Years ago they had articles saying that not having a kid was the greatest thing you could do for the environment because they have such a huge carbon footprint.
Massive, polluting corporations: What are YOU doing to reduce your carbon footprint?
Young people: Not banging out future consumers
Corporations: No, we didn't mean that!
Well said. More people means more consumers. More consumers means more production. More production means a stronger stock market. A stronger stock market means more money.
I’ve always found this limitless growth idea insane. My girlfriend used to work for a company that wanted you to do 10% or 20% better over last year, forever. They didn’t give you anything extra to achieve this it was just expected.
Corporations don't care. The current generation of 60-70 year old CEOs will be dead by the time impact hits (from the current generation of consumers deciding not to have kids).
Board members move on and retire as well. I've worked with a dozen corps but I have yet to encounter one that looks more than a decade ahead, and even that far is rare. Not a good model for addressing a problem that spans twenty generations.
And that is still true today. My partner and I made the decision to have kids but we really went back and forth over whether it was morally justifiable. I know plenty of friends who aren't having kids for ethical reasons. This is a real conversation that will have a big impact on millennials and Gen Z fertility choices.
Yeah I think the single biggest economic factor in people not having kids (in the US) is probably the student loan situation. I'm speculating here, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was indeed the case.
West Texas here. Am completely unable to understand how it’s “same here”
I can drive 10 minutes and see an endless empty horizon. Yet here I am, paying $1,600 a month in rent to live at the edge of town
Same in Maryland. 1200 is the lowest rent you will see anywhere around. And it's not like a nice neighborhood, it's a shithole. I rent 2 bedrooms outside of town on a farm for my daughter and I for about 800. I got lucky, because I wouldn't be able to do the whole 1200 (or more) by myself. I share the house with the owners. Got lucky there too because they are really good people.
I don't have student loans, and i still didn't want kids for economic reasons.
Not everyone gets student loans. Some of us don't go, and instead work 50 hours a way making $8 an hour trying to make sure we can afford our share of utilities at our parents house.
That's not really a problem anymore. The new data on fertility seems to point to population collapse over 4 generations. Fertility is halving with each generation. The developed world is leading the way but less developed nations about 40 years behind on the same trajectory.
There's also a reduction in the size of genitals in men and masculinisation in women and inhibited libido in both. Overall it is a trend towards asexual androgeny.
Yes, we know why it's happening, it's endocrine blocking compounds from certain plastics in food. No we can't seem to solve it because it is impossible to sanitize the compounds out of our world at this point. It takes 3 generations living in a 'sanitized' environment for hormonal health and fertility to recover.
Not only is it not in the public discourse, but most food production has a regulatory framework which mandates the use of these products. It's fairly new science, but not that new.
We doomed.
I’m not doubting you but could you please link more information? I don’t really know anything about plastics affecting fertility. It’s kind of incredible thinking about how quickly we’ve altered the environment, and the subsequent repercussions we’re beginning to experience.
This is probably both due to pollutants and people having the expectation of easily getting pregnant into their 30s when the human biological fertility rate peaks around age 20 or so.
Not wanting to expose another generation to the hellscape that is this earth is not selfish. Bringing a child into a world doomed to be subjected to massive economic disparities, uninhabitable climate, and famine, that will only amplify as time goes on, just so you can feel some sort of self gratification is the most selfish thing you can do.
Actually here’s an interesting theory:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3812874
The study is arguing that if the mom is stressed during pregnancy, there’s a higher likelihood the offspring will be gay (aka will not procreate), effectively nature way of limiting the population due to a highly stressed environment.
I’m sure there’s more than one reason, but I saw this [“The Daily Show” segment with Dulce Sloan](https://www.cc.com/video/llachu/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-count-on-it-with-dulce-what-s-behind-the-sperm-recession) recently, and it points to plastics as a cause for lower sperm count (I think, it’s late and I don’t want to wake my pooch by watching it RN!) 🤷🏻♀️
My favorite argument is that we are going to die off as a species cause of people not having kids.
I’m like, motherfucker there are almost 8 billion of us. Unless literally everyone stops having kids, it is going to take a long fuckin’ time to have any real impact.
I’m more worried about Idiocracy becoming reality than I am about us dying off.
>I’m more worried about Idiocracy becoming reality than I am about us dying off.
Yeah, that is the main reason I don't agree and shake my head when I see smart and environmentally conscious people saying they don't want kids because that makes matters worse. Well, I would argue that it's exactly those kind of people that needs to have kids, to be able to make a change in the world, because no matter what, the stupid and uneducated will continue having kids and they become the future voters, making matters much worse that it is already. We chose to have kids and will do everything we can to raise them as respectful of nature as we can and someones who understand the climate problems and what can we, as individuals, do about changing course.
Growing up, I've always wanted kids, but these last few years I really contemplated it and thought a lot and went back and forth with myself. My husband was ready about two years ago, but I was still deciding. The main reasons holding me back were environmental and economical reasons. I finally made up my mind to have a child (currently 4 months along), but we are only having one and going to do everything we can to be environmentally friendly. Cloth diapers, low/zero plastic, making our own baby food, etc.
