Couples who CHOOSE not to have kids

disillusioned · 10-06-2005 10:00am #1

My husband and I have chosen not to have children. We have been together about a decade and our views on the matter haven't changed.

Most people find this unbelievable and say that we'll change our minds when the hormones kick in. People seem to think it's selfish and wonder why bother marrying if you're not having a family. People have even suggested that one can never be complete without being a parent!

I'd like to hear from other people who've made the same decision to find out just how many people feel the same.

Also, if there are any "mature" people who made this choice years ago and for whom it's now too late - do you regret it?

Fortinbras' · 10-06-2005 10:06am

Oh the harsh reality of being a gay couple!

IANOC · 10-06-2005 10:09am

id say all the negative thoughts and beliefs on your topic will come from those who cannot have children
but its your right not to have any , if thats your wish

disillusioned · 10-06-2005 10:15am

Dear Fortinbras'

What makes you think I'm gay?

I guess you must be one of those narrow-minded people I run into all the time. I'd appreciate if you'd keep stupid comments like that to yourself.

Are you suggesting that if I was part of a gay couple that I couldn't have kids? Get real!

Nevyn · 10-06-2005 11:31am

I really do think this thread would be better of in humanities then in Parenting.

Sleipnir · 10-06-2005 11:32am

I think some people take everything too seriously.

Neuro · 10-06-2005 2:26pm

disillusioned wrote:

People seem to think it's selfish...

I believe having a child is one of the most selfish acts imaginable; you (and your partner) bring someone into the world to fulfil your egotistical desire with little consideration of the suffering the child will inevitably have to endure during their lifetimes. Any child you give birth to will have to face:

- their own death
- their parents' deaths
- the suffering they will have to endure in competing for jobs, competing for status, competing for a mate etc.
- the pain of trying to find some 'meaning' in their existence which inevitably leads to them having children...

And for what? Just so that you could satisfy some vague longing to give your life meaning.

See attached documents...

The Corinthian · 10-06-2005 3:35pm

Neuro wrote:

I believe having a child is one of the most selfish acts imaginable; you (and your partner) bring someone into the world to fulfil your egotistical desire with little consideration of the suffering the child will inevitably have to endure during their lifetimes.

If you commit suicide now you can spare yourself that anguish.

IANOC · 10-06-2005 3:41pm

The Corinthian wrote:

If you commit suicide now you can spare yourself that anguish.

ya ill even do it for you

Memnoch · 10-06-2005 3:42pm

there's actually some nut job religion out there in america who's tag line is..

"save the planet, kill yourself now!"

I won't get into the distasteful methods these people propagate in pursuit of this "noble" cause.

back on topic.

OP - It's your life, it's your choice. Be happy the way you want to be and don't let anyone else tell you otherwise.

Why are you so bothered about this? I guess it's because you constantly have to deal with narrow-minded busy bodies that can't keep a lid on their own lives and so must go around trying to patch up everyone else's percieved problems.

As regards to the wider question. In this age of booming population, declining resources, increased competition and human calousness, one could probably make a strong arguement for not having kids, from both a personal and a wider moral perspective.

Me? I'm gonna have a couple, but that's just me.

Saruman · 10-06-2005 3:47pm

My wife was dead set against kids.. wanted to have her tubes tied and everything. i told her she is only 27 and whe may want kids some day, especially near around 30 the biological clock kicks in.. Anyway recently she admitted she changed her mind and would not mind a child.. though not just yet

Things change but i depends on the couple.. im sure some dont want and never will want kids. Probably more trouble than they are worth

Beruthiel · 10-06-2005 3:58pm

disillusioned wrote:

Most people find this unbelievable

who cares what most people think? I certainly wouldn't!
what you decide between yourselves is your own business and no one elses.

and say that we'll change our minds when the hormones kick in

what hormones would they be exactly?

People seem to think it's selfish

selfish?!
how exactly is it selfish??? *boggle*

and wonder why bother marrying if you're not having a family

because ye decided to spend your lives together

People have even suggested that one can never be complete without being a parent!

really?
would these people be parents themselves?
perhaps they are a tad jealous that you took a different route and aren't knee deep in smelly nappies and sleepless nights?

