Family & Relationships Are we going to see more people live 'childfree' lives?

[mouncey2franklin]

What have you noticed among friends and family? Have you seen an increase in the number of women putting off children until it is 'too late'? An increase in men supposedly 'going their own way' and eschewing family? And if so, what do you make of it all?

I used to believe that having a family was a critically important thing to do in life. These days, not so much. I see some people and their children have brought true joy and meaning to their lives. I see other people who clearly regret having children, and would not do so if they had their time again (although few will ever admit it, to themselves or to others).

Once upon a time there were social pressures to do certain things. Those pressures are no longer there. Are we going to see more people intentionally lead childfree lives? And if so, does this bother you, or do you see the upside of it?

 

[rdhopkins2]

It’s fantastic those that don’t want to be parents are not doing so.

 

[Demosthenes]

I don't have a lot of interest in having kids, but I try to steer clear of people who use buzzwords like 'childfree'.

 

[WCErevival]

Me and my partner don't want kids. We are in our mid 30s. I noticed recently that most of her close friends don't have children and most likely wont have them at a later date either. They are all in good jobs.

What worries me is society following the movie 'Idiocracy'. The more successful people reduce in breeding due to following careers and the mainly lower socioeconomic group breed like rabbits.

 

[revo333]

I have a few friends who had children in the last 5 years and they are already looking forward to them leaving the house once they turn 18.

I think it's a bad attitude and I will feel a bit sorry for the kids if they keep that attitude.

 

[Bunkdar]

Me and my partner don't want kids. We are in our mid 30s. I noticed recently that most of her close friends don't have children and most likely wont have them at a later date either. They are all in good jobs.

What worries me is society following the movie 'Idiocracy'. The more successful people reduce in breeding due to following careers and the mainly lower socioeconomic group breed like rabbits.

Underrated movie
But does success in modern society = better genes 2 spread via baby ?

 

[WCErevival]

Underrated movie
But does success in modern society = better genes 2 spread via baby ?

Not so much in modern society with social influencers and such but still with the traditional jobs that require degrees a lot of that natural intelligence won't be passed on. The is purely from my own observations.

 

[Bunkdar]

Not so much in modern society with social influencers and such but still with the traditional jobs that require degrees a lot of that natural intelligence won't be passed on. The is purely from my own observations.

If a GFC 2.0 scenario killed off capitalism then i think it would revert back 2 females breeding with the biggest, baddest ape in the zoo
Social safety net is important for a functioning society but i have wondered about the genetic impacts on evolution
I think you are looking at it from down ya nose though

 

[Run n Spread]

Yes. Simply because it is an option now. Only realistically in the last 50 years has it been a "lifestyle choice."

I don't know what to make of it all. Except choice is always a good thing.

Only thing I disagree with the OP is societal pressures are always there. They may be more subtle and of a different criteria but they are still there.

 

[Deliverance]

Not so much in modern society with social influencers and such but still with the traditional jobs that require degrees a lot of that natural intelligence won't be passed on. The is purely from my own observations.

You mean jobs like lawyers, merchant bankers, investment advisors, accountants and our highly educated politicians? Yeah, what a terrible world it would be without those people.

 

[Morning_Fog]

15 years ago, my wife had ovarian cancer and she had a full hysterectomy as that was the recommendation for a full recovery. We discussed kids, we decided we didn’t want them. We were in out mid to late 20’s.

Fast forward to my mid 40’s, she still doesn’t want kids but and I’m now not sure.

I don’t want to wait another 10 years and say, what if. I think I want to investigate and discuss with her the idea of adoption, fostering or simply kidnapping (I kid, I kid).

Adoption id extremely hard and fostering is unpredictable with the kid and their background, so who knows what avenue we will take.

 

[perthblue]

15 years ago, my wife had ovarian cancer and she had a full hysterectomy as that was the recommendation for a full recovery. We discussed kids, we decided we didn’t want them. We were in out mid to late 20’s.

Fast forward to my mid 40’s, she still doesn’t want kids but and I’m now not sure.

I don’t want to wait another 10 years and say, what if. I think I want to investigate and discuss with her the idea of adoption, fostering or simply kidnapping (I kid, I kid).

Adoption id extremely hard and fostering is unpredictable with the kid and their background, so who knows what avenue we will take.

never tried it myself but have heard from a few relatives that adoption in this country is a total mind*, needlessly complicated, which is a shame given the huge amount of kids that don't have a permanent home.

good luck to your and your wife whichever avenue you go down.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

15 years ago, my wife had ovarian cancer and she had a full hysterectomy as that was the recommendation for a full recovery. We discussed kids, we decided we didn’t want them. We were in out mid to late 20’s.

