The Price of a Child (2013)

Snark is deprecated here (though that was marginally good snark) and reposts are fine if the article is good and hasn't had attention in the last year or so: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html.

This one must recently have been republished or appeared elsewhere since it was posted three times here in the last few days.

Re: The Price of a Child (2013)

#5

Post by Symbiote » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 9:20 PM UTC

jesuslop wrote: post #2

boy for sale, https://frinkiac.com/caption/S08E13/800415

A real family, sold in Chicago in 1948: http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/hammond/sold-off-sib...

Re: The Price of a Child (2013)

#6

Post by ikeboy » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 12:03 AM UTC

Title reminds me of https://mises.org/library/children-and-rights. (Do not endorse).

Re: The Price of a Child (2013)

#7

Post by pavel_lishin » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 12:13 AM UTC

I imagine that people were largely indifferent to the loss of a child in "ye olden times" because it was expected, and they hardened themselves to the probability. Childhood mortality was atrocious back in the day.

Re: The Price of a Child (2013)

#8

Post by erehweb » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 12:31 AM UTC

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I imagine that people were largely indifferent to the loss of a child in "ye olden times" because it was expected, and they hardened themselves to the probability. Childhood mortality was atrocious back in the day.

Maybe not. Listening to the History of England podcast, was pointed to the poem "Pearl" https://interestingliterature.com/2016/02/03/a-short-summary... and http://www.billstanton.co.uk/pearl/pearl_new.htm which includes a father's grieving for his lost two year old daughter. So some evidence that these losses were keenly felt.

Re: The Price of a Child (2013)

#9

Post by ams6110 » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 12:41 AM UTC

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I imagine that people were largely indifferent to the loss of a child in "ye olden times" because it was expected, and they hardened themselves to the probability. Childhood mortality was atrocious back in the day.

I would think "indifferent" is a stretch, but would agree it's something that almost everyone experienced themselves or in their immediate circles.

Another difference is that generally, "pain and suffering" was not seen as deserving financial compensation. That changed at some point last century also, maybe as it became more rare and thus more shocking to judges and juries.

Re: The Price of a Child (2013)

#10

Post by i000 » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 1:48 AM UTC

erehweb wrote: post #8

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I imagine that people were largely indifferent to the loss of a child in "ye olden times" because it was expected, and they hardened themselves to the probability. Childhood mortality was atrocious back in the day.

Maybe not. Listening to the History of England podcast, was pointed to the poem "Pearl" https://interestingliterature.com/2016/02/03/a-short-summary... and http://www.billstanton.co.uk/pearl/pearl_new.htm which includes a father's grieving for his lost two year old daughter. So some evidence that these losses were keenly felt.

Another example are Laments by a great Polish 16th century poet (Kochanowski).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laments_(Kochanowski)