1) Older women have less healthy babies (lower weight, more likely to be obese, downs syndrome, etc) 2) Intelligent, educated women have babies later in life
In order for intelligent women to have more healthy babies, they should be encouraged to have them at a younger age, an age that they're better off studying than raising a child. That's where the baby bank comes in. A woman can have a child while she's young, give it to the bank that gives it to an older couple. Then when she's old enough to start a family she can request another baby out of the bank or similar specifications to the one she put in.-- lagomorph, Apr 02 2010 Kibbutz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KibbutzPrior Art [8th of 7, Apr 02 2010] Where did you get stastistic #2 from? ...sounds a bit opinionated...though the idea is quite halfbaked and I almost like it. [ ]-- xandram, Apr 02 2010 //Older women// Define.-- Jinbish, Apr 02 2010 Is interest paid? [+]-- Aristotle, Apr 02 2010 Would the system include a mechanism to ensure that deposits and withdrawals balance out?-- swimswim, Apr 02 2010 Although this is a good idea we can not bun it since it promotes the idea of babies, a concept we loathe and detest.-- 8th of 7, Apr 02 2010 Nope, no way. --- rcarty, Apr 02 2010 [xandram] It's definitely a fact that educated (I'm not going to speak to intelligent) women tend to have children later in life on average. I don't remember the average difference but it is statistically significant.-- MechE, Apr 02 2010 [ ]
[marked-for-deletion] either it's a "lets all" or your simply putting a name to an existing child-rearing path.-- FlyingToaster, Apr 02 2010 We dispute your [M-F-D], [FT].
This already exists where grandparents take a major role in looking after their grandchildren. Pack-living predators (lions, for instance) oprate a similar regime. Since the females are sisters or close relatives, genes are preserved by caring for sibilg's offspring as well as one's own.
This is extending and formalising the system outside genetic relatives.-- 8th of 7, Apr 02 2010 (EDIT: bun withdrawn; see below)
[+] despite the controversy this is certain to generate. As has been pointed out, a social system that encouraged grandparents to care for grandchildren, given that older people are likely to be either established in their careers and able to take more time for childrearing or are retired, would be a workable response to the dysfunctional current system that prevents young parents from taking the time and energy to raise them correctly, but this is both a more certain method (since some people never get to be grandparents), a system that does not require the participation of grandparents who may not be interested, and a way of bringing the time costs of childcare into the formal economy and the public eye, where they belong, since workers in the informal economy tend to be marginalized and their value dismissed. Also, since I assume the system would rely on open adoptions, it would tend to encourage extended families and closer social ties.-- gisho, Apr 02 2010 [8/7] what's genetic relatives have to do with it ? A young woman has a baby that she gives up for adoption, then later on in life she (and presumably her husband and/or or life-partner) adopt a baby: an existing paradigm.
The only "new" thing is deciding to call a restrictive subsection of the existing adoption system "Baby Bank", which while a cute name, is hardly uniquely descriptive. It might be a bit of productive social engineering to call adoption agencies that, but that's not the idea, and is again a "lets all".
[gisho] they're called "extended families".-- FlyingToaster, Apr 02 2010 I gather it is tricky to adopt babies that meet your desired specs. This is why people wind up getting them from Malawi etc. The piece of this that is novel is the guarantee of a later baby to similar specs. It is so halfbaked I have the sensation of chewing on a lump of wet dough and finding some butter chunks and pockets of unmixed flour within, but I like it.-- bungston, Apr 02 2010 //guarantee of a later baby to similar specs//
I can see the refinement but I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that under existing practices an adopting couple could have a DNA test run and tested for positive traits.
I can also imagine that a "baby bank" would run tests *before* adoption, to screen out desireable factors in the mother that are environmentally, rather than genetically, produced.
lago, are you suggesting perhaps such a "tiered" adoption system ? children of well-off parents in one creche, crack-babies in the other.
still [ ] and still [mfd] "lets all", "baked"-- FlyingToaster, Apr 02 2010 That is the idea, FlyingToaster, yes. But with the goal of intelligent, driven women producing more healthy children rather than giving them the choice between children and career.
With the exception of the initial donations, in order to make a withdrawal you would have to donate a quality infant yourself so that everyone would be guaranteed an infant available to them when they were ready to start a family.-- lagomorph, Apr 02 2010 [lago] in what way is your idea incompatible with current adoption systems available, and for that matter how is it not inferior ?-- FlyingToaster, Apr 02 2010 It's not incompatible with the current adoption system, nor is it intended to replace it.-- lagomorph, Apr 02 2010 Bun withdrawn: upon reading the annotations, there seems to be an emphais in this idea on 'quality' babies. I like, in principle, the idea of a _formalized_ system that allows women to trade a baby born when they're healthy enough to have an easy pregnancy with low risk of age-related genetic defects, but don't have the time to care for a child, for a baby gestated by someone else when they're better able to care for a kid. Even a system designed to match genetics between the babies wouldn't be unreasonable.
But the problems that lead women to delay childbearing are widespread in any affluent society, and don't just apply to upper-class women - and the annotations are making it sound moRe and more like the 'bank' wouldn't be available to lower-class women, even those intellegent and driven enough to want to carve out a challenging career, let alone those who'd just like a little more breathing space while they get their lives in order, finish college, or look for a partner.-- gisho, Apr 02 2010 It's actually exactly those women that it is for, the college aged ones that do not yet have the time or financial means for a child. By quality I'm referring to a lower chance of age related defects.
The details are a bit half-baked.-- lagomorph, Apr 02 2010 the superduper halfbaked part of this is the intrababy relativism: one baby is as good as another. It treats babies like a commodity, and there is no a priori reason why this should not be the case but is not at all the way things are actually practiced. A wonderful half-baked idea in that the issue is brought into focus by the proposed solution.
A scheme like this would be even more helpful for young single mother than for professional ladies, since a dependent baby is a huge economic drag on these young women and avoiding that drag until you are educated and established would be a societal blessing for all involved. Of course one could permanently avoid that drag on resources by not having sex, but we are all descendants of creatures who avoided that solution.-- bungston, Apr 02 2010 mfd tag [marked-unwarranted]. This is a halfbaked idea for an actual invention. It hasn't been done or is not widely known. There's no clear 'let's all' in this idea. It's for a specific category of people. mfds should be judged with at least as much care as we expect of the idea originator. If you're sure an idea is mfd but not sure which of two reasons is why, you may not be a Redneck, but you're probably wrong.
+-- Mustardface, Apr 03 2010 I hope this idea is tongue-in-cheek, because if not, it is morally reprehensible and both socially and ethically irresponsible.
Let me give you a few examples:
12 year olds will worry even less about getting pregnant, knowing they may deposit the child at the bank, once birthed. Many 24 year olds will have several babies’ worth of credits and still no education.
Some pregnant women continue to smoke and drink while with child. What reason would any woman, using your baby bank have, to forego any indulgences? Satisfaction of a job well done? You're bank's babies would be chock full of infants which have been physically and emotionally neglected (to some degree) since conception.
Not to mention my greatest objection: You will be raising a child that is comprised of someone else’s DNA, while *you're* child is being raised by someone else.-- MikeD, Apr 03 2010 The bank doesn't invest the babies and realise time value on them, it just uses them to pay off earlier depositors - so it's really more of a baby Ponzi scheme.-- Wrongfellow, Apr 03 2010 random, halfbakery