It is an interesting dilemma, I think, that the American people are so focused on their rights to privacy but at the same time are so focused on getting government funding for causes of their own interest. It is not my place to say whether this issue or another is more deserving of funding. Berube and Bernstein argue that more government funding should be spent on education and living for disabled peoples. Judith Warner in her Perfect Madness, seems to argue that women should be getting some form of governmental support to raise a family in America (much like some European countries). A question that I have is a question of rights and obligations: Who in our society is obligated to care for disabled peoples? If everyone is obligated (as Berube is wont to believe) to aid in the support of these disabled peoples then who has the right to dictate what is best for them? If everyone is obligated to aid in the support of disabled people does everyone also have the right to know about their lives?

I feel like Berube walks a very fine line between a desire for privacy and a desire for fiscal aid. It is my opinion that a society should help raise a child, much like the African proverb suggests. Therefore it is of my opinion that the some tax dollars should in fact be destined for the education and living facilities for disable peoples. Berube poses this problem "So, dear reader, be you a chimey sweep or a chairman of the board, do you have any obligations to the Jamies in your midst? Why is it possible for us to believe that we may, and so easy for is to act as if we do not?" (232). What does it say about the American society that we do not feel the need to support our fellow citizens? Or rather that we do feel the need and obligation and more frighteningly do nothing about it?

Berube discusses in his final chapter the need to place "disabled" children in the classrooms with "normal" children. He puzzles at the legislation that varies state to state about whether they in fact share classrooms. It seems that American society has inherrent in it some sort of fear of those different. That those people with some disabilities do not share the same rights as those who are "normal." What sort of lesson do we teach our own children if we insist that disabled children should be separated from everyone else. According to Berube, Jamie learns better in the presence of other fully functioning children, he learns better from reward, he learns better, in a sense, from peer pressure. So, is it not an obligation of this society to aid in the education of these disabled children without any sacrifice on our part?

To return to the first point, do I have an obligation to help someone else's child? And if I do, do I have a right to know something about their lives? It is a question of Roe v. Wade and it is a question that I believe the Supreme Court is continuously battling. In my opinion, Yes, we have an obligation to help someone else's child. But No, we do not have any right to peak into their lives simply with our money.