Monday, March 05, 2007

Letter to Boo Chanco


Like you, I was surprised to read of Rosalie Cabinan, the woman from Baseco with 14 children. But where you find cause for chagrin, I find cause for awe. Bearing, birthing, and breeding 14 children is quite a feat, don't you think?

Granted, Ms. Cabinan may not fit your vision of responsible parenthood, but you haven't asked the essential question: is she happy? The answer to that, I'm afraid, we cannot divine from numbers alone.

One can have a baby by accident. Or two babies. Or even three. But when you have fourteen children (not counting the four who died), they cannot all be accidents. In an article in The Economist some years back, it was said that poorer families tend to have more children as a form of social security. That may be what is at work here.

Regardless, would you be able to tell Ms. Cabinan that she could have had Abigail, Berting, and Caloy but she shouldn't have had Dexter, Edith, Frances, Gary, Helen, Ida, Jane, Kristine, Leonor, Maria, and Baby Nora? Against that Iron Woman, not I!


  1. Having more children is a form of social security? Of what kind, I wonder?

    And if the "essential question" is whether Mrs. Rosalie Cabinan is happy, then conversely, the question of whether her children are happy is equally important. Let's go ask Abigail, Berting, Caloy, Dexter, Edith, Frances,Gary, Helen, Ida, Jane, Kristin, Leonor, Maria, and Baby Nora if they're happy.

    Fourteen children--fourteen human beings needing nurturing and attention. One mother.

    No, I don't think they can really be that happy.

  2. For you, Amateur Misanthrope, the essential question is: are you happy? Because from the name, I would think not.

  3. Ooh, a personal attack in lieu of a proper response. I believe there's a logical fallacy for that. It's called an ad hominem argument. Hmmm. And you obviously miss the irony in my chosen blog name. Besides, the amateur misanthrope is just my blog persona/pseudonym. In any case, Mr. Savant, you still haven't given a relevant response to the question i posed apropos your post above. Do you sincerely think these people whose families are bloated way beyond their financial means could be "essentially" happy? Please, no more fallacies next time.