Living Car Free - How many children do you have?

I don't have children, but I'm fully of the opinion that one can live car-free without children. I live in an area without good public transportation, and A LOT of people who refuse to walk or bike. I hear all day long that they have to have a car because they have __ children. Must they have a car?

No kids, and no public transportation where I live either.

I've been car-free for almost 4 years, and I have a 10-y-o daughter (and a 5-y-o nephew who latches onto me like he was mine). She rides in a car about 1-2x/week (bro-in-law picks her up from after-school karate, sometimes church w/ him & my sis), other than that, she's on the bike every chance she gets. When the weather gets too cold, we ride the bus.

(A few years ago, we took a bus trip in Feb. to the LBS, who had ordered a TDF DVD for me. Despite an unexpected snowstorm the night before, we went as planned. Stopped along the way to grab a bite to eat, but the storm had closed the place without notice. We walked 1/4-mile through foot-deep snow to a grocery that had a deli, ate lunch, caught the next bus to the LBS, and did our business. She still remembers that as an adventure!)

If we had NO alternative but bike & bus, I would alter our schedules to accomodate. But it IS possible to function w/o a car; you just need to teach your child NOT to be a store-bought princess!

I have no children, but I see people with strollers on the bus all the time.

I don't have children, but I'm fully of the opinion that one can live car-free without children. I live in an area without good public transportation, and A LOT of people who refuse to walk or bike. I hear all day long that they have to have a car because they have __ children. Must they have a car?

Children always were used for a number of reasons for adult behavior. I have no children myself since I made a informed and best reasons for me not participating back when I was younger and in the marriage/child rearing market. Children were used for latching onto men as a ball & chain when a woman wanted to marry, a wepoen when the divorce occured, lack of a life when the adult person failed in society, a badge of honor when the person had no other item to show to others (father of five, mother of 15), or simply a lack of forethought when things were heating up in the past. And you are assured of free food, shelter, and other benefits if you just bring another life into the world. Cars, in the other hand, required thinking about them before they arrive, almost everybody has one, paying through the nose to maintain them, status symbol, and cost like anything just like a baby. And no one will be down on you for owning a resourse stealing status symbol to support those hungry mouths to feed. Cars and children do go hand in hand. They feed off each other.

But here in the inner suburbs and cities, the public transportation is jammed with whole extended poor families, including strollers filled with even newborn babies. Who in their right minds would bring a defenseless newborn aboard a germ filled bus or train?

Who in their right minds would bring a defenseless newborn aboard a germ filled bus or train? Wise people who want their kids to have a strong and "smart" immune system, as opposed to a slew of allergies?

We live in the age of allergies (caused by oversterile environments), not in the age of infections.

Who in their right minds would bring a defenseless newborn aboard a germ filled bus or train?

ok - i don't have kids - but one of my new best friends is my beautiful 15 month old niece. I couldn't be prouder of my sister's parenting skills. Along with her daily schedule of reading, playing, and other baby/toddler stuff she's constantly informing my niece of what she's doing: i.e. if playing with a flower she's telling her the name of the plant, - same with body parts, people, etc.

But one thing she's not is a germaphobe. While of course my niece wouldn't go play on the floor of a public restroom she's smart enough to realize the the world and its surfaces have germs - plain and simple. She's not petrified of my niece exploring, touching things, and interacting with life in general.

I've ridden the Subways in Mexico City and Buenos Aires and in both places saw mothers breast feeding their babies on in their seats. I'm sure those kids will turn out fine. And I'd bet a McDonald's playplace is far more germ laden than a bus or subway.

also as mentioned I don't have or want kids, and the only reason I'd consider adopting a child is to piss off Focus on the Family. As of yet that's not prompted me to start the paperwork -but here's a picture of my niece (http://www.futuregringo.com/amsterdam/lilichess1.JPG) -

and her in Amsterdam (http://www.futuregringo.com/amsterdam/lilibybikes.JPG)

So its really fruitless to think I'd find a kid any cuter than her huh?