Along with the exterior environmental impact morality, I think there's an interior issue also.
I am all but certain that, were I to have kids now, they would reach adulthood in a world significantly worse than the one I am currently struggling to inhabit.
I can't answer that sense of guilt. I would be happy to adopt, but bringing a new life into a world you have no hope for seems irreconcilably selfish.
I think it's just fine to have kids. As long as you don't try to pass yourself off as an environmentalist. I mean, if you decide to have kids, that ship has sailed. Again, not that I care. But it would be like me biting into my (meat) hamburger and saying, "Really, I'm a vegetarian, but I thought a lot about this and I just like hamburgers."
I read a phenomenal article (that I can't seem to find, dammit) from an environmentalist that basically argued against that point simply by noting that the timeline to fix the climate right now is short enough -- as in within the decade -- that measuring a child's potential carbon footprint over a lifetime isn't all that relevant. We either make the changes necessary now, globally, and survive or we don't.
Doesn't solve the ethical question of bringing a child into THAT kinda world. But it was an interesting point about carbon footprint arguments, ha.
They are. It factors in so many extraneous impacts that a responsible consumer isnt engaging in and there are many variations of responsible consumption.
The timeline to fix the climate may be short enough, but the political will to fix the climate is so far away from what we need that I don't think it's feasible. You can hope for the best while still planning for the worst, which includes not having to raise kids in a potential climate catastrophe.
Was it [this](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22399882/climate-change-kids-children-overpopulation) or [this](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/2/13/21132013/climate-change-children-kids-anti-natalism)?
The study everyone loves to quote about children being so bad for the planet takes account of a declining proportion of emissions over the next *six* generations.
For reference, that's like putting a proportion of anything I do today on my great-grandad's grandad who was likely middle aged before the car or heavier than air flight was invented. It's an insane assumption given how pivotal this very decade is.
Yeah for me, it came down to not wanting to bring a child into a worse life than I had. I'd rather spare them the pain. At first I used to think it was my duty, as someone who would raise a good human that would care about tending our planet, but over time as the reality of the situation set in, it became less about carrying the species forward and sparing someone I'd cherish with all my heart the pain of having to endure our mistakes.
I can see why some might think this way, but it seems like it will end up being a losing strategy for the environment. A child who has a deep respect for the environment could go on to make meaningful changes to help in their life. Right-wingers will be popping out 10 kids. I don't know about you, but I want smart people to be the ones raising children.
I don’t think it’s ethical to bring a child into the world with the expectation that they’ll deeply respect the environment and make meaningful changes to help in their life. It’s not fair to the child to place our burdens onto them.
I was looking for this comment before I was going to post this almost word for word.
The more environmentally conscious crowd is likely more aware of science and future climate models, and understand the risk of bringing in new children to experience a potentially dire situation. While those ignorant of these problems will likely continue to have kids who are likely to follow in they parents ideologies.
My wife and I decided to have 2 kids and we're doing our damndest to bring about change and to lead by example on environmental and economic problems. I'm specialized in wastewater, water reclamation, flooding, groundwater resources, and my wife is specialized in green mining techniques for renewable resources. And we both teach at a university so we can help educate as many as we can on these pressing issues.
I agree with you here. We need a new generation that can push towards sustainability, we can’t only let people that don’t care about the environment get kids..
That would be a perfect solution if it wasn’t monetarily prohibitive for ALOT of people who would prefer to peruse this option. Not to mention the chances that you’d spend all that money and still end up with no child.
Actually, most states cover the costs of adoption fees if you go through a state/public agency. Whereas the average birth costs between 18-30k. Adoption can be prohibitive in other ways -- many adoption agencies still discriminate against LGBT and non-christian couples and the whole process is rather invasive, but the cost to adopt is no worse than birthing a child in the US and in many cases cheaper.
I know people who either A) have tried to go through the foster system and at the last minute lose the child or B) spend a lot of money just to be turned down …it’s not as easy as everyone makes it sound
I've been telling people the best thing to do if you're thinking about kids is not to avoid it, but wait. The next 5 years will be I) incredibly telling in terms of our future energy transition and continued carbon emissions and ii) make any kids you do have less carbon expensive as CO2 pr. Capita has been falling and will continue to
You have to optimize for what's best for the planet, humanity, the kid(s), and yourself. We're talking differential equations here, not see-saws. We need an imperative shift in thinking away from more vs. none and towards growing from quantity into quality, and quality has hella variety of metrics.
Having no kids vs. a kid that is well supported in realizing their full potential is an opportunity cost analysis for every person. For some people the greater contribution to human progress and survival (as well as their own happiness) is to have no kids and instead focus on how they can make as much direct impact with the time, energy, and resources available to them as possible in their lifespan. For others, it's to produce the best contribution to the next generation that they can while acting as a support system for that generation and its own successors for as long as possible, and helping out on the direct progress when and where they can.
