The birth of a child is treasured by many, as it is widely considered among the most interesting and beautiful miracles of life. However, Indian businessman, Raphael Samuel, does not seem to share this admiration of a human birth. He claims that “it was not [his] decision to be born,” and for this reason, he wants to sue the very culprits of this issue, his parents. By his logic, since he did not ask to be born, he deserves to be paid for living.

One might expect a lawsuit like this to drive the family apart, but Samuel claims to have a healthy relationship with his mother and father. His parents, both of whom are lawyers, appear to appreciate their son’s creativity and courage in this case. Mrs. Samuel says that she is “very happy that [her] son has grown up into a fearless, independent-thinking young man.” She adds that her son “is sure to find his path to happiness.”

Samuel’s philosophy on birth is referred to as anti-natalism which argues that since life is filled with difficulty and hardship, people should stop reproducing in order to spare children of this misery. According to Samuel, this would slowly take out humanity, ultimately providing benefits for animals and the Earth.

While it is unlikely that Samuel’s complaints will be even be heard by a judge, it is important that as people, we are not so quick to dismiss this case. Of course, Samuel’s ideology consists of many extremes, most notably that people should end procreation. Passing on life to the next generation is something that is so crucial to human culture that it is ridiculous to ask people to give it up. However, bringing a child into the world is still a major responsibility, and to Samuel’s point, people should consider whether they can provide their children with the resources they need to succeed and be happy. If not, a little bit of caution before taking on the task of parenting certainly can’t hurt.