. So if a mom or dad has to leave work early to care for a sick child, I have no problem with that.

Jerry Steinberg: So you're working extra so that someone else can work less, and you're not being compensated for it? Is that fair?

Washington DC: What exactly do you mean by 'equivalent benefits'? Should you receive some kind of cash compensation to 'balance' benefits such as parental leave? For that matter, then, should single employees be 'compensated' for not having a spouse on the health plan?
I'm sorry, but the tone of this -is- selfish. Benefits like that are meant to acknowledge that people have different levels of need and responsibility and some need some extras that allow them to work. By your logic, I would guess that if your employer paid to make accommodations for a wheelchair bound employee, you would expect some cash in hand to acknowledge your non-need of those expenses. Ew.
(btw, I'm single and childless, but an Aunt many times over)

Jerry Steinberg: Equivalent benefits might include financial compensation, but should also include flex time, leave time and anything else necessary to restore the balance.

Clifton, NJ: This discussion is an interesting follow-up to the frequent postings about children and working parents. I understand you formed your organization in order to socialize with other childless couples, but do you have any ideas how to balance family and workplace issues? I'm currently without children but plan to have them someday. But I am increasingly resentful of coworkers who consistently leave early, arrive late, take off extra days to be with a sick child who can't go to day care. I'm sympathetic to the situation but I shouldn't have to make up the extra work! Where is the relief for the rest of us -- whose theater tix are wasted staying overtime?

Jerry Steinberg: Right on!

Annapolis, MD: Regarding Jacqi's question about having a child to take care of you later in life. My Mother used to say that I should have kids so I wouldn't be lonely when I got older. That strikes me as a terrible reason to have kids that I'd resent for all the freedom I'd give up.

Just another opinion..

Jerry Steinberg: Get a dog!

Alexandria, VA: What's the contact information for the WDC chapter? I'm a 30-year old, married 8 months, just got a dog, not wanting kids (husband agrees), who'd like more info.

Many thanks, and keep up the good work.

Jerry Steinberg: Please visit the Web site at www.nokidding.bc.ca. We have links on our Web site to other chapters that have Web sites and contact information is available for those chapters that don't.

Jacqui Salmon: We have a link further on up to Jerry's site.

McLean, VA: The military is the worst offender toward the unmarried/childless. The military actually pays service members with dependents a larger salary. For junior enlisted, the pay actually doubles! So the young sailor who decides to stay single makes almost no money and has to live on the ship, while his counterpart with a wife or child earns twice the pay and gets to live off the ship.

I'm not denying that raising kids costs money. But how about paying every service member the same, as happens in the civilian sector? If an individual wants a family, he or she has to budget for it like civilians do.

Jerry Steinberg: It's shocking that an employer would compensate employees on the basis of the lifestyle choices that they've made instead of their contribution to the employer. Would I be justified in demanding more pay because I've decided to spend winters in Hawaii or buy a million-dollar house even though I work less and contribute less than equally paid employees?

Springfield, VA: I have some older friends like you who believe that they either need to wait until they are in their mid 30's to have children or they have decided not to have kids. I totally disagree, but on the other hand who can blame you for not wanting to bring up a child in todays society. Don't you feel like your 'name' and accomplishments won't live on? That is what children are for. You the parent shape their minds, let them grow up forming their own opinions, and they become the future leaders of our society. Don't you feel like your going to be missing something?

Jerry Steinberg: I'm sure Jeffrey Dalmer's parents once felt the same way. I would rather be remembered for my achievements than for simply creating more humans who may or may not make positive contributions to society. I am very content with my legacy.

Fairfax: "Vacation in Hawaii?" Let's work on this from a real-world basis, so we can be reasonable.
I think it's going more than a bit too far to say that parents get paid (apparently with some frequency!) full-time pay for part-time work. I thought parents willingly took the loss of time if they needed to be with their kids, or made it up. I'm sure there are exceptions--just like when we singly people get the flu, or have an emergency, etc. Exceptions run across the board, though they may be situationally different--they're there for everyone.
Secondly, I'd leave America if I found out that our social programs--social security, medical coverage, etc. were to be disbanded. We all pay into the till for the benefit of everyone. YOU benefited from family health coverage, right? Most of us do as children. How else can we insure their health and safety? If we put parents out in the cold, and eliminate any funding to programs for children, we're not sticking it to PARENTS, we're sticking it to KIDS--you know, the next generation?
I can certainly appreciate your frustration with special treatment by employers--so take it up with the employers! And with the derisive comments of 'friends'--so tell them they are out of line! This whole thing comes off as very reactionary.
And yes, I've chosen not to have children. that doesn't mean I don't see why their needs must be accommodated by the adult world.

Jerry Steinberg: Everyone is susceptible to the flu. When I get it, I miss work. But when Child 1 and Child 2 and Child 3 get it, my child-burdened co-worker is absent four times as often. Of course, I benefited from social programs when I was a kid, but I am paying for your children's education. Isn't that sufficient payback?

Downtown DC: Another way of turning the tables on those who think there's something wrong with you if you don't have children: When they ask you about it, just look baffled and say, "Why would I want to do THAT?" like they're the one who made an odd choice. And as for the extra goodies parents seem to get in the workplace, one alternative I've heard of that makes a lot of sense is for companies to give workers a menu of benefits from which to chose. A parent may pick child care and family insurance coverage, I may pick more vacation time. That way it all come out even.