I'm not car free but I'm using my bike more and more every day. I have an 8yo boy and a 1yo girl. I haul the girl to all nearby parks on a trailer, she loves it. In fact, she like it more than riding in the car (she hates car-seats). The school bus picks/drops the kid just a few houses down the street, no problem there.

I have multiple grocery stores and a hospital in a 4 mile radius. I think, for normal daily living, it can be done. But I would keep at least one car for emergencies and special occasions. Things like the baby getting sick in the middle of the night during a winter thunderstorm... or taking the kid to a soccer game final, 4 counties away.

Who in their right minds would bring a defenseless newborn aboard a germ filled bus or train?Happens here all the time. Unless we're talking about MRSA filled buses and trains, I'd echo the earlier replies to this and say it's actually good for them. :)

Did you know that your keyboard can have more "bad" germs than toilet seat (http://www.which.co.uk/reports_and_campaigns/computers_and_internet/reports/computers/bacteria_news_article_557_137708.jsp)?

--J

Happens here all the time. Unless we're talking about MRSA filled buses and trains, I'd echo the earlier replies to this and say it's actually good for them. :)

Did you know that your keyboard can have more "bad" germs than toilet seat (http://www.which.co.uk/reports_and_campaigns/computers_and_internet/reports/computers/bacteria_news_article_557_137708.jsp)?

--J

How about Cellphones (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=2273311)? I see plenty of infants "gnawing" on mom's cellphone:innocent:

I lived car light with my two. We used to ride to school together in the mornings, and grandpa would walk the youngest one home in the afternoons; great thing about neighborhood schools!.

Aaron:)

I don't have children, but I'm fully of the opinion that one can live car-free without children. I live in an area without good public transportation, and A LOT of people who refuse to walk or bike. I hear all day long that they have to have a car because they have __ children. Must they have a car?

If we decide to have kids and are still in Madison, we'll likely get *a* car, at least til we're done with tiny babies in winter. A tiny baby is too small to handle extreme temperatures well for long periods (if your winter temperatures range below zero F, it counts as extreme... those temperatures can do real damage to an adult and a baby can't tell you if it hurts). They also don't handle jolts well. The alternatives to a car are all a bit awkward. Add in that new parents are often very sleep deprived, and they may not have the energy to handle all errands by bike. Even if they do, sleep deprivation messes up your judgement. And yes, a fitter person will do better... but not everyone is fit enough and post-partum depression is a real issue. Build your plans around the worst case scenario so you've got some slack.

We could have my partner take over most of the outside errands on his bike. I'd go stir crazy in winter and get depressed (my SAD is helped by exercise). So that's a non-starter. For a family where the woman's mental health didn't depend on lots of excercise, it might work better.

My partner could work from home on errand days, so there was an adult to keep an eye on the baby. Then I could do errands, get my exercise and life would be ok. For many people, this just isn't an option. Some jobs just don't have a schedule that adapts to tiny babies.

We could get a box-bike like a bakfiets and use a winter cover. I can't lift one, so we'd need to be in a building where the bike storage solution is not "carry your bike up and down stairs". This is more flexible for the average family, but you would need a good location. It does take more energy to drive a 100lb bike than a 30lb one. Other large cargo bikes have similar issues, and are not well set up for tiny babies in winter. New mothers do not have the energy to kludge something together.

Carsharing could work, but in low density areas, they tend to not take off. Even urban areas with good mass transit tend to have minimal carsharing options.

So yes, if you're not in a relatively dense urban area, you may well need a car for a few years while your children are small. Once the youngest is in the 3-4 age range, a car should be optional again. The degree of car optional with children does not depend on how strong the parents are, it depends on the kids. Illnesses that are minor for an adult can make things very difficult for a child.

Good point(s) Torrilin...

