Some ‘responsibility-sensitive' theorists of justice have argued that because parents are responsible for the existence of children, only they are responsible for the costs of those children. Others have argued that because children are akin to public goods, the costs of children should be socialised between parents and non-parents. I argue that both analyses are incomplete. To focus only on costs neglects that I should receive the benefits that flow from my choices. The relevant benefit of having children is demographic renewal, ergo parents should receive the benefits of demographic renewal to the exclusion of non-parents. However, because demographic renewal is embedded in children, it presents itself as a non-excludable public good, motivating the argument for cost socialisation. But this is not a necessary conclusion. I argue that a case for directing to parents the hypothetical market price of demographic renewal can be made by reference to Ronald Dworkin's theory of distributive justice, Equality of Resources. In my talk, I explain how Dworkin's principle of abstraction grounds fertility rate targeting as a price discovery mechanism, why a state might choose various forms of parental compensation, and why cost socialisation is appropriate only between parents.
