Well, OK. I wouldn’t want to chain my kids to me, either physically or economically or by some sort of emotional manipulation, so they had to hover nearby while my husband and I progress toward the final ischemic incident. But I don’t think parents can be scorned because they hope for surviving kindred to love and be loved by.
Bill threw me out of the kitchen and said rude things about the eggplant. Maybe I should stop doing his laundry ... although that would probably be worse for me than for him.
I’m not scorning people for hoping for surviving kindred. I’m scorning those that say creating surviving kindred is their primary reason for having kids. There’s a big difference between “I hope my kids will be there for me towards the end” and “I’m having kids to take care of me towards the end”.
There's nothing wrong with hoping your kids will be there at the end of your life. Nor is there anything wrong with taking pleasure in knowing that someone will love you and remember you when you pass on.
But I agree with discostu that choosing to have kids in the first place, based on those reasons, is very shallow and sad. If someone is on the fence about having kids, the deciding factor shouldn't be "Well, I need to have someone to take care of me when I'm old." And it's a terrible approach for trying to inspire others to have children.
It's kind of like the difference between marrying for love and marrying for money. There's nothing wrong with a wife who enjoys a better lifestyle as a result of her husband's superior wealth. But if she decides to marry him because of the money, even if only in part, then I don't think any of us would hesitate to call her the appropriate name for that kind of woman.