Stick to what you want, do not be swayed by other people who think they know more than you do or what's best for your.
From your comments above, I'm guessing that you are starting to wonder if they are right and you 'might' start to regret later when it's too late.
Kids are not the be all and end all of anyone's life time, sure they can be a good part of it, but so can so many other things. I'm betting your quality of life is much better than most people who have kids, there is a lot to be said for that too and certainly has it's own rewards for sure.
I think that after 10 years of keeping to this decision suggests to me that you know your own mind at this stage.

utopian · 10-06-2005 11:57pm

disillusioned wrote:

My husband and I have chosen not to have children. We have been together about a decade and our views on the matter haven't changed.

Having children seems to be something that a lot of people only decide they want after they do it. I have frequently heard "I never thought I would enjoy being a mother, but..." from women who have had unplanned pregnancies.

That's not to say that your choice isn't valid. It's just that one can only make a fully-informed choice after having the first child!

nesf · 11-06-2005 9:30am

Why do you have to reproduce? It's not exactly a duty now is it?

Saruman · 12-06-2005 9:07am

nesf wrote:

Why do you have to reproduce? It's not exactly a duty now is it?

It is if your catholic

Catholics who dont will probably burn in hell or some crap like that

nesf · 12-06-2005 10:11am

Saruman wrote:

It is if your catholic
Catholics who dont will probably burn in hell or some crap like that

But what about all the gay and sterile catholics?

TerrorFirmer · 12-06-2005 10:16am

disillusioned wrote:

My husband and I have chosen not to have children. We have been together about a decade and our views on the matter haven't changed.

Most people find this unbelievable and say that we'll change our minds when the hormones kick in. People seem to think it's selfish and wonder why bother marrying if you're not having a family. People have even suggested that one can never be complete without being a parent!

I'd like to hear from other people who've made the same decision to find out just how many people feel the same.

Also, if there are any "mature" people who made this choice years ago and for whom it's now too late - do you regret it?

/ACtually, I'm a firm believer of adoption. I don't want my own kids - why bring another child into the world when there are so many that need good homes? We only live once, its our duty to try and make life as good as it can be for as many people as we can. I plan adopting several kids.

Thats ridiculous tho, the main point. Anyone who calls that selfish is a plain and simple arsehole or possibly jealous. What happened to the ideals of love and romance, eh?

Catsmokinpot · 12-06-2005 6:57pm

its completely your choice, and to be honest ur keeping the population down.... which is a good thing cause there's too many of us walkin round wrecking the place already.

i would agree to an extent with mobileinfantry, the amount of parentless children in the world, it would be nice to adopt. having children no matter wether you made them or adopted them is a brilliant experience. after all thats what we're here for. i'm not saying your going to regret it, but don't be surprised if you do.

Moriarty · 12-06-2005 7:18pm

Catsmokinpot wrote:

its completely your choice, and to be honest ur keeping the population down.... which is a good thing cause there's too many of us walkin round wrecking the place already.

Globally, maybe. Locally, certainly not. Europeans need to have more kids than they're having at the moment. Population levels are pretty much static in Europe, and they're actually falling in one or two countries.

OfflerCrocGod · 12-06-2005 9:13pm

Moriarty wrote:

Globally, maybe. Locally, certainly not. Europeans need to have more kids than they're having at the moment. Population levels are pretty much static in Europe, and they're actually falling in one or two countries.

Indeed, Europe is going to end up dead at the rate it's going

CathyMoran · 12-06-2005 9:33pm

Personally I have always wanted kids - the fact that it is more difficult for me to have them makes it even more important to me. Having said that I have always been maternal - when I was 4 I used to protect a 3 year old who was having a bad time in school but I have always tended to teach kids when I looked after them.

However to the OP - if you do not want kids then I do not see why that is a problem. It is your own life and why should you care what anyone else thinks.

Adoption was also brought up on this post - I used to be very pro-adoption, one of my favorite cousins is adopted and he has a brilliant relationship with his mum. I know a lot of adopted people but I have also met some adopted people who are not happy being adopted - it is very difficult to help the adopted child to get over their feelings of loss. That is just me...

In the end I hope to have 1-2 kids and adopt 2 more (if I am lucky).

bug · 13-06-2005 12:28am

I've observed people who have made this decision.