My mom was car free with 4 of us, fortunately at the time we lived in a fairly temperate climate and most stuff was with in cycling/walking range. BTW mom has never ridden a bike! Taxi cabs can always be added to the transportation mix for occasional use. I can recall more than one occasion when mom would have to haul my baby sister to the clinic for some reason and would call a cab. We also used cabs for bi-monthly shopping trips, in between I was sent to the store to pickup necessary stuff with a wagon or bicycle with baskets, IIRC I was around 12 at the time.

Aaron:)

I'm not car free but I'm using my bike more and more every day. I have an 8yo boy and a 1yo girl. I haul the girl to all nearby parks on a trailer, she loves it. In fact, she like it more than riding in the car (she hates car-seats). The school bus picks/drops the kid just a few houses down the street, no problem there.

I have multiple grocery stores and a hospital in a 4 mile radius. I think, for normal daily living, it can be done. But I would keep at least one car for emergencies and special occasions. Things like the baby getting sick in the middle of the night during a winter thunderstorm... or taking the kid to a soccer game final, 4 counties away.

The sick baby at night can be covered by taxi cab...been there done that! For the soccer game, possibly car pool with someone else on the team and offer to kick in for gas...been there done that too!

Aaron:)

7 year old boy, 11 year old boy, and 38 year old boy (me!).

The sick baby at night can be covered by taxi cab...been there done that! For the soccer game, possibly car pool with someone else on the team and offer to kick in for gas...been there done that too!

Aaron:)

Didn't thought about that :thumb: great ideas :thumb:

Who in their right minds would bring a defenseless newborn aboard a germ filled bus or train?

I grew up on a farm, and we had barnyard animals running around. Nuff said :D.

3 and 7 year olds. We're just now buying a car (after two years car-free).

Sure, it can be done, but there are certain conveniences that make a car desirable (going camping, going to the beach, seeing the countryside), particularly when your spouse isn't as into cycling as you are.

It's been interesting -- and I live in a place where it is quite easy to be car-free for day-to-day living -- but it's time...

Thanks, everybody for your replies. I only know of one person with an infant, so I'll cut her some slack, but the rest I think just want their cars. :D

I also happen to live in an area in which the car RULES! My husband was just complaining the other day that you could drive down any street in any neighborhood--even the "bad" neighborhoods where all the houses are falling down and find shiny, expensive cars every 20 feet. :rolleyes: I know that's a different mindset as well.

I tend to think people are just lazy, because I tend to often not give people the benefit of the doubt. (Working on that.) But seriously, I live in a neighborhood with two convenience stores, a few restaurants and two parks within easy walking distance (less than half a mile) and no one walks. I've watched my friends get in their cars and drive one block to get a soda. Then they look at me like I'm the crazy one when I suggest they walk.

(And for the record, I agree that babies need exposure to things that will build immunity. I wouldn't think a bit about taking an infant on a bus or train, etc.)

(And yes, jamesdenver has an adorable niece.)

Our daughter will be 1 year old this coming Saturday!
I think that if I did not have a child when I first discovered this forum, the car free lifestyle would have been more feasible. But with a kid it just isn't possible for me. Groceries, doctor visits, weather, most of our family is 125 miles away, etc. We just need the car for some things. Kudos to those who can do it car free!
But I am living as car free as I can. The wife will be a hard one to convert though.:cry:

Children were used for latching onto men as a ball & chain when a woman wanted to marry, a wepoen when the divorce occured, lack of a life when the adult person failed in society, a badge of honor when the person had no other item to show to others (father of five, mother of 15), or simply a lack of forethought when things were heating up in the past.

Well, I would contend that is the other way around; if anything women want to marry in order to have children, that is why they put up with noisy, ill-behaved men. Do you really think they have children in order to be able to spend their lives taking care of their lazy husband (not to mention the extra burden of the children)?

