Although some people don’t have kids because they hate them, being childfree doesn’t automatically mean you’re anti-child. If you love kids but don’t want any, you’re not alone. And if you’re tired of hearing “But you love kids! How could you not want to have them?” you’re in the right place.

So what’s wrong with you?

Are You A Selfish, Self-Entitled Millennial?

It’s gotten to the point where Millennials can’t sneeze without being called selfish and lazy. (Or accused of putting the tissue companies out of business by wiping their noses with toilet paper. But I digress.) So you’ve probably already heard that the reason we’re not having kids is, no surprise, because we’re just selfish and lazy.

I disagree. I think in most cases it’s because we’re just a bit more aware of ourselves and our options. You probably know more than a handful of Baby-Boomers and Gen Xers who are pretty selfish and lazy (if not downright hateful) as parents. They had children for incredibly selfish reasons. But the point is that they had kids. And since that’s what our society says you’re supposed to do, their selfishness is forgiven.

We live in a culture that glorifies parental self-gratification. No matter how selfish a reason is to have a child, if it results in a baby, the selfishness is excused. So it’s only when Millennials look at that and say, “Yeah, maybe it would be better not to have a child if I don’t think I’d be a good parent,” that things get uncomfortable.

It’ll take another article entirely to go into all the reasons that some parents feel angry and defensive around non-parents. So let’s just get back to the main point. You don’t want kids, but you do like kids. If it’s not because you’re selfish and lazy, then what is wrong with you?

Nothing’s Wrong with You

If your response to not wanting to have children is to not have children, then there’s nothing wrong. If you didn’t think you’d be a good parent and had them anyway, then you really would be being selfish. Now as to why you don’t want to have kids when you enjoy their company… that’s not too complicated.

It’s fine to like (or even love) something and not want to possess it. It’s similar to loving dogs, but choosing not to have one. There are plenty of good reasons for that, such as:

• you live in a small apartment and feel it’s not a good environment for a dog
• you know you don’t have the time to properly care for a dog
• you think you’ll resent having to get up in the middle of the night to let it out to pee
• you find dogs fun to play with, but you know you wouldn’t like the committment
• you think you’ll probably end up being the person who doesn’t clean up their dog’s poop

Basically, it’s for any reason you wouldn’t be able to give a dog the life it deserves. And if that informs your decision to not get a dog, kudos to you.

When It Comes to Kids

The same is true for having kids. There are dozens (maybe hundreds) of valid reasons you might love kids but don’t want any of your own. For instance, maybe you can’t afford children without relying on financial assistance from others. Or you have bad genes and feel it would be irresponsible to pass them on. For that matter, the fact that the earth is already over-populated might make having a child seem narcissistic.

Then there are even more compelling reasons. Maybe you aren’t certain you could love any child unconditionally. Perhaps you appreciate the fact that, just because you like kids doesn’t mean you’d make a good parent. And then there’s the most important reason of all: you simply have no reason that you actively want a child.

Regarding that last one, as I’ve said before, parenthood is a vocation. If you don’t feel called to it, then it’s not for you.

So if you love kids but don’t want any, you’re fine.

More than fine, actually. You have a huge advantage over all of the people who didn’t realize they didn’t want kids until after they had them. Provided you don’t bow to social pressure and have one anyway (Amy from we’re {not} having a baby! has something to say on this matter), you’ll be in good shape.

If you’re still worried that you’ll be missing out, or if you simply just don’t know what to say to your nagging relatives and co-workers, check out these other resources:

Top 5 Answers to “Why Don’t You Have Kids?”

How to Tell Your Parents You’re Childfree (without breaking their hearts)

While you’re at it, be sure to sign up for The American Spinster’s mailing list for ongoing support and information about the childfree lifestyle:

Email address:

---

One of the most common remarks on the childfree lifestyle is that it’s selfish. How is it selfish to not have a child one doesn’t want or can’t afford? Search me. Though we’ve tackled that question in the past, today I’m asking: Is it selfish to have kids?

It’s certainly true that some parents have children for incredibly selfish reasons. While I don’t have any large-scale statistics, I can say that when I ask a parent why they had children, nearly every single one replies with one of two answers:

• “I just wanted to have kids.”
• “I wanted to be a mom.”

But does that mean that it’s necessarily selfish to have kids?

When Having Kids is Definitely Selfish

First let me say that I know that people find themselves pregnant in less-than-ideal circumstances, and that the decision to have an unplanned child is deeply personal. Additionally, the decision to continue a pregnancy one didn’t anticipate isn’t quite the same as choosing to become pregnant in the first place.