I think that if you are like minded on the subject of not having kids then there is no problem, and outside influences regardless of who, or what, shouldn't effect you if you are sure and solid together in your choice.

The problem, as I see it, and as usually occurs, is that one partner "convinces" the other that it should be their way of thinking too.

Alot of people enter into relationships telling the other straight from the start they're not into kids...having them, being around them etc. Its never an issue at the time, this leads to problems later, because one thinks surely we are a "couple" now and your personal outlook has changed. This usually isnt the case.

I think if people had of had the choice in the 1950's of not having children, they would have stuffed half of their rabbit warren back in.

The whole hormonal thing...is a pile of old tyres to be honest. Women dont have an innate want to have children. Not any more than men. Its an alien thing to them too. Most men...dont get this, and think...but you are female have a womb etc. Thing is, men have nipples. Is breastfeeding a natural thing to men? At the risk of coming accross as germain greer the latter is just an example of how weird the idea of having a child is to some women.

One of the things that influences women to make the decisison to have children after their thirties unless they are already of the family mindset is society.
Most of their friends are having children and they follow suit. Alot of marriages result of the same mindset.
I'm sorry to say that alot of people give in to the pressures of society and what is the "next step"... its the whole old age self questioning of "what am I supposed to do next" I dont fit into this society.

Every Saturday night in bo jangles or my own gaff and a few kids?
Everyone else is doing it...them seem to be ok.
Then again, who is to say that we think too much and should just follow suit.

Without sounding like SJP, its hard to be childless and 30 in Ireland. Because I think there is a certain element of society that look at you and say... well are you infertile...are you selfish....there has to be something wrong there.

Thing is, there isnt. Once its what both of you want. In that case, yes you are doing the right thing.

You have more freedom.
Make sure you have a good pension plan though, and lots of friends, cos you might end up having no one to direct your alzhemic thoughts at.;)

In short, in this day and age, it takes a real individual to make the decision you have and be 100% happy with it in my opinion.

MorningStar · 13-06-2005 11:19am

I think has to be said that people are missing what seems to be the point. What are the later problems and has anybody experience/knowledge of growing older and not having kids?
I don't think there is a fear of what other people think just what is the life like for a couple that doesn't have children. It's hard to tell because anybody I know who is older has had kids and relies on family now.
It's all well and good to say don't worry about what people think but it seems to be about how life goes

utopian · 13-06-2005 8:08pm

bug wrote:

The whole hormonal thing...is a pile of old tyres to be honest. Women dont have an innate want to have children. Not any more than men. Its an alien thing to them too. Most men...dont get this, and think...but you are female have a womb etc. Thing is, men have nipples. Is breastfeeding a natural thing to men? At the risk of coming accross as germain greer the latter is just an example of how weird the idea of having a child is to some women.

One of the things that influences women to make the decisison to have children after their thirties unless they are already of the family mindset is society.

Procreation is a Social Construct. You need a lot of schooling before you believe something like that.

neuro-praxis · 13-06-2005 9:52pm

Actually most women I know feel very broody. They long to be pregnant, and when couples can't conceive, it seems to be one of the most devastating realities a couple who desire children can experience.

So I might argue with you Bug that people don't deeply long to procreate.

As for the OP's decision, the best of luck. I'm not really a big fan of children, but I think once I hit 35 I'll have a few, if not least because life is rich with a large family network.

bug · 13-06-2005 11:07pm

utopian wrote:

Procreation is a Social Construct. You need a lot of schooling before you believe something like that.

I agree. Aparently being reclusive is in opposition to the ways of society, but people do it and its also seen as a negative thing. Or a psycological thing, rather than a choice.
Maybe not schooling, but outstanding individuality to break out from the social construct and understand what you want yourself

Morningstar had a fair point, and unfortunatley I couldnt answer what it would be like, because although i have close experience of this from older close associates whom I am concerned about. Its not my personal experience.

The only thing I can think of is that if "us kids" didnt exist, i dont know who my parents would be talking to, or who would be looking after them. But they were the 1950's generation.

I think everyone needs something to dedicate their lives to and perhaps thats the secret whether it be kids, or opening the world biggest....bird.. sanctuary...or golf.