Jerry Steinberg: Yes, the menu system appears to be the most equitable way of compensating workers. And I whole-heartedly endorse it.

Arlington, VA: Jacqui, I don't believe Jerry is aiming his comments at you personally, but you seem to be perceiving them that way. With "full-time pay for part-time work," I believe he meant that parents typically take more paid leave (i.e., use more sick days) than non-parents to care for their children. Yes, it's an exaggeration, but the point is valid.

Jerry Steinberg: I'll pass that along to Jacqui.

Jacqui Salmon: You're probably right, reader.

Reston, VA: Are you attempting to be funny or do you actually have a point to make? The reason why I
ask is that thus far you have engaged in ad homonym and straw man attacks and snarky, smart ass
comments. If you have a point, try making it with reasoned arguments and answer questions
that are put to you. It will always be true that there will be selfish jerks and insensitive
louts on the earth, that is what maturity is for, to protect you against the slings and
arrows of the childish. It seems that, since all of us would rather our tax dollars were
spent differently in some way, that you are merely stamping your feet because you feel
slighted by the fact that there are people in the world who think you make bad choices.
Every choice every person makes is thought to be stupid by someone. Get past the fact that
life is a bit unfair. If you remedy this "imbalance", there will still be plenty more, or will
the fact that you personally don't have to deal with it make it irrelevant. By the way, I am
childless and married, and I am a bit of a misanthrope. I also understand that society favors that which enhances its survival,
i.e., children. Being a human being, I have a vested interest in seeing that the human race
continue and improve, so I understand that favoring/protecting children and parents
may be for the common good. We can all find injustices to rail against, or we can grow up, get
over it and enjoy the lives we have.

Jerry Steinberg: I'm sorry that my rationale has escaped you. As for increasing the human population, imagine a world with fewer people. How breathable the air? How drinkable the water? How spacious the land? We should not be encouraging the burgeoning human population. We are breeding ourselves into extinction. This planet can not provide for more people. Our footprint is WAY too big.

Arlington, VA: My favorites are the ones who, when I tell them I don't want kids, say "oh, you just haven't met the right man yet."

Grrr. If he wants kids, then he's not right for me.

And mindless procreation-- having kids because you think you're supposed to, not because you've thought about it carefully, has got to be the stupidest thing ever.

Jerry Steinberg: Add to that, 'You'll change your mind" and "It's different when they're your own." People must make decisions based on a realistic self-assessment and make choices that they feel are right for them and them alone. NO ONE has the right to influence your choices-no one!

Jacqui Salmon: Due to the big response to Jerry Steinberg, we're going to go a few minutes over to answer some of the remaining questions-although we won't be able to get to them all.

Vienna, VA: This is probably too late to be included but, last I checked, if I take a day off to be with my sick child, it's considered a VACATION day. If I use up to many VACATION days to be with my sick child, I DON'T GET PAID. If I have to leave early to get my sick child, I also am required to MAKE UP THE TIME, meaning I skip lunch and don't have time to read these enlightening discussions!

And, most important, if I abuse the system, I find myself in the unemployment line.

If I run out of vacation days and don't want to find myself in the unemployment line, I have my husband take the next sick child day.

I must also say that I have, over the years, had many co-workers who, come third quarter say Gee, I have 3 vacation days left, guess I'll call in sick the next three Fridays to use them up.

No one thinks twice about their actions. They are vacation days, and they can use them as they wish.

Jerry Steinberg: In some other workplaces, days spent with a child are not deducted. Your system seems fairer than most.

Arlington, VA: Jerry, a lot of the so-called "family friendly" tax subsidies for the childed have been introduced recently (e.g., the per-child tax credit) or are currently under discussion (e.g. subsidized day care). I think a lot of these policies are straightforward vote-buying tactics. Do you think as the baby boomers age, and as fewer people have children, that the voting public will demand that a lot of these subsidies be rescinded?

Jerry Steinberg: Everything a politician says and does is designed to gain votes. It's harder to eliminate a perk once it's established. Unless the number of people receiving those perks and clamoring for more diminishes, thus diminishing the vote.

Germantown, MD: Why are so many people comparing the needs of the handicapped with parents who have children? Have they forgotten that children are a choice?

And for those who say you can't live on one parent's income, I would say that you should start looking at how much of the second income you spend on a second car, day care, meals out or delivered when you're too tired from your job to cook, etc. and then re-evaluate whether you need that second income, or you just want it. If you want kids so much, maybe you should be willing to actually sacrifice something in your life like fancy food or vacations to make a better life for them.

Jerry Steinberg: I couldn't have said it better. Plus the handicapped don't choose to be handicapped.

Laurel, MD: I've heard that the childfree make up a substantial part of the work force and electorate. So what can we do to ensure more equitable treatment of us in the workplace?

Jerry Steinberg: Benefit "menus"-you choose whichever benefits you need and others choose accordingly. That is the only equitable way of resolving the issue.

Jacqui Salmon: Many thanks to Jerry to staying over to answer more questions. And thanks, Jerry, for so, uh, vividly expressing your opinions on life with and without children. Next week we'll tackle a topic that's VERY family-oriented-surviving vacations with your children.