Children in Jeopardy: Can We Break the Cycle of Poverty?

Yes, we can break the cycle of poverty, Harris argues, but only if ""we"" get more control over those hopeless teenaged mothers. ""Perhaps we should require mothers to have a preconception examination by a doctor so they understand how important the pregnancy and healthy child development are."" The octogenarian philanthropist interprets demographic research to argue that society gains economic advantages by granting abortions to impoverished and teenaged would-be mothers. In what he calls a ""common scenario,"" Harris suggests that a sensible, visionary three-month-old fetus of an unwed, 15-year-old high-school dropout ""would not be pro-life""; she'd want to be aborted. Just when it seems he's advocating a kind of prenatal genocide, he reminds us he's not. ""I clearly understand that while the economics of abortion may be persuasive, voters must first consider the moral and religious aspects of the decision to terminate a pregnancy."" His fundamental case is, of course, unarguable: prevention of poverty beats the ""cure"" of welfare and jail. He doesn't, however, dare ask any 15-year-old mothers if they would rather not have been born, but he seems to believe they should think so. The best stretch of writing--persuasive, interesting, humane--is a long excerpt from a report on poverty by a British analyst. (Oct.)