Hopefully some older people will reply to you and give you their experiences.
Best of Life!

RainyDay · 14-06-2005 10:58am

I guess that many of those who speak about adoption as a 'nice thing to do' have no idea about the harsh realities of adoption in Ireland today. There are a tiny number of Irish children available for adoption each year. Those infertile couples who wish to adopt end up spending vast sums of money on foreign adoptions. Russia & China were the most likely target countries, but I've heard of couples going to Vietnam and some Central American countries more recently. This is a hugely painful process, requiring health board approval in Ireland and then fighting through the highly bureaucratic and in some cases corrupt processes in the foreign country.

neuro-praxis · 14-06-2005 9:53pm

I can't believe that the idea that procreation is a social construct is getting the time of day.

Humans = animals

All animals procreate and humans are no exception. It isn't because society expects them to, it is because they want to.

Plus, it just happens. Nature is a beast!

simu · 14-06-2005 9:55pm

neuro-praxis wrote:

I can't believe that the idea that procreation is a social construct is getting the time of day.

Humans = animals

All animals procreate and humans are no exception. It isn't because society expects them to, it is because they want to.

Plus, it just happens. Nature is a beast!

Well, they want to have sex... the procreation is usually just a by-product.

MorningStar · 15-06-2005 8:47am

neuro-praxis wrote:

As for the OP's decision, the best of luck. I'm not really a big fan of children, but I think once I hit 35 I'll have a few, if not least because life is rich with a large family network.

Not picking on your point but you have said something I have heard a lot lately. People planing on having kids later in life. I don't want kids but to plan to have them later seems a little odd to me. It's a generally well know medical fact that having kids later in life increases the risks to the child and mother. A lesser know fact is mens sperm quality diminsihes too. You will also be older dealing with your child. The only people I knew who's paretns were over 50 when they were 15 were the youngest of the family.
It could all go well but there seems to be a possible problems and with so many people going for this it would be a bigger social issue. Inexperienced older parents dealing with teenagers, an increase in medical and behavioural care.

ionapaul · 15-06-2005 12:02pm

Is it not true that some women's plans to have their first child in their mid-to-late 30s might come back and haunt them? A doctor friend of mine once told me that some modern women expect to be as fecund at that age as in their early 20s, but it doesn't always work out like that.

Also, I'm not sure that procreation can be defined as a by-product of the desire for sex...any evolutionary theorists in the house to help with this? Surely the desire for sex and associated pleasure is an evolutionary development that facilitates greater / more successful procreation, and the 'desire' (unconsious and unfeeling though a simple organism's tendency to reproduce may be) to procreate predates the desire for sex.

simu · 15-06-2005 12:12pm

ionapaul wrote:

Is it not true that some women's plans to have their first child in their mid-to-late 30s might come back and haunt them? A doctor friend of mine once told me that some modern women expect to be as fecund at that age as in their early 20s, but it doesn't always work out like that.

True - but most people are too busy with uni/travelling/starting a career/having fun etc in their 20s to think about kids.

Also, I'm not sure that procreation can be defined as a by-product of the desire for sex...any evolutionary theorists in the house to help with this? Surely the desire for sex and associated pleasure is an evolutionary development that facilitates greater / more successful procreation, and the 'desire' (unconsious and unfeeling though a simple organism's tendency to reproduce may be) to procreate predates the desire for sex.

Yeah, that would make more sense from an evolutionary pov but I'm thinking of it from the point of view of an individual. Most people most of the time have sex for pleasure/other non-reproduction-related reasons and not to get pregnant.

seamus · 15-06-2005 12:31pm

neuro-praxis wrote:

I can't believe that the idea that procreation is a social construct is getting the time of day.

It's the first I've heard about it, and it's rare I find something that I'm so completely, 100% in disagreement with.

I'm 23, my gf is 23, we both know we'll have kids someday. Not because we *should*, and certainly not from peer pressure. It's something I'm personally driven to do, it's an urge that I can feel as distinctly primal. Exactly the same as the urge to eat, or the urge to provide for myself. Sure, sex is also a similar urge, but the underlying urge behind it is also there.