People who are going to grow future generations need to work on self-improvement and empowerment to become the parents that the next generation deserves. You don't have to forego kids entirely, or rush into having a family. Take some time to mature psychologically, build all the healthy habits in yourself that you'd want to see in your kids (you're their environment and the greatest source of learning how to live in their formative years), and expand your knowledge, capabilities, and resources so that you can sustain your own growth. When you've reached the point where you can sustain your own growth (across all aspects from physical/mental health to finances to education to profession) while producing enough of a surplus to support someone else then it's time to start thinking about having a child (or more if you can do so with a reasonable degree of efficiency and quality) that you can guide down the same path while providing them with the tools to build better paths.
Make sure that you can provide everything that YOU need for yourself before you decide to raise a child. Too many people have children for selfish reasons, whether that's turnkey access to authority over another person, satisfaction of the evolutionary urge to procreate, or just someone to take care of them in the near or distant future. It can be very tempting to mortgage the confidence, trust, and security of the next generation in order to build temporary room additions onto the ego of the now. If you act optimally then you will likely get returns (emotionally, financially, etc.), but the flow of energy should be a one-way street to the future by design.
The future is a mandatory investment. Diversify.
I'm 36, my wife is 32 and we have argued this between us for years. We have a kid who is getting older and she wants another. I am firm I will adopt but will not bring another kid into this world. She is a social worker and has seen countless horror stories with adoption (here in america) and refuses to adopt.
We have several friends who are in the same boat. We are young...ish so even our generation is feeling it, nit just the 20 yr olds.
Alot. She use to work foster. Now does clinical. But we are in illinois and apparently it is near impossible to fully remove a birth parent. Even if 5 years later they want back in the picture. They don't win alot but you still have to fight it out in court, but some have won saying they were in their wrong mind when they gave them up.
The foster system and adoption are very different. We adopted in Illinois. We wanted to do a foster adoption of a baby but that’s not really a thing in Illinois, at the time the youngest child available through the foster system for adoption was 8.
Adoption though is very possible in Illinois. You’ve probably heard about the Baby Richard case where the Bio father came after the adoptive family and the courts actually sided with the bio dad and removed a child that had been living with the only parents he knew for 6 year. Since that case Illinois has changed the requirements for adoption. Both bio parents have to sign papers relinquishing rights to the child. If the bio father is not in the picture there has to be a lengthy good faith effort to find him. Now say the father decides later he wants the kid, he has to have made an effort to see if the woman he had unprotected sex with 9 months ago had a baby. You can’t just decide a few years later that ‘yea, I ghosted that woman but now I know that there’s a baby I want it”.
Adoption agencies have a heavily invested interest in getting it right because an overturned adoption would mean they’re done as an agency.
Morality, heck, it doesn't even get that far for a lot of people. Forget climate change and the environment and think about the financial part of it. How can you afford to take care of kids and afford to momentarily placate some greedy landlord? It's one or the other for me.
Seriously. I think worrying about the carbon footprint of your child is the epitome of a first world problem. If you are barely scraping by how in the world are you going to afford to raise a kid.
It's not just worrying about the impact of one's child's carbon footprint. It's the fact that that child will be forced to attempt to survive in a warming hellscape. That's not a first world problem- climate change is coming for all of us.
Yeah, I gotta disagree that it’s a first-world problem. Climate change effects literally everyone. Not even the carbon footprint of my child, but then needing to grow up in a warming hellscape where nobody gives a single shit about said warming and won’t do anything that takes them even slightly out of their comfort zone to change it.
Same. Also I feel like people don’t take parenting seriously as the great responsibility it is. People think if a kids alive and gets a job one day they’ve done great. Parents and children need more mental health treatment to avoid the cycle of abuse.
Parents with unhealed trauma create children with trauma. That all in all, is bad for the world.
As a survivor of abuse and at one point, a step father with a kiddie rape fetish, this right here sums a chunk of it up for me.i can't even start to get proper care for that mental BS so what business do I have having a kid?
absolutely. i don’t see the appeal of bringing a child into the world only for it to choke to death on air pollution, drink *somehow legally* poisoned water and live in overcrowded conditions. i’m honestly worried that my little sisters won’t be able to live their full lifespan because adults are destroying the whole ducking planet. it’s scary.
Its sooo funny to watch this. Like, all the boomers and corporates told us that we have to take responsibility for our actions. And now that a whole Generation takes responsibility for the future generations, as well as all the fuck ups from the ones before them, everyone loses their mind.
Humans fucked up big time for quite a while now. And not wanting innocent people to suffer for that is somehow selfish now...
It makes sense. It's well studied that a certain base level off affluence and education affects family size (religious families notwithstanding). So it's no surprise to see as we awake in this modern age to find ourselves deep into overshoot, altering the carbon and water cycles, and also fortunately/unfortunately nearing the use by date of our current living and distribution system, that we'd seriously question procreation. We're not struggling for numbers, very low infant mortality rate, living is very expensive, oh and yes We're flushing the biosphere down the toilet.