Having said that, willfully deciding to have a baby when there is currently no baby or developing baby in the picture, and when one cannot provide (emotionally, financially, or physically) is going to be a selfish decision in most cases.

What are the factors the unselfish person considers when planning to conceive?

Financial Resources

There are a lot of strong feelings on this topic, and for good reason. Like it or not, we live in an economically unfair society, and it’s deeply unjust for anyone to say, “poor people need to not have babies they can’t afford” when one’s entire childbearing years might be spent in the low-income brackets. It may well take we Millennials a couple of decades (into our forties) to make it to the point when we can financially afford children. And why should we have to put off having children to the time where it’s no longer a biologically viable option?

That line of thinking gets uncomfortably close to the eugenics-based belief of breeding economically disadvantaged people or groups out of the gene pool. And no one, least of all me, wants that. But here’s the thing: recklessly having babies does absolutely nothing to fix this unfair system. And, not to beat a dead horse, but having children will not improve your finances.

At the end of the day, despite how very nuanced this topic is, having children you can’t afford is selfish. It’s putting your desires before the well-being of another.

Emotional Availability

This one doesn’t seem to discriminate based on one’s bank account or social class. If you have a child as the ‘default’ option in your life, rather than something you’ve weighed seriously and put conscious thought into, you’re not making the effort needed to be emotionally available to your child.

Kids take a lot of emotional strength, stability, and endurance. Enforcing boundaries and maintaining consistency requires a committed and compassionate mindset. If you have a child without doing anything to prepare yourself for that kind of emotional marathon, that’s selfish too. It’s saying that your emotional needs (feeling loved and needed by a baby) are more important that your child’s emotional needs.

Time Availability

Good parenting requires time and self-discipline in time management. Do you have the time to devote to implementing a routine? Do you have time to actually interact with and get to know your kids? Children learn, grow, and change at a much more rapid rate than most adults. This requires taking time to understand who your child is and what their point of view is. If you don’t have that, you won’t have a clue why they’re acting the way they do. And that just leads to frustration, anger, and disappointment.

Once again, if you know you won’t have the ability (or are not willing to make the sacrifices needed) to give your child the time they need, it’s selfish to have one anyway. Again, it’s putting your desires before the needs of another.

When Having Kids Might Be Selfish

Okay. So what if you can afford to give a child a decent life, see yourself as being emotionally available to them, and have actually put the effort into learning about being a good parent? What if you’re the type of would-be parent who has carefully considered the details of how you’ll raise your child and made a plan ahead of time with your partner? Is it selfish to have children then?

The short answer is, well, maybe.

The longer answer is that while you may not be putting your own wants above the needs of your future child, you may still be putting your own wants above the needs of others. And those are people who already exist, not a person who hasn’t yet been created.

There are two main factors to consider.

Overpopulation

There’s simply no denying the fact that we live on an overpopulated planet. Is it selfish to create a new person when millions are starving, and hundreds of millions _1  2 of children are unwanted? Well, that leads directly into the next factor…

Biological Arrogance and Exclusivity

And finally, there’s the issue of biological conceit. This conceit says, “my genes (or my partner’s genes) are so much more valuable to me than any others on the planet that I’m going to create a new person at the expense of all the parentless children throughout the globe.” It’s closely related to the belief that one’s genes are genuinely better than those of children with “issues” in foster care. And let me state this plainly: if you believe that adopting a child with “problems” is more than you’re up for, you probably aren’t up for the challenge of raising a bio kid either (see above).

Is your desire to see your partner’s features in your child really more important the the needs of an existing child? If so, it’s possible that you’re acting out of selfishness.

So Is It Ever NOT Selfish to Have Kids?

I don’t want to end this article with the idea that becoming a parent is innately selfish, because I truly don’t believe it is. And I don’t think that most people who have children for selfish reason do so consciously. In my experience talking to parents, the main reason that people have children for selfish reasons (and are often disappointed as a result) is that they never paused to think critically about having children before they did it.

The point of this post isn’t to bash parents or say that parents are horrible, selfish creatures. It’s to encourage everyone reading to give the decision to have children the serious consideration it deserves. If you were considering spending the next 20 years of your life in a convent, devoted entirely to serving God, and paying some $230,000 to do so, wouldn’t you give it a few weeks of serious thought first? Why, then, don’t we give the decision to have kids that same level of self-reflection?

What Does the Unselfish Parent Look Like?

Before I close, I do want to include a very thoughtful answer to the “why do you want kids” question given to me by a friend.