I in fact believe, that the more complex the social construct, the *less* you are driven to procreate. Modern social constructs either convince people that procreation may not be the best idea (not a bad thing), or actually prevent people from going ahead with it.

If you don't want to have kids, that's fine, that's your choice. I wouldn't question it, or exclude or berate you for not having kids.

simu · 15-06-2005 12:48pm

seamus wrote:

It's something I'm personally driven to do, it's an urge that I can feel as distinctly primal. Exactly the same as the urge to eat, or the urge to provide for myself. Sure, sex is also a similar urge, but the underlying urge behind it is also there.

Really? Personally, I find the idea of having another human growing inside my body and feeding off me revolting and disturbing. However, I would consider putting up with it for a while because I think it's good way to transmit features I find good in myself through to the next generation and that it would be very enlightening and enriching observing another person coming to grips with the world from zero.

But maybe I'm just strange.

Modern social constructs either convince people that procreation may not be the best idea (not a bad thing), or actually prevent people from going ahead with it.

Do you have an example of this? I mean, the way I see it, the most "popular" model for life (or social construct) we have at the moment is the college, career, find partner, have kids one.

RainyDay · 15-06-2005 12:55pm

ionapaul wrote:

Is it not true that some women's plans to have their first child in their mid-to-late 30s might come back and haunt them? A doctor friend of mine once told me that some modern women expect to be as fecund at that age as in their early 20s, but it doesn't always work out like that.

Been there, got the t-shirt. Like many of our peers, we concentrated on getting our house up & running, having the wedding, and having a fair oul time travelling round the world before thinking about kids, with the expectation that they would just pop out on demand once we were ready. So we were ready in our mid-30's, but our bodies weren't. Then followed a difficult 5 years of trying, failing, drugs, trying, failing and ending with successful IVF treatment to bring our beautiful daughter into this world. So it's just a note of caution to those who plan to have kids later on - nature may not be bought into your plan.

seamus · 15-06-2005 12:57pm

simu wrote:

Really? Personally, I find the idea of having another human growing inside my body and feeding off me revolting and disturbing. However, I would consider putting up with it for a while because I think it's good way to transmit features I find good in myself through to the next generation and that it would be very enlightening and enriching observing another person coming to grips with the world from zero.

But maybe I'm just strange.

I'm not female, I can't give that perspective.

Do you have an example of this? I mean, the way I see it, the most "popular" model for life (or social construct) we have at the moment is the college, career, find partner, have kids one.

Well, the world is a perfect example of this. Most places where we find the modern (western) society, we find dropping birth rates and stalling population growth. In less well-off or backward places, we still find massive population growth. In general, the rule follows that the more educated you are, the less children you will have. And IMO it stands to reason that more educated you are, the more you "subscribe" to modern social ideas and trends.

As it were, I believe that Natural selection has come full circle and bit us in the ass.

My 2c.

Beruthiel · 15-06-2005 1:13pm

seamus wrote:

It's something I'm personally driven to do, it's an urge that I can feel as distinctly primal. Exactly the same as the urge to eat, or the urge to provide for myself..

really?
I've never, ever felt that!

I find the idea of having another human growing inside my body and feeding off me revolting and disturbing

ever see that old sifi series V?
the episode where a woman became pregnant by an alien and the alien baby attached itself to her major organs so she couldn't abort without killing herself, that's what being pregnant felt like to me

bonkey · 15-06-2005 3:30pm

MorningStar wrote:

What are the later problems and has anybody experience/knowledge of growing older and not having kids?

The only one I can think of is a change of heart after its too late to remedy.

My grand-aunt (100+ and still going strong) never married and never had children. I don't see that it caused her any problems.

jc

MorningStar · 15-06-2005 3:32pm

seamus wrote:

I'm 23, my gf is 23, we both know we'll have kids someday. Not because we *should*, and certainly not from peer pressure. It's something I'm personally driven to do, it's an urge that I can feel as distinctly primal. Exactly the same as the urge to eat, or the urge to provide for myself. Sure, sex is also a similar urge, but the underlying urge behind it is also there.