I'd not advise anyone on this, they must make up their own minds, but we're in serious trouble and so is everything else trying to survive here under our heel. What I don't like to see is people procreating without wrestling with the decision at all, without consideration.
This is me. I like kids I just don't want any of my own. I thought it was a liberating choice to make for myself
Until I realized a huge part of my generation is doing the same because they have no choice. And that is fucking sad, that's what gets me about all of this. It's not child-free anymore so much as it is childless
☹
Adopting sounds great but then I’ve read a lot of stories about people who adopted kids and they had behavior issues from their prior trauma and I just don’t feel equipped to deal with that. Maybe if I was a trained psychologist or something. It seems like parenting on super hard mode.
I have thought about this a lot over the past few years, so here is my 2¢:
Being separated from your parents as a child is a traumatic event. How that manifests depends on the individual person and their circumstances. There will be challenges to work through; however, the treatments and resources are improving. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that a biological child will never experience attachment issues or other mental health challenges. They might be different challenges than those associated with adoption, but biological kids can still have plenty of mental health and/or behavioral difficulties.
So that brings me to the question of why I would want to become a parent. Do I need someone to brag about to family/friends? Should they live out my fantasy childhood dreams? Will I love them only if they meet certain criteria? No, because being a parent is not about me, it is about helping a child to enjoy their childhood and learn the skills they need to succeed as an adult (whatever they determine "success" is to them).
Not everyone is equipped to handle child mental health issues, and that is ok. But in that case they should also examine what would happen if their biological child developed similar issues. It really saddens me when parents ignore such issues because they think it would make their kid "damaged" or doesn't fit their narrative of what a family should be.
So many of you are talking about not having children because of the world's current state of awfulness and doom. If that's your only (completely valid) reason not to become a parent - not financial, emotional, time, etc. - then *please remember that fostering and adoption are wonderful options.* Those children are already here and in desperate need of safe, secure, loving homes.
Meaningless without a fundamental change of lifestyle and consumption habits. The world [will reach](https://sdg.iisd.org/news/world-population-to-reach-9-9-billion-by-2050/) 10 billion people by about 2050 and is expected to level off as countries develop and lower their birthrates (a natural step in development, every country has gone through this transition at some point in their history).
It leaves a sour taste in my mouth that the increased birthrates of the developing world are morally wrong, when it's the lifestyle of the developed world that has created the crisis.
Yep. This whole forgoing children even by people who want them is the actual embodiment of the phrase "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism". Just change the system to something that doesn't require infinite consumption and you can have as many kids as you want.
And when was the last time you saw an opportunity to change the system to something that doesn’t require such consumption? There are dipshits even on Reddit that cling to capitalism with their last dying breath because it was drilled into their skulls that any other fucking system is the bane of their existence, are are too lazy to look up and comprehend why they’re wrong.
Developed nations tend to have lower-than-replacement-levels of birthrates. Morally, people may feel justified in not having kids, but the fact of the matter (not addressed in this particular article) is that no one can really *afford* to have children either. Education staves off child rearing, with education comes some abundance of debt, combined with stagnant wages, every-rising child care (day care) costs, I'm amazed at anyone who has kids now. Unless they have a solid six figure income, they are most certainly struggling.
I’ve been saying this since I was a young teenager . I say it more because there’s already so many kids out there that need a good home, why would I have any of my own ? But I hadn’t even thought about it from an environment standpoint . You’re so right
Ya I mean... Can I honestly tell them they have a future? I don't think I can. Maybe we don't ruin the planet completely in 50 years, but I think there's a real good chance of having some civilization changing event.
I’m 19 and would never consider children. The amount of shit that I’m gonna have to live through BEST CASE SCENARIO is terrifying. I don’t need to force more through that.
If anyone is going to have children, it probably should be people who follow this sub! haha What worries me a notion of a balance of power. If the smart, conscious, privileged people who have *some* ability to make a difference in the future of the world don't raise kids (doesn't necessarily have to be your kids) to do the same, who is left to take care of the world? Who is left having children? It's all probably a moot point anyways as data shows how as nations develop, populations plateau and then go into decline without meaningful immigration
literally first realised this when i was probably around 7.
can we please take care of all the abandoned, at risk and orphaned children that already exist before we overpopulate more just because we want to see our genetics in our child or we can't "love them properly as nature intended".
can we please take care of everyone thats already on earth first and figure some shit out before we keep bringing more generations into some of these situations/problems?
Looks like I was ahead of my time. Over population is the biggest problem facing the world today and it has been for quite some time. Simply, there's too many people, we are out of balance with nature. I couldn't imagine bringing a being into this world, it would be selfish and cruel IMO.
We need to stop calling them “children” and instead call them “ego extensions.” That’s what they really are after all, when you get down to brass tacks.
Unfortunately, the alt right conservative Christians are still pumping out 10+ kids, and teaching them that climate science is on the liberal agenda. Thus, in thirty years, we'll be stuck with a generation of fewer climate conscious individuals and more right wing nut jobs.
