At the beginning of the article, comments are made on the concept, manifestation and basic attribute of parenthood. In this regard, it is stated that: 1) parental ties are vertical relationships occurring between parents (biological, foster, adoptive) or carers (legal or actual) and children (own, second spouse or adopted), 2) the forms of parenthood are maternity, paternity, adoption and care) and 3) the attribute of parenthood is the exercise of parental roles involving the exercise of parental authority. Next, parenthood was analyzed from the point of view of social risk on the assumption that it is a heterogeneous concept in the sense of the multiplicity and diversity of factual events to the occurrence of which social security legislation links the acquisition of parental entitlements. The events (in particular, the birth of a child) giving rise to the right to maternity benefit from social sickness insurance were specifically analyzed. Finally, it is concluded that the automatic extension of social insurance protection to all, constantly expanding, parental entitlements from the sphere of labor law and from non-employment titles causes the maternity benefit in its current form to become detached from the socio-economic purpose of social insurance, and the growing expenses for its financing deepen the deficit in the sickness fund of the Social Insurance Fund. As a consequence, which was considered inappropriate, the maternity benefit is increasingly becoming similar to benefits of the subsidiary part of social security serving – like other benefits in this area (e.g., child-support benefit) – to implement the state's social (pro-family) policy of supporting families with children. 

The subject of the article is the issue of verification by Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) of conducting business activity as a title of social insurance and the contribution calculation basis of social insurance declared by the insured (entrepreneur). In this area there are no controversies as to the legitimacy of questioning the business activity as a social insurance title by the pension authorities. The author expresses, however, a more far-reaching view and, approving the Supreme Court's position presented in the judgments in cases I UK 208/17, II UK 301/17 and II UK 302/17, he believes that ZUS is also competent to verify the declared contribution calculation basis on this account. Therefore, the main purpose of the article is to present a wide range of arguments in support of the defense of the above thesis in confrontation with the older case law of the Supreme Court and the most recent literature in this area, in which such actions of ZUS are considered inadmissible.