Abstract: Marc Fleurbaey and I have proposed a form of egalitarianism for possible people, on which we should be concerned with people’s expected well-being, conditional on their existence. (An example is what a person’s healthy life expectancy would be if they were created.) Critics, including Jake Nebel and Toby Handfield, have argued that a person's expected well-being, conditional on their existence, does not have the importance we attribute to it. Against their challenges, I argue that the quality of a potential person's prospects at the moment of our choice to create them is an essential element in justifying decisions to them, should we choose to create them. I also argue it is important to avoid (a) creating people with worse prospects than others; (b) creating people who will end up worse off than others; and (c) creating people with poor prospects (even if they are not worse than others’ prospects).