All original content (c)
Ben Cremeens

Where does raising a family fit in under Objectivist philosophy, or any rational egoist philosophy, for that matter? The only children in Rand's most popular novels were a couple of almost-parenthetically mentioned bright-eyed youths that Dagny Taggart met in Galt's Gulch in Atlas Shrugged. Rand herself had no children, claiming she need all her time and energy to work. The only parents mentioned in detail are the mothers of Peter Keating (The Fountainhead) and Hank Rearden (AS): not a pretty picture.

As we look in the October 1962 issue of The Objectivist Newsletter, we find we are not the first to attempt to reconcile the idea of having families with the idea of putting one's own interests first. In the "Intellectual Ammunition" Department, we find the question of a reader:
"What are the respective obligations of parents to children and children to parents?"

Obligations of Parent to Child

Under Objectivism, Parents are obligated to take care of their children for essentially two reasons:

• If it were not for the action of the parents, the child (a human being) would not exist.
• The young child cannot exist independently.

Leaving out the point that the parents have much to gain from such a relationship, the parents "owe" it to the child to raise him, because after all, he didn't ask to be born. In the words of Nathaniel Branden, "The fact that the parents might not have desired the child, in a given case, is irrelevant in this context; he is nevertheless the consequence of their chosen actions--a consequence that, as a possibility, was foreseeable."

What exactly are these obligations? The obvious ones are the material needs (food, clothing, shelter, etc.), and then there is the essential responsibility. The parent is to prepare the child for independent survival (independence is one of the essential attributes of man qua man). Once the child is capable of independent survival, the parents' obligations are ended. In layman's terms: once he can hold down a job, the parents can tell him to hit the road.

Reconciling RationalEgoism with Junior's Braces

Many newcomers to Objectivism would ask "wouldn't it be wrong to sacrifice in order to take my child to the orthodontist?" The proper answer would be, "Only if your kid (and his well being) is of no value to you whatsoever." Branden expands on this idea:

"If parents forgo other purchases in order to provide for their child's necessities, their action is not a sacrifice, and they have no right to regard it as such. One of the cruelest injustices that parents can perpetrate is to reproach a child for being a financial burden or for requiring time and attention, as if the child's legitimate needs were an imposition on them..."

Obligations of Child to Parent

While the parents' obligations stem from their adherence to the virtue of Integrity, the child's obligations stem from the virtue of Justice. As the child understands more and more about the world around him, it is his job to recognize that "much of what he receives, above the ordinary, is an expression of his parents' benevolence and affection" and should be reciprocated with consideration and general good will. The child should not expect his parents to live solely for his sake and "may not expect them to relinquish every other interest and value in order to work at satisfying any wish he may chance to conceive."

While Justice requires that the child understand that their parents are more than just a free meal ticket, it does not require that they take care of their parents after they have "left the nest". The food, clothing, and shelter that the child recieved from his parents were a result of the parents following their actions through to the end, they were not a loan to be repaid at a later time. He didn't ask to be born; "[t]here can be no unchosen obligations of this kind."

Reconciling Rational Egoism with Mamma's Retirement Home

For many of the same reasons as buying Junior's braces, one can take care of one's parents without turning one's back on the principles of Objectivism. Another quote by Branden:

"If, however, [his parents] had treated [the child] at all well and if he has maintained cordial relations with them, he properly would wish to help them to the extent that he reasonably and non-self-sacrificially can do so."

Blood Ties are not Blank Checks

Family members are usually predisposed to feel benevolence toward each other. For instance, I happen to feel that my father happens to be one good-lookin' sonuvagun; the fact that we are the spitting image of each other helps in my appraisal. However it is to be noted that having similar genes does not allow for "moral blank checks".

"Emotions are not causeless. Love, respect, admiration have to be earned."

Back to the main Objectivism Page

This page contains non-copyrighted information that is completely worthless, as well as copyrighted material (see citations). If you want to reproduce this page in any other manner, I would prefer that you ask my permission.