As to the second point, your children would live on, have children of their own and perpetuate your memory, as well as your name and to some extent your physical and mental features. No matter how nice a car you'll buy, it won't be much fun once you're dead. I know of very few aging people who don't wish they had spent more time with their family. On the other hand, I never heard anyone mourn over not having bought an expensive enough car.

Hi. My babies did just fine riding the bus with me and my husband, even in Madison.;) We were car free before the kids came along and stayed car free. For my kids, being old enough to need a bus pass is a right of passage to becoming a big kid.

No kids that I'm aware of.

The answer is so different for different people that the question is almost meaningless. I have twin three-year-olds and no car. In NYC, that means we can get anyplace where the subway station has an elevator, can't get anywhere if there's no elevator, and can't go anywhere that isn't along a subway line unless we rent a car.

For many people with children, yes, a car is an absolute necessity.

But more to the point, keep in mind that the answer "I need a car because I have kids" tactfully ends unwelcome conversations with bicycle-enthusiastic non-parents. I realize this will offend a few people, but if you're not a parent, your opinions about parenting are pretty much noise.

The way the infrastructure is set up in the U.S., I would say that living in area that supports being car-free with kids is very much the exception. Sure, in some places it could be done. But the vast majority of this country is not set up this way. Everything is too far apart, on roads typically not suitable for children to walk or bicycle, and most people have no mass transit system.

I have two kids. Evil and Lesser.

Child-free is the way to be!

Wise people who want their kids to have a strong and "smart" immune system, as opposed to a slew of allergies?

Educated people know that newborns don't have any immune system to speak of when they are born and that you need to be very careful not to expose them to anything at first... but I don't think this lasts very long. Maybe a few days?

Educated people know that newborns don't have any immune system to speak of when they are born and that you need to be very careful not to expose them to anything at first... but I don't think this lasts very long. Maybe a few days?
Traditional midwives recommend 30 days where you're not exposing them to an onslaught of non-home flora. That is assuming the baby is breastfed, however.

Educated people know that newborns don't have any immune system to speak of when they are born and that you need to be very careful not to expose them to anything at first... but I don't think this lasts very long. Maybe a few days?

Just don't let people on the bus (or elsewhere) touch your newborn with unwashed hands. Newborns unlike older babies and toddlers do not stick everything in their mouths. Also newborns do have a functioning immune system, it just isn't a fully mature one. If you have an older child, you are pretty much screwed on avoiding germs anyway.

Our daughter will be 1 year old this coming Saturday!
I think that if I did not have a child when I first discovered this forum, the car free lifestyle would have been more feasible. But with a kid it just isn't possible for me. Groceries, doctor visits, weather, most of our family is 125 miles away, etc. We just need the car for some things. Kudos to those who can do it car free!
But I am living as car free as I can. The wife will be a hard one to convert though.:cry:

Happy birthday, Little Miss talleymonster! :love:

I have a 13-month-old daughter, and am in a similar situation. I work (and bike commute!) full-time. I go as car-lite as I can on my weekends. I'm trying to get her used to the helmet and the bike trailer, but in true toddler fashion, she is being as contrary as possible about the whole thing.

I have a feeling that the older she gets, the more car-free days we'll have.

I have a wife who thinks she needs a car, she has one. Kids gone, my daughter thinks she needs 2 cars??????

I have one, just turned 18, not interested too much in driving since everything we need is in walking distance except church and my mother/mother in law. Groceries get done once a month in a lrg car run, and by bike for weekly stuff

I'm child-free, thankfully. I think a lot of people feel they have to get married and have children. It's one thing if that's what you want, but it's not a requirement! To be rather blunt, I want a child as much as I want a kick in the face, daily. But then again, I've never really been comfortable around kids.

I have exactly the number of kids I want: zero.

Happily childfree.

I have twin three-year-olds and no car. In NYC, that means we can get anyplace where the subway station has an elevator, can't get anywhere if there's no elevator, and can't go anywhere that isn't along a subway line unless we rent a car.


