By Lee Pitts

If I could change one thing in this world it would be to give every kid a family. Not a "new math" family with five half-brothers and sisters, two part-time step-moms and a father who is missing in action. Those fractions add up to a "nuclear family" that could blow apart any global village: Dividing as fast as it is multiplying. I’m thinking more of a traditional family with two parents, some brothers and sisters, a couple grandparents, a crazy old uncle and maybe a dog. I would not waste my one wish on wealth or welfare because a family like that can make a happy home out of any old hut.

If I were society’s architect I’d start with parents. Two of them. The father and mother roles would be played by a man and a woman because women still make the best moms and men the best dads. This would be the basis for what used to be known as the "family unit," before the monetary unit took its place. One dedicated father and one loving mother: What a concept! The idea may be out of fashion but it’s still the best form of government ever devised and the source of greatest human happiness.

The parents would spend more time selecting their lifelong partner than they would their silver pattern and would be willing to finish any family they started. Their long-range plans would include staying together instead of going from matrimony to alimony before the first child is born. No child of theirs would be shuttled back and forth between parents on an airplane like some piece of excess baggage. Or have their IRS deductibility argued over in court.

These old-fashioned parents would spend more time investing in the family than in the Dow and would talk to their kids more often than their stockbroker. They’d give their children a safety net and a head start in life by teaching them a trade, manners and sportsmanship at an early age. They’d be more concerned about being a good parent and less about being a pal. They wouldn’t give their kids a new car to drive to school that is better than their teachers can afford. And if a child was overly interested in things that go boom the parents would be the first to know, not the last.

I wonder, is it asking too much for prospective parents to realize that bringing a child into the world includes some responsibilities that should NOT be handed off to a day care center, Internet chat room, school system or penal institution?

In rebuilding the family’s foundation I’d surely want to include some brothers and sisters as building blocks. Hopefully there would be at least two offspring so they could learn to share their toys, teachers, communicable diseases and inner-most thoughts. Siblings simply can’t be beat as teachers for life’s most important lessons: Knock first. Clean up your own mess. Pass the gravy, please. It’s always your turn to do the dishes. And family pride and respect are the best hand-me-downs.

As they’ve been known to do on occasion brothers and sisters will no doubt combat, compete, compromise and tattle-tale over trivial things, and, I hope, over those things not so trifling: like a brother hanging with the wrong crowd or a sister doing drugs. Sure, they can be annoying at times, but siblings guarantee two things in life: a high phone bill and a friend forever.

No family would be complete without a full complement of supporting players: grandparents to spoil the children rotten, cousins to take the place of gang members, and plenty of aunts and uncles who enjoy sitting at the folding table with the little tykes for Sunday dinners or holidays. Is there anything better than a family that’s all wrapped up with one another on Christmas Day? What’s the point of having a sap in the family tree or a doting aunt if they are recognized only for traveling the farthest distance to the family reunion or by their name badge?