In response to the guest column by Michael Hicks in the July 19 News-Sentinel:
Hicks, a professor of economics at Ball State University, uses the terms “unwed mother,” “unmarried mothers,” “unwed moms,” “single moms”, and “those who bear children without partners” throughout. His focus seems to limit itself to the females who carry the baby.
What about the unmarried father, single father, sperm donor, absent father or irresponsible father, who seem surprised or shocked when their intercourse with a female results in her pregnancy? Is this person interested in marrying her and forming a family?
Some are actually proud of impregnating a woman. She is his “baby momma.”. He has proof that his equipment works. This, of course, is a shortsighted view to say the least. I suggest Hicks be more circumspect when addressing a problem as complicated as the American economy.
From an economics standpoint, where are the jobs paying enough to support a family? The ideal family that Hicks is advocating cannot be formed on substandard pay. Big business and our legislators, who seem to be beholden to it, have a large part to play in the downfall of our family units and the middle class that made our country a great economic power.
The unemployed don’t buy goods or pay taxes. Let us not place the blame elsewhere.