I think this is the reason many people think they need a car: because they think you need a pram to move your already almost grown up children. I am sure your three-year-olds have some condition that prevents them from walking, but in many cases I think people just don't realize that children also have legs. Some people ride bicycles before they are three, and all healthy children walk long before that. The clever thing about children is that once they are too heavy to carry, they are also old enough to walk.

In short:it is true that you probably need a car to carry a pram, but you don't need a pram to carry a child!

I think this is the reason many people think they need a car: because they think you need a pram to move your already almost grown up children. I am sure your three-year-olds have some condition that prevents them from walking, but in many cases I think people just don't realize that children also have legs. Some people ride bicycles before they are three, and all healthy children walk long before that. The clever thing about children is that once they are too heavy to carry, they are also old enough to walk.

In short:it is true that you probably need a car to carry a pram, but you don't need a pram to carry a child!

Twin three-year-olds.

Twice a day.

About a mile and a half each way.

In New York City.

During rush hour.

In all weather conditions: sleet, rain, snow, heat.

No matter whether one slept.

Or the other slept.

Or neither slept.

Or one ate.

Or the other ate.

Or neither ate.

Or whether one or both parents slept at all.

Without you, I'd have thought that looked more like a forced march, with both passive and active resistance from one or both children, and likely injury on at least a weekly basis. Thank god you were here to tell me I don't need a stroller.

I forgot how many kids you have Gustavo.

-D

Two children, but I did not raise them carfree, but they were raised to walk or ride a bike as much as possible. My thirtysomething daughter, when pulling a steep hill on our last family bike ride, remarked how she fondly remembers riding in the rear childseat of her mothers bike, just having to sit back, watch the scenery go by, and wishing she could do it again. :D
Both my children have cars, but they each have a 40 mpg compact, and my daughter carpools to work with my wife.

Twin three-year-olds.

Twice a day.

About a mile and a half each way.

In New York City.

During rush hour.

In all weather conditions: sleet, rain, snow, heat.

No matter whether one slept.

Or the other slept.

Or neither slept.

Or one ate.

Or the other ate.

Or neither ate.

Or whether one or both parents slept at all.

Without you, I'd have thought that looked more like a forced march, with both passive and active resistance from one or both children, and likely injury on at least a weekly basis. Thank god you were here to tell me I don't need a stroller.

I am not saying it will ever be easy to travel or commute with young twins, but why make it even harder by carrying the pram around? You are already using the metro, aren't you? That wasn't my idea. It just seems like an added inconvenience to take the pram, in addition to the children. My grandmother lived in the city, had no license and would always take us in the metro, several times a week. I don't think she would have managed to take a huge pram as well, especially not during rush hour.

Pram use has always seen to me a bit like car use, in many cases people use them from old habit, not because it is more convenient.

I am not saying it will ever be easy to travel or commute with young twins, but why make it even harder by carrying the pram around? You are already using the metro, aren't you? That wasn't my idea. It just seems like an added inconvenience to take the pram, in addition to the children. My grandmother lived in the city, had no license and would always take us in the metro, several times a week. I don't think she would have managed to take a huge pram as well, especially not during rush hour.

Pram use has always seen to me a bit like car use, in many cases people use them from old habit, not because it is more convenient.

How far can your kids walk on their own and what age are they?

-D

I am not saying it will ever be easy to travel or commute with young twins, but why make it even harder by carrying the pram around?

It's not harder. It's not even just "more convenient"; it's the difference between being able to get where we need to go and not being able to.


Pram use has always seen to me a bit like car use, in many cases people use them from old habit, not because it is more convenient.

So let's see...

You have no understanding of the people, the terrain, the weather, the context, the needs, the intent, the capabilities, or the general situation, but you're giving unsolicited advice anyway, avoiding questions about how many children you have, and basing flimsy arguments on memories of what your grandma did.

Just guessing here. Male, mid-20s, road bike?

