Why do you want/ not want children?

pwurple

username123 wrote: »

I cant find any posts on this thread where anyone says they dont want to speak to children?

Nor do I see any posts where anyone assumes that every child is a brat?

Nor do I see any posts where anyone says they refuse to speak to children?

Could someone point those posts out for me please?

Take a look at post 167 for a start.

meeeeh

Malari wrote: »

Going back to the OP's original question about why you do or don't want kids, I wonder if there's a genetic component to not wanting them. My siblings are not having kids either!

I don't think so. I think environment probably shapes us a lot more than genes. Religious beliefs, education, financial situation, family situation, cultural background, career objectives and so on. It is hard to generalise and I'm guessing here but I think you could find statistical cooleratio between higher education, lack of religious beliefs and smaller average number of kids. Similarly Central Europe has a lot lower birth rate than UK and especially Ireland. Even well off countries.

pwurple

Malari wrote: »

Going back to the OP's original question about why you do or don't want kids, I wonder if there's a genetic component to not wanting them. My siblings are not having kids either!

It would be the daftest genetic effect ever... Eliminates itself in one generation.

Mod

Pwurple; do not post on this thread again.

Neyite

I think this generation is the first really where women have reproductive choice and maybe that is why its a bit of a novelty, for want of a better word when you hear a woman state that, well, no, she does not want kids, and is perfectly happy with that choice.

That same women, 50 years ago, in this country had little or no access to contraception, abortion was illegal, marital rape was legal, in fact, the only ones in control of womens wombs were: priests, doctors, pharmacists, husbands and very rarely the woman herself, and then only by probably choosing to join a convent or remain the spinster at home on the farm.

So women married, and had children, some because its what was expected, but probably because there was no way of preventing it. Because women who were fertile had lots of children due to circumstance, or joined the nuns and taught those children, the stereotype that women are all natural earth mothers was reinforced. Why bother educating them when they were only going to waste it by having babies and staying at home? Why not teach them home economics eh? I'm sure we all know at least one woman of our mother's generation who had more children than she would have chose.

Now this generation, we have choice. We can choose to get pregnant or not. We have more awareness of consent as do our partners, in intimate relationships. We have access to solutions to unwanted pregnancy that dont involve a choice of guaranteed misery between equally unappealing decisions such as an unhappy marriage versus a laundry-type set up.

So I think its just that women these days are simply more open about their wishes. There have always been women who never wanted children but ended up having them anyway, but they never had the voice then to say what the child-free women are saying on this thread.

username123

My mother was one of those who didn't want children, but felt she had no other choices.

My paternal grandmother had 17 children. She was literally always either pregnant or recovering from being pregnant. I mean, she couldn't have wanted that many, they were quite poor. I didn't know her unfortunately, I'd like to have questioned her on it.

meeeeh

Neyite wrote: »

So I think its just that women these days are simply more open about their wishes. There have always been women who never wanted children but ended up having them anyway, but they never had the voice then to say what the child-free women are saying on this thread.

While I agree, I would also guess than in a lot of countries numbers changed drastically because of female employment. I doubt where I am coming from the availability of contraception had such a significant influence as female employment. On my mother's side granny was from a family of eleven and grandfather was rrom a family of 21 kids (three different wives) and I think there were another three outside marriage. My mum is an only child. On my dad's side there were 4 and 5 and dad gas only one brother. I think of only five families with 'kids' of my age where there are five or more kids. Usually 3 would be considered big family when I was growing up. My grandparents are first generation with very high female employment.

Edit: could be also that WW2 affected the generation having kids after war and future generations definitely continued the trend.

Malari

pwurple wrote: »

It would be the daftest genetic effect ever... Eliminates itself in one generation.

Well not necessarily if it's recessive, and if the desire not to have children is present but you reproduce anyway.

Neyite

meeeeh wrote: »

While I agree, I would also guess than in a lot of countries numbers changed drastically because of female employment. I doubt where I am coming from the availability of contraception had such a significant influence as female employment. On my mother's side granny was from a family of eleven and grandfather was rrom a family of 21 kids (three different wives) and I think there were another three outside marriage. My mum is an only child. On my dad's side there were 4 and 5 and dad gas only one brother. I think of only five families with 'kids' of my age where there are five or more kids. Usually 3 would be considered big family when I was growing up. My grandparents are first generation with very high female employment.