Fast forward to my mid 40’s, she still doesn’t want kids but and I’m now not sure.

I don’t want to wait another 10 years and say, what if. I think I want to investigate and discuss with her the idea of adoption, fostering or simply kidnapping (I kid, I kid).

Adoption id extremely hard and fostering is unpredictable with the kid and their background, so who knows what avenue we will take.

Sorry to hear about your wife's illness. I looked into adoption about 2 years ago and decided it wasn't for me. Permanent foster may be a good option for you to research, it is easier and cheaper than adoption but the legal guardian rights cease at age 18 (although that doesn't change the parental relationship of course!)

 

[Hawk Dork]

No kids, no pets its very liberating.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

It would definitely end up being cheaper. With increasing costs of living you need good income and job stability in order to have a good go at life and bringing them up I reckon. Definitely not for everyone.

 

[Seeds]

It’s fantastic those that don’t want to be parents are not doing so.

It is great that society doesnt put pressure on people to have kids as much as it used to. But people who dont have kids should pay higher taxes to fund their retirement as we need the next generation to do all the work for us when we are retired.

 

[Seeds]

If a GFC 2.0 scenario killed off capitalism then i think it would revert back 2 females breeding with the biggest, baddest ape in the zoo
Social safety net is important for a functioning society but i have wondered about the genetic impacts on evolution
I think you are looking at it from down ya nose though

Why do you care about evolution? It takes tens of thousands of years for even the slightest changes. You will be well and truly dead before anything changes from evolution. And even if that wasnt an issue humans will be overridng evolution and designing new humans within the next 30-200 years guaranteed. In 500-1000 years the dominant species living on this earth will be genetically more different from us then we are from apes and evolution will have played no role in the change.

 

[Seeds]

Underrated movie
But does success in modern society = better genes 2 spread via baby ?

Or c) more leisure time is better then both.

 

[Bunkdar]

Why do you care about evolution? It takes tens of thousands of years for even the slightest changes. You will be well and truly dead before anything changes from evolution. And even if that wasnt an issue humans will be overridng evolution and designing new humans within the next 30-200 years guaranteed. In 500-1000 years the dominant species living on this earth will be genetically more different from us then we are from apes and evolution will have played no role in the change.

Gotta point something out dude...you started with questioning why i care about evolution .?. and then went into a paragraph about ya own views on it
Enthusiasm aside it feels like a human ego angle view
Why would we design new humans ? Design something better ffs..example

 

[Seeds]

Gotta point something out dude...you started with questioning why i care about evolution .?. and then went into a paragraph about ya own views on it
Enthusiasm aside it feels like a human ego angle view
Why would we design new humans ? Design something better ffs..example

Exactly. We will design something better that replaces humans. And we will be that things partial ancestors.

And why do you care about evolution?

 

[Bunkdar]

those partial ancestor robots
will take one look at us
and fek us off

 

[Seeds]

those partial ancestor robots
will take one look at us
and fek us off

No they wont because we wont be here anymore. They will be our great great .... great grandkids.

 

[Andre]

What worries me is society following the movie 'Idiocracy'. The more successful people reduce in breeding due to following careers and the mainly lower socioeconomic group breed like rabbits.

Up until the creation of the welfare state evolution favoured those that were either stronger, faster or smarter (wealth as a proxy for having (or their ancestors) at least one of these traits). From a purely biological (leaving moral arguments aside here) perspective the welfare state is encouraging those most likely to lack these 'good things for improving humanity as a whole' traits to have children, whilst those that do have these traits are generally working.

It's why cries against 'middle class welfare', especially Family tax benefits (or their equivalents in other countries) are so short sighted. These encourage those that are more likely to 'improve the gene pool' to have children (especially if they don't taper off with income), as well as these are more likely to be two parent households where the children are going to be raised in a stable, loving environment, with much less risk of exposure to substance abuse, violence and crime (I'm saying less, not that all for any group).

Things could be further improved by having policies similar to some Scandanavian countries where both parents are required to take parental leave. Having government funded (100% of pay) parental leave for 3 months for each parent would be a good start.

 

[Chief]

A bit off topic I don't know that equating morality with poverty has ever been a good path.

So saying the "worse" people will have more kids than the "better" people doesn't sit well at all. Have you spoken to a private school kid lately? Some of them are utterly insane, evil, or both.

 

[Deliverance]

A bit off topic I don't know that equating morality with poverty has ever been a good path.

So saying the "worse" people will have more kids than the "better" people doesn't sit well at all. Have you spoken to a private school kid lately? Some of them are utterly insane, evil, or both.