It's not harder. It's not even just "more convenient"; it's the difference between being able to get where we need to go and not being able to.

So let's see...

You have no understanding of the people, the terrain, the weather, the context, the needs, the intent, the capabilities, or the general situation, but you're giving unsolicited advice anyway, avoiding questions about how many children you have, and basing flimsy arguments on memories of what your grandma did.

Just guessing here. Male, mid-20s, road bike?

Seriously, can you explain to me how it can always be more convenient to add a pram to the stuff you lug around? I do want to know, because I can't see it. I know that it's a nightmare to take a pram rush hour commuting in the metro. I don't even use the metro because I don't like such crowded places. But most children take up much less space than a pram, and if you go by public transport, they won't have to walk very far, basically only from the bus stop to the house. I am not suggesting you walk all the way you know.

Please note that I am not saying a pram is ALWAYS inconvenient, just that, like cars, I think they tend to be over-used.

So when is the pram or stroller absolutely necessary to go where you want to go?

Please also explain what my choice of bicycle has to do with this...

It is true however, I do have a road bikes. And a mountain bike, a fixie and a 'cross. No car though. I am not in my twenties.

Even though it was a while ago, I know for a fact that my father was very particular about us not riding in strollers once we could walk, which we did very early.

Seriously, can you explain to me how it can always be more convenient to add a pram to the stuff you lug around?

It's a nonsensical question. The stroller isn't ADDED TO anything. It's the means of conveyance. The children, supplies, snacks, etc. all go in it.


if you go by public transport, they won't have to walk very far, basically only from the bus stop to the house.

Right.

That's a mile and a half each way. Three miles total per day, year-round, in all weather conditions. Try to pay attention. I already said this.

It's about a quarter-mile from home to the subway, and about a mile and a quarter from the subway to preschool.

Total distance traveled, including the subway, is something like 20 miles/day.


Please note that I am not saying a pram is ALWAYS inconvenient, just that, like cars, I think they tend to be over-used.

You're backpedaling. When we started this, you knew better than I did what my children could or couldn't do.


So when is the pram or stroller absolutely necessary to go where you want to go?

Any time we want to go more than a few blocks, especially when on a tight schedule.


I am not in my twenties.

Sad.

On the subject of stroller use, I never liked them. My kids are 3 years apart, so I carried the baby in a sling and the preschooler walked with me. It did require some creative conversations. For a long time, the walk between our home and the bus stop was a rain forest adventure with many invisible animals.

It also depends on the kid, my older kid has always had a crazy amount of stamina. We rarely ever used a stroller with her. The younger one, just runs out of energy sooner. He regains it fairly quickly, but he needs to take more frequent breaks. When we'd be walking further than he could manage, we'd take an umbrella stroller along.

There are plenty of parents, as well as non-parents, who think strollers are overused. I've seen some lovely flame feasts on the subject at parenting boards.

Seriously, can you explain to me how it can always be more convenient to add a pram to the stuff you lug around? I do want to know, because I can't see it. I know that it's a nightmare to take a pram rush hour commuting in the metro. I don't even use the metro because I don't like such crowded places. But most children take up much less space than a pram, and if you go by public transport, they won't have to walk very far, basically only from the bus stop to the house. I am not suggesting you walk all the way you know.

Please note that I am not saying a pram is ALWAYS inconvenient, just that, like cars, I think they tend to be over-used.

So when is the pram or stroller absolutely necessary to go where you want to go?

Please also explain what my choice of bicycle has to do with this...

It is true however, I do have a road bikes. And a mountain bike, a fixie and a 'cross. No car though. I am not in my twenties.

Even though it was a while ago, I know for a fact that my father was very particular about us not riding in strollers once we could walk, which we did very early.

I'll start by saying that every child, every parent, and every family is different. Going without a stroller worked well for your parents when you were a kid. Still, if I had three-year-old twins, I'd probably put them in a stroller. Three year olds have the potential to run very quickly, to places that parents don't want them to go (like the street). They also have the potential to plop down on the ground, throw a tantrum, and then have to be carried. If one twin chooses one option, and the other twin chooses the second option, a parent traveling alone would be in a huge bind.