Edit: could be also that WW2 affected the generation having kids after war and future generations definitely continued the trend.

Actually thats true too - the need for women in more industries due to WW2 and beyond helped too.

'Fun' fact: A tax handbook that I came across from 1975 in a big clear out at work detailed how tax changes upon marriage for a woman changed. She would 'resign' her old pps number and begin to use her husbands. With a 'w' on the end. It was effectively like starting a new job tax wise.

Child benefit used to be only paid to the husband too, so if the husband pissed it away in the pub, tough sh!t kids. Maternity leave was only 13 weeks.

Addle

Neyite wrote: »

Maternity leave was only 13 weeks.

Only?! That's long enough!
But that's a whole other thread!

Malari

What's maternity leave now?

username123

Malari wrote: »

What's maternity leave now?

According to Citizens Info:

Since 1 March 2007, you are entitled to 26 weeks’ maternity leave together with 16 weeks additional unpaid maternity leave.

Im in favour of long maternity leave. I think its important as a society to support women who want to have children and work. Making maternity leave too short results in women not going back to work at all and so stunts female progress in the workplace.

rainbow kirby

It's slightly longer over here (6 weeks 90% salary, 33 weeks £137/week, 13 weeks unpaid). I'm fully in favour of long maternity leave too, and in favour of being able to share the leave as paternal leave to give fathers some more time to spend with their children too.

vitani

Addle wrote: »

Only?! That's long enough!
But that's a whole other thread!

Considering most women start their maternity leave a week to two weeks before their due date, and considering that some babies can be a week or two late, 13 weeks maternity leave could conceivably mean that you'd have to go back to work when your baby is only two months old.

username123

rainbow kirby wrote: »

It's slightly longer over here (6 weeks 90% salary, 33 weeks £137/week, 13 weeks unpaid). I'm fully in favour of long maternity leave too, and in favour of being able to share the leave as paternal leave to give fathers some more time to spend with their children too.

Actually thats an important point, lot of companies dont pay any top up so women only get the state maternity payment. I do know a number of people who have taken shorter maternity leave simply because they couldnt afford to take the full entitlement.

XxMCRxBabyxX

I think that certain parts of the US only gives women 6 - 12 weeks leave so we're very lucky for that over here.

Das Kitty

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I think that certain parts of the US only gives women 6 - 12 weeks leave so we're very lucky for that over here.

Try none!

I think woman ( and men ) who don't want children fall in to two camps

(1) They have always had a deep philosophical and psychological conviction that having children was not for them.

or

(2) The other camp tends to centre around issues like loss of freedom, money, the cost, unsure about parenting and so on.


The decision not to have children is usually easy for the first group and the second group often struggle a lot with their choice.

meeeeh

For me 6 months is just about right, when I visit home they are horrified how can we do with less than a year. There is a balance that need to be struck between women being employable, so maternity leave can't be too long, but you also want to get people enough time to settle with kids.

Certain support for people with kids is necessary. You do not want to end up in the situation huge part of continent is facing pension crisis in couple of decades.

vitani

6 months is about right for me as well. I went back to work part-time when my daughter was seven months old and at that point, I was fully ready to start being 'me' again. A full year would have really isolated me, tbh, but it's different for everyone, depending on your own circumstances.

Jerrica

pwurple wrote: »

It would be the daftest genetic effect ever... Eliminates itself in one generation.

Not necessarily, in fact reproductive altruism has been a necessity for evolution of complexity. Animals ranging from insects all the way up to mammals have oodles of examples of sterile castes or non-mating individuals who are vital to the success of a community. It's quite normal in many pockets of biology for some of a species to be considered better suited to reproduction than others. I think there's probably a really valid argument for there being a genetic component to choosing to be childfree and not just a sociological decision.

loubian

I always assumed I'd get married and have kids. I wanted more than two because I am the oldest of two siblings and I've always wanted another brother or sister. But I got pregnant with my daughter and I'm not with the father. I never thought I'd be the single mother. .. its taken a lot of adjusting, and I'm still working everything out but I really wouldn't know what to do if my daughter wasn't here. I'd still like to meet someone and have kids but who knows if that will happen! For now, I'm just going to enjoy having my daughter to myself

IvyTheTerrible

Tigger99 wrote: »

Pwurple you might think that's weird, but that's the way some people feel. They don't like the dependence kids have on their parents, the noise, the mess, the unpredictability. I completely understand that. I don't feel like that about kids, but think it's a valid opinion.