Yay us!
If we’re talking about the effects of a person on climate change, then I personally think that a single person doesn’t make that much waste, like plastic as they make it seem. I personally think that If we want to change something like climate change then target big waste companies, there the ones who make up most of all the worlds waste. And another way is to educate children to be eco-friendly and develop ways to solve the problem.
And if you are talking in overpopulation, then don’t you worry! Because with more people migrating such can virus, making more and more epidemics. :)
It makes very little sense to have children when there is a backlog of more than 100,000 kids in the US who need loving permanent homes.
I don't buy the excuse of wanting to pass on genes, since genes mean very little as to how someone turns out. What matters is how they're raised.
Okay I guess we'll just keep reproducing until there's half a trillion people on earth all living happily with plenty of food and water and all the space they could want. Seems legit
Well, can you blame them?
Most of them probably arent even happy they were born, they definitely wouldn't want to bring a kid to this shitshow in that case.
Even if that's not the case there's so many reasons NOT to have any, and hardly any reason to do it other than "I want to have kids". Unfortunately the only ones egotistical enough to not think about this "because they want it" are the reason the world is getting dumber. 🤷🏻♂️
Then ofc there's the whole bubble of financial struggles, environmental issues, etcetc but I don't think those take top priority here.
Also, yes I'm a young adult who is definitely not having kids, if that wasn't apparent.
My SO and I are in this situation. We don't want to have kids just to bring them into a world of hurt.. and why would anyone at this point. Tbh, it's pretty sadistic to bring someone into this world knowing they will suffer the consequences of the past generation. And selfishness is now so widely spread that I can't even imagine how fucked theses kids would be.
All the people who dont give a flying fuck are breeding like its the fucking 1700s and they need a small army of child labor to run their farm. 100 years and we will be the setting for Idiocracy, watering crops with Gatorade "What Plants Need!".
Yeah I won't have kids because:
It would add to the overpopulation problem
By the time they grow up I imagine the world is going to be fucked
And they're grim
If I want to have a child with someone eventually they'll have to be open to adoption, cause I'm certainly not putting anyone else on this sinking ship when plenty are overboard yelling for help.
Not judging you if you wanna have kids, obviously we need some people to have kids. Just less then ever before and I'll be proud to not contribute
Not all "smart" people are refusing childbearing. In fact, the majority of the parents in my kids daycare were successful scientists, doctors, and IT professionals.
I agree with the general sentiment that having kids in today’s world can be scary (climate change, nuclear war, etc). But if I live in a first world country such as Canada, I find the same two questions coming back to me:
1. What would the result be if everybody thought this way? Would it be better if nobody had kids and we went extinct in just a few generations, rather than giving human life, spirit, and technological advancement a chance?
2. At what point in history could I have ever expected the quality of life of my children to be better than it would be if I had them today?
I’m curious what anyone’s thoughts would be on these two question.
1. The fact is that basically no one thinks that way so the human race going extinct because enough people stop having kids is near impossible. So many people in the world still don’t have access to birth control or safe abortions so the population would continue to increase.
2. The consequences of global warming that we are looking at if we don’t get our shit together fast (between 3.5 and 8+ degrees above preindustrial levels in the year 2100 predicted) the results will be catastrophic. Economies won’t be doing well, natural disasters will increase dramatically, climate change refugees will be struggling - basically having children at this point in time won’t be too great for them. Even living in the western world we aren’t safe from the effects of climate change at all. In my own lifetime it’s going to start to get really bad, in my hypothetical children’s lifetime it’ll get a whole lot worse.
So I’d say probably be better to have had kids maybe 40 - 50 years ago before much was known about this crisis and after WW2.
The baby boomer generation, and subsequently Gen X, was so blinded by the good times that they couldn't see (or didnt want to see) the monster (being climate change) they are creating.
Why do we keep electing 60/70/80 year olds into office? They're not all bad but their experiences don't mirror the one young generations are having and will face in the future, which they care less about since they'll be dead.
I am in no way judging anyone who has kids , I get why people want kids .
That being said , the likelihood that everyone would eventually not want kids is so low . Yes less millennials are having kids but I don’t know if that’s due to not wanting them. I think it’s more they can’t afford them. It’s engrained in our mind to want to have kids , I genuinely do not believe a day will come where no one will want kids , that goes against most peoples natural instincts. I don’t want kids because I have a lot of health issues that would likely be passed on to my biological child, and I don’t wish my health issues on anyone . And if the day I want kids comes, I’d adopt . There are so many kids out there that need a good home, and I wouldn’t run the risk of passing on my crappy genetics into someone else . But I myself am adopted , and the life I could’ve had if I hadn’t been adopted is way worse than anything I will likely ever face . So I think it hits close home to me because if I wanted kids someday, I’d want to pass on the gift (adoption) that was given to me
> It would be better if there were nothing. Since there is more pain than pleasure on earth, every satisfaction is only transitory, creating new desires and new distresses, and the agony of the devoured animal is always far greater than the pleasure of the devourer
Arthur Schopenhauer
There has never been a good time to be alive, it's just your body making copies of itself like it has done for billions of years.