If one twin chooses one option, and the other twin chooses the second option, a parent traveling alone would be in a huge bind.

Especially since one of them weighs 50 pounds and it's all muscle.

Seriously, can you explain to me how it can always be more convenient to add a pram to the stuff you lug around? I do want to know, because I can't see it.

You. Cannot. Be. Serious.

Regardless of its 'necessity', you can't see the advantage of having one thing to hold everything, instead of carrying three bags while chasing after your (oops, I mean "a") kid?

But I'll humor you and list conveniences: speed, safety, comfort, and it provides a nice place to nap.

The sick baby at night can be covered by taxi cab...been there done that! For the soccer game, possibly car pool with someone else on the team and offer to kick in for gas...been there done that too!

Aaron:)

If you live in a large city where you don't know your neighbors, you learn to be independent and have access to things that liberate you from dependence from others. That includes a car to take you to the hospital in the middle of the night or transit strike. When my father had heart attacks and the resulting surgery, there were no cabs, buses, trains, rental cars, nice friends, or neighbors around. I learned the hard way that if you are to call for these things, you were in for a very long wait or no service if at all. So if you have a small infant, or an elderly person, you better have a dependable car at your disposal or whim. I would not have it any other way.


Well, I would contend that is the other way around; if anything women want to marry in order to have children, that is why they put up with noisy, ill-behaved men. Do you really think they have children in order to be able to spend their lives taking care of their lazy husband (not to mention the extra burden of the children)?

As to the second point, your children would live on, have children of their own and perpetuate your memory, as well as your name and to some extent your physical and mental features. No matter how nice a car you'll buy, it won't be much fun once you're dead. I know of very few aging people who don't wish they had spent more time with their family. On the other hand, I never heard anyone mourn over not having bought an expensive enough car.

I did not have an overwhelming push to marry someone who did not deserve the title of "father" if they were not mature enough or had some sort of booze or drug problem, abusive history, or just plain crazy. I could live with a noisy, lazy guy providing he did not have the above stated problems. And the guys I have dated over the last few years had some or all of the above. A lazy noisy guy is a bed of roses compared to what I seen.

As for pushing my genes & memory to the next generation, all I have to do is try to remember the previous ones (grandparents and beyond them) to get a feel of who will remember me when I am gone (probably no one-as I don't even know my own grandparents). I was and still am very scared of what the next generation after me will face to forever dampen any desire to perpetuate the following generation. I worry and very frightened for the following generations following me-had I chose to bring them into the world. No health care, no chance in hell of going to college, no stable employment, no money, no future-just gangs, drugs, and free sex awaits them. I can sleep at night knowing that no child will suffer because of some misplaced "maternal instinct" needing to be fulfilled-at an innocent child's or children's expense.

If you live in a large city where you don't know your neighbors, you learn to be independent and have access to things that liberate you from dependence from others. That includes a car to take you to the hospital in the middle of the night or transit strike. When my father had heart attacks and the resulting surgery, there were no cabs, buses, trains, rental cars, nice friends, or neighbors around. I learned the hard way that if you are to call for these things, you were in for a very long wait or no service if at all. So if you have a small infant, or an elderly person, you better have a dependable car at your disposal or whim. I would not have it any other way.

For a heart attack, stroke, or other immediate emergency, call an ambulance. The paramedics/emts will be able to get there and start treatment quicker than trying to drive your personal auto to the hospital.

For something like croup or a gash with controlled bleeding, you have a several hour time frame for getting to the hospital. My younger child has managed to need after hours and emergency care more times than I can remember.

Also, talk to your neighbors. Knowing people is important for a host of reasons that have nothing to do with cars. People in large cities are absolutely capable of being friendly and helpful to each other.