My family has dwindled. I want to add more members to my family; more people to share things with in my circle. I’d also like the opportunity to “pass the baton” to someone. Like, I want to see the world become a better place, and I feel like I’d be leaving “unfinished business” if I just died and didn’t have someone that I passed the “make-the-world-a-better-place-ness” on to. Keep in mind I do not require this/these added family member/s to be grown in my body, though I’m not against that.

So is it selfish to have kids? No, not necessarily. Can it be? Yes, definitely. As is the case with most acts, it’s one’s intentions, forethought, and preparation that determine whether something is greedy or giving in nature. So decide what’s best for you, but please, consider these things before making that life-changing, and (in the case of bio babies) life-creating decision.

---

 

People have kids for many different reasons. Some of them are good reasons. But sometimes, having children is simply an excuse to forward the bill to the next generation.

We glorify the noble father who sets asides his dreams to work hard and raise his kids. We idolize the woman who first proves her worth by going to college and landing a high-paying job, then chooses to give it up to have kids. And if having kids is one’s true dream, sure. That’s fine. But giving up on your actual dreams to have kids instead is just passing the buck.

Here’s what I mean.

Why Live for Yourself When You Can Live Vicariously?

So often I see new mothers mapping out their children’s lives with the sole intention of giving their child the life they want. And I always want to say, “Why don’t you just give yourself that life? Why create a new human in an overpopulated world when you can love the you who already exists?” Putting your wishes and dreams onto someone else doesn’t help anyone, especially not the kids who never signed up for that. You might as well say, “Forgo your dreams and live mine because I opted not to live them myself. You can just pass your own dreams on to your children anyway.”

But then there’s the other way of passing the buck to future generations…

Where to begin? For right now, let’s set aside the idea that children are people rather than modeling clay. I want to instead look at the notion presented in this text that essentially says a “smart” woman can contribute more to society by creating more people than she can by fulfilling a socially vital role.

And okay, I can see where you could maybe make that argument if you believe that molding children with precision is possible (and healthy). But there are still a couple of glaring and inexcusable problems. These are:

• The world has more than enough potential scientists.
• Women are capable of contributing as they are.

Let’s look at that further, shall we?

The Pro-Natal Mindset

The United States is a very pro-natal nation. That is, we are all about producing some babies. Clearly, before the agricultural and (especially) industrial revolutions, humans needed to reproduce often and successfully to sustain the species. But despite the fact that we’ve kind of got that covered, some nations fear that localized under-population will result in their demise. Even on a planet bursting with 7.6 billion people (there were only 1 billion in 1800), a slight decline in birth rates has some people worried.

The Reality of Pro-Natalism in the Modern World

Basically, we’re stuck in the evolutionary mindset that says, “Making babies is your most important job!” despite the fact that what humans should really be concerned about is killing ourselves off with overpopulation. But fears of ‘underpopulation’ are often stoked by groups concerned that failing to sustain this endless growth will lead to uncomfortable societal changes in our near future.

Nonetheless, “making six smart scientists” is not what the planet needs right now. We have seven and a half billion people – I’m pretty sure we can glean more than six smart scientists from that number. The idea that one’s own genes (or race, intellect, values, religion, etc) are somehow so valuable that no one else in 7.6 billion people could make an equally smart scientist is ego-centricism bordering on total narcissism.

As to the argument that educated people should be the ones reproducing (because they’ll raise educated children), the amazing thing about education is that it can be shared with anyone. Including people who already exist. As Alexandra Paul points out, we smart, first world women are exactly the type of people who should reproduce far less than we do.

Is Producing Children Really the Height of A Woman’s Usefulness?

The other major problem with the “make six scientists” idea is the notion that woman can best contribute to society by making babies. Let’s be honest. Women can contribute more as individuals than they can as incubators and mothers. (Please note that I didn’t say every childfree woman does contribute more, or that no mother can contribute as much as a childfree woman.) One smart scientist can train literally hundreds (if not thousands) of other smart scientists. And she can do so without creating six new consumers in an over-populated world.

One Last Thing

And, of course, there’s one last problem with the rhetorical question posed in the “six scientists” image. And that is that if each generation continues to follow this flawed line of thinking (“I can be more useful making future scientists than I can be as a scientist myself”), no one will ever become a scientist. Your future scientists will use the same excuse themselves, and pass it on to their children after them.

So how about we come together as a generation and simply say:

“The buck stops here.”

---

---

If you’d like to receive more helpful resources for your single & childfree life, join the American Spinster mailing list:

Email address: