Here is a great article cutting down, fairly, American libertarianism, the extreme free market, hyper-individualist philosophy of Big Business:
https://www.counter-currents.com/2017/11/the-moral-poverty-of-libertarianism/
The article quotes from Murray Rothbard’s The Ethics of Liberty:
https://www.amazon.com/Ethics-Liberty-Murray-N-Rothbard/dp/0814775594
where in chapter 14, “Children and Rights,” he says: “the parent should have the legal right not to feed the child i.e. allow it to die.”
While libertarians are good on many personal freedoms, such as gun ownership, and opposing taxation:
https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Economics-Politics-Perspectives-Democratic/dp/0765808684/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1512173751&sr=1-1&keywords=democracy+the+god+failed
the problem is that they overdose on “liberty,” ignoring other moral values, so that they ultimately refute themselves. Thus, the parent by having a child, who was never asked to be born, and conceptually cannot, is in no position to be exerting liberty in the case of feeding, because, the parent has created this dependent person. It is different if we were considering a lazy teenager 18 years of age, but Rothbard’s argument would apply to babies. It is a clear counter-example to the libertarian doctrine.
Further, libertarianism is very much a product of capitalist consumerism, and the individualism socially constructed for it. Humans would not have survived in primitive times without self-sacrifice, and this is inconceivable on their hyper-individual framework. I mean to say, if they think that there is no justification in feeding one’s own children, then what reason could there be for fighting to save one’s tribe? If libertarian was true, humanity would have died out long ago, and if consistently practiced today, humanity will still die out.