That is a weird statement. You can't be driven to have kids like the desire to eat. That is like saying you have the desire to hunt to eat the desire is to eat not hunt. You can be driven to have kids but that's not primal urge like sex. The society pressure doesn't just mean peers it the whole thing and there is certainly pressure to have children. Some is direct like family memember and other is indirect like TV ads showing families.

seamus · 15-06-2005 3:35pm

MorningStar wrote:

That is a weird statement. You can't be driven to have kids like the desire to eat. That is like saying you have the desire to hunt to eat the desire is to eat not hunt.

Not necessarily. And who says to hunt isn't a primal urge? The hunt still exists (although it's taken a different form).

You can be driven to have kids but that's not primal urge like sex. The society pressure doesn't just mean peers it the whole thing and there is certainly pressure to have children. Some is direct like family memember and other is indirect like TV ads showing families.

Well IMO, the evidence would seem to indicate otherwise.

nesf · 15-06-2005 4:05pm

Ok, I hope the following makes sense. My views on this topic, aren't straightforward or easily summed up into a few short lines.

Eh, does the whole primal urge thing really need to be debated? We're (generally) born with an instinctual need to have sex that kicks in at puberty. The vast majority of us go through this.

Sex != Children. That's a modern phenomenae, Unprotected sex between two fertile partners (obviously of the opposite sex) will eventually result in pregnancy in most cases. That's a fact of life.

The whole issue is different nowadays though. Now it's feasible to not have children and not abstain from sex. You can have your cake and not need to pay for it. (I'm speaking from "a masses" viewpoint here).

So now people can take a step back and ask themselves, "Do I want kids? Would I make a good parent? Is it fair for me to bring a life into the world? etc"

This is one of those, well it wasn't a problem 100 years ago, so there really isn't a lot of tradition and history to fall back on.

My view, is that the choice of having children and the choice of deciding you don't want them are both equally valid. I really think that it is something that should be left upto the two people involved.

Like, for instance, take me. I'm single atm. I'm 23. And I'm male. Do I want kids? I really don't know. I love children and would love to raise some, but I'd need to meet the right person to have them with. The important point is, if my partner isn't the right person to have kids with, but she is the right partner for me, then I will be happy. Or adoption. I'd be cool with that too

But there are more important things to me. I do not exist to procreate!

Having kids, really does not bother me. It'll either happen at the right time for the right reasons, or it won't. And I don't plan on taking risks about it either. I'm not the kind of guy that could walk away from a pregnancy. *shrugs* Guess it's the way I've been brought up.

What gets to me is the attitude some people have. The whole, oh look at that couple, they have no kids, there must be something wrong with them.

I mean seriously. It's completely understandable for a couple not to want kids in my mind. I think the arguments for it are very valid and more meaningful as the usually impassioned pleas that some groups come up with against them.

But my serious issue here is with ****ing muppets having kids. The generations of "trailer trash" knackers who all manage to get pregnant by 16.

I'm sorry, but those people should just be ****ing neutered or something (j/k). I mean, having kids is a serious ****ing decision. There is no excuse for not taking the matter seriously.

And no, there are plenty of young mothers in my extended family and my family helps them out and such. I've no illusions about how easy a thing it is to happen. I just don't get people's cavalier attitude to having kids.

It's not a right. If you can't support them or care for them, you shouldn't have them!!

</rant>

Macmorris · 15-06-2005 5:33pm

The problem isn't so much with people choosing not to have children. The problem is that it tends to be the more intelligent, more educated people who don't bother with children, usually for reasons to do with putting their career first. The result is that there is a deterioration in the quality of the gene pool because the genes for high intelligence are not passed on to the next generation.

That was the great tragedy of the birth control campaign. Back about a hundred years ago, it was predicted that contraception would have a eugenic effect because it was expected that the poorer people would have a greater incentive not to have children. The opposite happened however, as it was the educated people who had the foresight to use birth control and limit their reproduction, while the welfare state came along and made sure that the irresponsible poor were looked after regardless of how many children they had.

Even though having children is a personal decision, I think it would be better if the intelligent and educated minority of the population were less selfish and less career-oriented and realised that having children and passing on their genes is one of the most important contributions they can make to their country.

nesf · 15-06-2005 5:37pm

Macmorris wrote:

The problem isn't so much with people choosing not to have children. The problem is that it tends to be the more intelligent, more educated people who don't bother with children, usually for reasons to do with putting their career first. The result is that there is a deterioration in the quality of the gene pool because the genes for high intelligence are not passed on to the next generation.