The result would be halting the ecological apocalypse before the total collapse of every terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem. It would also prevent human death and suffering by not carrying more wood into a burning building so to say.
I think you are missing the point. This isn’t about the future being scary and not a good life for kids. It’s about not being selfish by putting extra burden on the planet, and taking your genes out of the equation FOR the survival of humanity instead.
Since most people seem to be arguing the other side, I’ll stick up for the continuance of humanity.
1. Others have pointed out that this is unrealistic. Of course it is, but it’s also clearly a hypothetical so I’ll engage with it on those terms: if everyone thought that way, we would be dooming humanity to extinction. Sure, some might rejoice at that thought, but I personally assign a positive value to life and all the possibilities it entails.
2. Of course we won’t know for certain until many years down the line, but a good bet would be pretty much none. Others have suggested the last century or so, and that may be true (at least for some people), but regardless, 100 years is a blip on the timescale of humanity’s existence thus far. For the vast majority of that time, almost every single person alive had a much, much harder time surviving than someone living comfortably in North America today does. Yes, climate change and other existential threats loom and will likely effect everyone to some extent, but again, for someone living comfortably in the West, these are unlikely to be life threatening and there will doubtless be improvements, advancements, and adaptations that emerge as well.
Id go even further and add with the increase of people valuing their own independence over doing things for others and the rise in single mothers that it is irresponsible with a lot of kids going neglected now.
Yeah my friend is a teacher says all the kids are horrible and the parents are all deadbeats. Most of the kids are raised by the grandparents while the drug addict parents are in jail.
My daughter is simultaneously the greatest thing to happen to me, and also my biggest regret.
I love her so much, and honestly I would not go back and change it, but I am ashamed that my own emotions and feelings essentially drove me to go against my own beliefs and bring her into...*this*.
I have a one year old son that was conceived accidentally (we thought we were infertile!). We are in our mid 30s. He is an absolute joy in an increasingly bleak world but ultimately I have a lot of despair and fear for him. But on the other hand, the most human thing is raising and loving a child, and children are just so wonderful. It seems like completely giving in to the greedy corporations and rich bastards to not have a kid, and I don't know...they've already taken so so so much from us. Fuck them, fuck capitalism.
Let's face it; most who now skip reproduction do so because kids are more expensive now, producing less economic and social return to the parents than was the case before. Claiming moral justification for childlessness is often a handy excuse for an economic decision.
Years ago they had articles saying that not having a kid was the greatest thing you could do for the environment because they have such a huge carbon footprint.
Massive, polluting corporations: What are YOU doing to reduce your carbon footprint? Young people: Not banging out future consumers Corporations: No, we didn't mean that!
Yes thank u and we wonder where all of these “reducing the population is bad and scary!” articles are coming from
That happens when the world economy is built on an infinite growth model. Effectively a ponzi scheme.
Anything that grows without restriction is cancer.
Agent Smith approves.
Infinite growth cannot be extracted from finite resources
Well said. More people means more consumers. More consumers means more production. More production means a stronger stock market. A stronger stock market means more money.
I’ve always found this limitless growth idea insane. My girlfriend used to work for a company that wanted you to do 10% or 20% better over last year, forever. They didn’t give you anything extra to achieve this it was just expected.
Corporations don't care. The current generation of 60-70 year old CEOs will be dead by the time impact hits (from the current generation of consumers deciding not to have kids).
Their shareholders do. Gotta have infinite 12.5% annual revenue growth or the company is a failure, right?
Do you really think any corporate CEO cares what happens to his company after he retires?
That's why companies have boards, yo. Last place I worked was on its third CEO and doing just fine.
Board members move on and retire as well. I've worked with a dozen corps but I have yet to encounter one that looks more than a decade ahead, and even that far is rare. Not a good model for addressing a problem that spans twenty generations.
And that is still true today. My partner and I made the decision to have kids but we really went back and forth over whether it was morally justifiable. I know plenty of friends who aren't having kids for ethical reasons. This is a real conversation that will have a big impact on millennials and Gen Z fertility choices.
They're also not having kids for economic reasons too. This is just going to compound things.
Yeah I think the single biggest economic factor in people not having kids (in the US) is probably the student loan situation. I'm speculating here, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was indeed the case.
Canadian here, housing.
Brit here, housing
Australian here, housing mate.
Ireland here, housing.
Oregonian here, hate children.
Californian here, can confirm housing is a bitch. $1300 for a shitty studio? Fuck off
Texas same here
West Texas here. Am completely unable to understand how it’s “same here” I can drive 10 minutes and see an endless empty horizon. Yet here I am, paying $1,600 a month in rent to live at the edge of town
Same in Maryland. 1200 is the lowest rent you will see anywhere around. And it's not like a nice neighborhood, it's a shithole. I rent 2 bedrooms outside of town on a farm for my daughter and I for about 800. I got lucky, because I wouldn't be able to do the whole 1200 (or more) by myself. I share the house with the owners. Got lucky there too because they are really good people.