I totally get that opinion. I have a baby and I love him, but I find a lot of other children hard to be around or relate to.

woodchuck

Addle wrote: »

The last few posts are the reason why I never (identifiably) answer the question 'do you want kids?'.
If you say yes and don't have them, some people will forever feel sorry for you.
If you say no, some people think there's something wrong with you!

I'm never quite sure how to answer this question myself. I'm currently single and definitely wouldn't plan to have a child on my own. So that means my having children depends on meeting the right man. But whether or not I ever meet the right man is such a large unknown that I don't think I can definitely say that I want to have kids. If I admit to myself and others that I desire children, but I never meet the right man (or even if I do but have fertility trouble etc), then I could be setting myself up for a life feeling completely unfulfilled.

A part of me thinks I probably would want kids... but as I said, this is largely dependent on finding the right man first. Having said that there are a lot of reasons that I'm very very reluctant to have kids too:
- Loss of freedom
- Being completely responsible for another human being and their happiness, health etc and the chronic stress that would go along with that.
- The risk to my own mental health in the early years; postpartum depression, daily stress, sleep deprivation etc. Staying home alone with a baby for ~6 months would also have a negative on my confidence, self esteem etc (I'm a natural introvert with a dash of social anxiety, so need to regularly and consistently put myself out there to maintain a relatively 'normal' baseline when it comes to interacting with people/situation).

Also I don't actually like babies. Little people (i.e. when they can walk, talk, potty trained etc) can be fun/cute etc, but I've never liked babies in general and fake the whole cooing thing when someone brings their newborn in for a visit :rolleyes: I just don't see the appeal of babies at all.

So if I did decide to have a kid, I'd be making a huge sacrifice for the first couple of years in which I know I'd just be miserable for all the reasons stated above. Having said that, I think later in life it could be very boring or lonely if you don't have a family.

I was on a first date the other night actually and the guy brought up the topic of whether or not I wanted kids :eek: An important conversation I know, but not on a first date ffs :rolleyes: I don't think he was too impressed when I likened being pregnant with having a parasite Absolutely no offense intended to anyone, it's just the mere idea of pregnancy freaks me out! It's a person. Growing inside of you. Feeding off of you. The thoughts just freak me out a bit!!!

In fact if I think too much about whether or not I want to have kids, logic would win out every time and I don't think I'd ever actually consciously try/plan for them

Moonberry

woodchuck wrote: »

I was on a first date the other night actually and the guy brought up the topic of whether or not I wanted kids :eek: An important conversation I know, but not on a first date ffs :rolleyes: I don't think he was too impressed when I likened being pregnant with having a parasite Absolutely no offense intended to anyone, it's just the mere idea of pregnancy freaks me out! It's a person. Growing inside of you. Feeding off of you. The thoughts just freak me out a bit!!!

Haha, I can completely relate to that fear!

I always thought when I was younger that I would have kids some day, but it was always something in the distant future and not something I really thought about practically.

It scares me a little that it's something that I'll have to make a real decision about some day, probably in the next 10 years. There are a lot of things that I want to do at the moment that aren't practical to do with children, and I don't really have the desire for children as such other than the "it'd be nice to do one day" sort of feeling. It scares me though to think that I might turn around when I'm in my 40s and wish it was something I had done and for it to be too late at that point. At the same time, having children is something so definite, once you do it you can't just change your mind about it and I can't see myself feeling very definitely sure I want them in the next few years. I'm very much on the fence about it!

Dark Phoenix

for me wanting or not wanting to have children was never a decision no more than being gay or straight is a decision. I have simply never wanted children, I have always known this. I have no urge to procreate. It is who I am and I am happy with who I am.

I am independent and I love my life. Having a child and having to constantly look after another human just has never appealed to me. Likewise for many women I am sure that not wanting children has never occurred to them.

As a child my biggest fear about growing up was 'having to get married and have children' because back then in rural ireland it was the assumption of what women did and as a child it seemed to me like it was what you were supposed to do. I dreaded the thoughts of having to resign myself to a life I didnt want. Then as I grew older I learned that we all have a choice and the peace that gave me was unreal. I am grateful that I live in a country where women have choices, access to contraception and a voice.