Intellegence isn't purely genetic. It's only about 50% so.

Just because the parents are smart doesn't the child will be and vice versa.

Macmorris · 15-06-2005 6:19pm

nesf wrote:

Intellegence isn't purely genetic. It's only about 50% so.

That's true, the environment is also very important. Things like good nutrition and education play an important role in shaping a person's intelligence.

The problem though is that there is plenty of attention payed to the quality of the environment and very little payed to the effects of genes. If genes are just as important (i.e. 50%) in determing a person's intelligence as the environment then you would expect that the government would be just as concerned about the quality of the population's genes. This is clearly not the case though. There is hardly ever any mention made of the problem of dysgenics caused by the high birth-rates of the less intelligent and the low birth-rates of the more intelligent people.

And as well as that, this isn't a case of choosing between either a good environment or good genes. Both are important and we should try to find a balance between the two. Good environments usually comes along with high intelligence because intelligent people usually provide a better environment for their children. They are usually wealthier and take more of an interest in their children's education. I think high intelligence is more likely to lead to a good environment than a good environment is to lead to high intelligence.

Just because the parents are smart doesn't the child will be and vice versa.

Again, that's true, but it is more probable that intelligent people will have intelligent children just as it is more probable that tall people have tall offspring.

Catsmokinpot · 15-06-2005 8:33pm

Macmorris wrote:

Again, that's true, but it is more probable that intelligent people will have intelligent children just as it is more probable that tall people have tall offspring.

just wondering what you define as intelligence? aptitude for learning or actual knowledge? cause pretty much every child has an enormous aptitude for learning at a young age. and its the correct nurturing and feeding of that aptitude that makes intelligence.

intelligent people can just as easily have a stupid child as an intelligent one, intelligence is mostly learned aptitude however is different.....

e.g. my neighbour back in wexford parents are really intelligent + he's as dumb as a post

utopian · 15-06-2005 8:49pm

Catsmokinpot wrote:

just wondering what you define as intelligence?

Surely everyone means by intelligent "intelligent the way I am intelligent", whether that be good at sums, making money or whatever.

The amateur eugenicists who posted above think Ireland would be a better place with more people like them, and fewer "knackers" and "unintelligent" people.

Some might think it better to be stupid than to be so smart that you make jokes about compulsory sterilisation.

Catsmokinpot · 15-06-2005 9:29pm

yeah i was going to ask them did they think sterilisation would be the best way to go but u bet me

Neuro · 16-06-2005 12:49pm

seamus wrote:

It's something I'm personally driven to do, it's an urge that I can feel as distinctly primal.

Check out this site:

http://www.vhemt.org/biobreed.htm#reasons

Your reason for having children is first on the list...

disillusioned · 21-06-2005 10:02am

Neuro: cool link - cheers.

Originally I set up this thread in the hope that someone of older who'd decided not to have kids would respond and say "it'll all be ok" but now that I've read over a lot of the responses I am as sure as ever that I don't want kids. Thanks everyone.

seamus · 21-06-2005 10:33am

Neuro wrote:

Check out this site:

http://www.vhemt.org/biobreed.htm#reasons

Your reason for having children is first on the list...

Ah yes, vhemt, an utterly sane, reasonable and non-biased organisation.
Curiuosly enough, it's not an urge I can't control, rather one that I would like to act upon.

Swarfboy · 21-06-2005 11:05am

Both my partner and I were of the same view....no kids...
9 years later she got pregnant (an accident)
Both of us didn't want to go through an abortion so decided to have the baby... He's the best 4yr old boy I know and has thought me so much in such a short time....
He also "saved" me when my father died.... he makes my life feel fulfilled and now I can't wait till we can have another....
Just my perso.......however I did have a friend of me mums ... who is now well in her 80's and lost her dear old Charlie (husband) about 10 yrs ago... he was considerably older than her and they decided not to have kids way back in the 50's..... They had a happy and fulfilled life to the end and their love never faltered................

It's your life ................!

Couples who CHOOSE not to have kids

Do you want to have children? 83 votes

Comments