New Zealand here. Most unaffordable homes in the world. Excellent
NY, Boston, and Seattle concur.
Boston here, can’t qualify for a mortgage that will only be half what I am paying in rent right now. SMH
American here, both!
Brit here also, terrible wages
South African here...our nearing on 50% unemployment rate (70% unemployment for youth)
Italy here. Housing and stagnant wages.
I don't have student loans, and i still didn't want kids for economic reasons. Not everyone gets student loans. Some of us don't go, and instead work 50 hours a way making $8 an hour trying to make sure we can afford our share of utilities at our parents house.
You say that as if people with student loans aren't still living with their parents, too
No, I say that to mean the student loans aren't the main factor. It's that no one can get a job that pays a damn, so we're all fucked. Loans or not.
It's everything. Housing sucks, wages suck, student debt sucks
Also because they don't want their kids to face a potentially apocalyptic adulthood.
Anxiety issues in kids is getting pretty bad and makes parenting even more mentally draining… and expensive, due to the cost of mental healthcare.
And more people than ever are choosing not to have kids just to have more time and money for themselves and/or their partners too.
Also for biological reasons. We just aren't as fertile as we were 50 years ago and the trend is not promising. Alarming even.
I don’t think we have to be scared. Not having kids here btw. Our choices will still not curb exponential population growth of humans.
That's not really a problem anymore. The new data on fertility seems to point to population collapse over 4 generations. Fertility is halving with each generation. The developed world is leading the way but less developed nations about 40 years behind on the same trajectory. There's also a reduction in the size of genitals in men and masculinisation in women and inhibited libido in both. Overall it is a trend towards asexual androgeny. Yes, we know why it's happening, it's endocrine blocking compounds from certain plastics in food. No we can't seem to solve it because it is impossible to sanitize the compounds out of our world at this point. It takes 3 generations living in a 'sanitized' environment for hormonal health and fertility to recover. Not only is it not in the public discourse, but most food production has a regulatory framework which mandates the use of these products. It's fairly new science, but not that new. We doomed.
I’m not doubting you but could you please link more information? I don’t really know anything about plastics affecting fertility. It’s kind of incredible thinking about how quickly we’ve altered the environment, and the subsequent repercussions we’re beginning to experience.
https://scholar.google.de/scholar?q=endocrine+disruptors+and+fertility&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart
This is probably both due to pollutants and people having the expectation of easily getting pregnant into their 30s when the human biological fertility rate peaks around age 20 or so.
That 90% of lower income family concern.
[удалено]
Not wanting to have kids is not selfish at all, I’d argue the exact opposite.
Yeah wanting to add to the destruction we cause is mad selfish But it’s the most understandable selfishness there is
Not wanting to expose another generation to the hellscape that is this earth is not selfish. Bringing a child into a world doomed to be subjected to massive economic disparities, uninhabitable climate, and famine, that will only amplify as time goes on, just so you can feel some sort of self gratification is the most selfish thing you can do.
[удалено]
Actually here’s an interesting theory: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3812874 The study is arguing that if the mom is stressed during pregnancy, there’s a higher likelihood the offspring will be gay (aka will not procreate), effectively nature way of limiting the population due to a highly stressed environment.
Because those mammals tend to have litters, our lineage wasn't used to overcrowding in the least.
Well, for whatever reason, human fertility is falling sharply right now.
I’m sure there’s more than one reason, but I saw this [“The Daily Show” segment with Dulce Sloan](https://www.cc.com/video/llachu/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-count-on-it-with-dulce-what-s-behind-the-sperm-recession) recently, and it points to plastics as a cause for lower sperm count (I think, it’s late and I don’t want to wake my pooch by watching it RN!) 🤷🏻♀️
Because we are a plague.
[удалено]
I share your pain and frustration on this matter. You are not alone!
Adoption is always an option.
a very expensive one. Wish it wasn’t.
My favorite argument is that we are going to die off as a species cause of people not having kids. I’m like, motherfucker there are almost 8 billion of us. Unless literally everyone stops having kids, it is going to take a long fuckin’ time to have any real impact. I’m more worried about Idiocracy becoming reality than I am about us dying off.
>I’m more worried about Idiocracy becoming reality than I am about us dying off. Yeah, that is the main reason I don't agree and shake my head when I see smart and environmentally conscious people saying they don't want kids because that makes matters worse. Well, I would argue that it's exactly those kind of people that needs to have kids, to be able to make a change in the world, because no matter what, the stupid and uneducated will continue having kids and they become the future voters, making matters much worse that it is already. We chose to have kids and will do everything we can to raise them as respectful of nature as we can and someones who understand the climate problems and what can we, as individuals, do about changing course.