Gongoozler

I do not think we can answer the OP. For us there is no real reason or set of reasons for why we chose to have children. It was always just assumed it would be something we would do - when the moment and circumstances seemed most to lend themselves to the endevour - and we simply made our life plan around the notion that we would at some point be reproducing. We currently have 2 of the 4 children we have planned on.

But being pinned to the wall and been asked to explain "why" we want this? I do not think I can give a coherent answer. We simply do.

Gongoozler wrote: »

in terms of progressing the human race and continuing the line, it doesn't make sense for so many not to want children.

Doesnt it though? There is another poster who points out in the homosexuality debates that there are many species where by far the vast majority simply do not reproduce. And they are no less genetically fit than us. As Dawkins would point out Fecundity is not a measuring stick of evolutionary success - but a variable strategy on the route to success. Reproducing very little - and reproducing a hell of a lot - are both different tactics and each can be just as successful as the other.

Malari wrote: »

Well not necessarily if it's recessive, and if the desire not to have children is present but you reproduce anyway.

Or the third possibility - that the gene that makes you not reproduce leads you to improve the reproductive fitness of someone who also carries the gene - but does reproduce.

I think an error a lot of people like pwurple make is to view only the gene in a single host. Perhaps they might be as interested to learn as I once was that gene selection happens across populations - not so much across individuals.

ash23

I see some people who really took to parenting and it makes them complete and so unbelievably happy. And then I see others like myself who adore their children but who don't like being a "parent".

I adore my daughter. i couldn't love her more. But I really dislike being a parent. I hate the way it takes pretty much every penny I have to keep another person happy. I dislike that I can't come home after a long stressful day and go straight to bed with a book. I don't like the responsibility and the way I can't make a choice for myself without considering someone else. That I want to do things but can't because I'm a mother.

And I think people like me are the ones who end up being the frazzled, stressed out slightly miserable parents. It's hard to explain how I can love my daughter while disliking being a parent. And it's definitely not the case anymore now that she's older and less work. But when she was little, I felt smothered by motherhood and I hated it to be honest. Adored the child, hated the job.

And then there are others who love spending hours doing stuff with their kids etc.

I think too many people go into parenting with a romantic notion of what it will entail and end up miserable enough because of it. And some people take to it like a duck to water and don't mind the bad bits.

For me, one child is enough. I don't want to go back to that time where I felt like I had lost myself, where I was overwhelmed by the intensity of a small child needing me and where I felt just completely suffocated by the role of being a mother. Obviously there were moments of pure joy and happiness and I wouldn't change having my daughter. But I've no inclination to repeat it now that I've gotten some independence back.

I can sleep in again and afford to go out. I can go to bed knowing I probably won't be woken up during the night. I can sit and read a book or watch a movie without fearing that the silence in the next room probably means the walls have been painted or a fire has been started.
I can buy something nice for myself and not feel guilty that the money should be spent on something for the child because I know now that she doesn't need everything that is peddled to parents.


Anyway, for me some people thrive in parenting and some tolerate it. And those who are inclined to know they will just tolerate it or not tolerate it are those who can take or leave having kids. It's pretty understandable when you consider the commitment it is to have a child. It's not for everyone, even for some people who do have kids and that's why we see so many kids who are neglected or dragged up. It would have been much better had those parents made an educated choice about whether they WANTED to take on the responsibility of a child or not.

diveout

One of the things I hate about motherhood, is that you are suddenly public property, and it's open season on your child and how you are doing your job, and everyone is a blipping expert and everyone assumes to know your child at least as much as you do and it is the most free licensed area of judgementalism in life I have ever come across.

Butt out, I just met you on line in a supermarket ffs.

username123

Great post Ash23.

When I spoke earlier in the thread re parents who seem unhappy since they became parents, it was people like you I had in mind. Nice way to put it that you love the child but hate the job. I see many like you. It would be nice if there was a more open dialogue about it tbh. I know that I would be the same (or worse) and I know that that is one of many reasons why I shouldnt have children.

The mere notion that unhappy parents exist has been challenged strongly on this thread - which is sad because sweeping an unhappy truth under the carpet doesnt make it any less true. It would be better if we could talk about these things and look at ways to improve the situation for people who do find themselves unhappier since they started parenting instead of pretending its just a nonsense that childfree people make up to validate their choices.