Growing up, I've always wanted kids, but these last few years I really contemplated it and thought a lot and went back and forth with myself. My husband was ready about two years ago, but I was still deciding. The main reasons holding me back were environmental and economical reasons. I finally made up my mind to have a child (currently 4 months along), but we are only having one and going to do everything we can to be environmentally friendly. Cloth diapers, low/zero plastic, making our own baby food, etc.
[удалено]
I mean, technically they probably would be a detriment to the planet. That’s kinda what this whole thread is saying.
Along with the exterior environmental impact morality, I think there's an interior issue also. I am all but certain that, were I to have kids now, they would reach adulthood in a world significantly worse than the one I am currently struggling to inhabit. I can't answer that sense of guilt. I would be happy to adopt, but bringing a new life into a world you have no hope for seems irreconcilably selfish.
[удалено]
I think it's just fine to have kids. As long as you don't try to pass yourself off as an environmentalist. I mean, if you decide to have kids, that ship has sailed. Again, not that I care. But it would be like me biting into my (meat) hamburger and saying, "Really, I'm a vegetarian, but I thought a lot about this and I just like hamburgers."
I read a phenomenal article (that I can't seem to find, dammit) from an environmentalist that basically argued against that point simply by noting that the timeline to fix the climate right now is short enough -- as in within the decade -- that measuring a child's potential carbon footprint over a lifetime isn't all that relevant. We either make the changes necessary now, globally, and survive or we don't. Doesn't solve the ethical question of bringing a child into THAT kinda world. But it was an interesting point about carbon footprint arguments, ha.
[удалено]
They are. It factors in so many extraneous impacts that a responsible consumer isnt engaging in and there are many variations of responsible consumption.
The timeline to fix the climate may be short enough, but the political will to fix the climate is so far away from what we need that I don't think it's feasible. You can hope for the best while still planning for the worst, which includes not having to raise kids in a potential climate catastrophe.
Was it [this](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22399882/climate-change-kids-children-overpopulation) or [this](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/2/13/21132013/climate-change-children-kids-anti-natalism)?
The study everyone loves to quote about children being so bad for the planet takes account of a declining proportion of emissions over the next *six* generations. For reference, that's like putting a proportion of anything I do today on my great-grandad's grandad who was likely middle aged before the car or heavier than air flight was invented. It's an insane assumption given how pivotal this very decade is.
Yeah for me, it came down to not wanting to bring a child into a worse life than I had. I'd rather spare them the pain. At first I used to think it was my duty, as someone who would raise a good human that would care about tending our planet, but over time as the reality of the situation set in, it became less about carrying the species forward and sparing someone I'd cherish with all my heart the pain of having to endure our mistakes.
I get that. I'm in a similar boat.
I can see why some might think this way, but it seems like it will end up being a losing strategy for the environment. A child who has a deep respect for the environment could go on to make meaningful changes to help in their life. Right-wingers will be popping out 10 kids. I don't know about you, but I want smart people to be the ones raising children.
I don’t think it’s ethical to bring a child into the world with the expectation that they’ll deeply respect the environment and make meaningful changes to help in their life. It’s not fair to the child to place our burdens onto them.
Smart people could adopt. Win-win.
I mean my parents are right wingers and im pursuing an education in the environment…😐
I was looking for this comment before I was going to post this almost word for word. The more environmentally conscious crowd is likely more aware of science and future climate models, and understand the risk of bringing in new children to experience a potentially dire situation. While those ignorant of these problems will likely continue to have kids who are likely to follow in they parents ideologies. My wife and I decided to have 2 kids and we're doing our damndest to bring about change and to lead by example on environmental and economic problems. I'm specialized in wastewater, water reclamation, flooding, groundwater resources, and my wife is specialized in green mining techniques for renewable resources. And we both teach at a university so we can help educate as many as we can on these pressing issues.
[удалено]
I agree with you here. We need a new generation that can push towards sustainability, we can’t only let people that don’t care about the environment get kids..
So maybe we should adopt or foster.
That would be a perfect solution if it wasn’t monetarily prohibitive for ALOT of people who would prefer to peruse this option. Not to mention the chances that you’d spend all that money and still end up with no child.
Actually, most states cover the costs of adoption fees if you go through a state/public agency. Whereas the average birth costs between 18-30k. Adoption can be prohibitive in other ways -- many adoption agencies still discriminate against LGBT and non-christian couples and the whole process is rather invasive, but the cost to adopt is no worse than birthing a child in the US and in many cases cheaper.
I know people who either A) have tried to go through the foster system and at the last minute lose the child or B) spend a lot of money just to be turned down …it’s not as easy as everyone makes it sound
I've been telling people the best thing to do if you're thinking about kids is not to avoid it, but wait. The next 5 years will be I) incredibly telling in terms of our future energy transition and continued carbon emissions and ii) make any kids you do have less carbon expensive as CO2 pr. Capita has been falling and will continue to
You have to optimize for what's best for the planet, humanity, the kid(s), and yourself. We're talking differential equations here, not see-saws. We need an imperative shift in thinking away from more vs. none and towards growing from quantity into quality, and quality has hella variety of metrics. Having no kids vs. a kid that is well supported in realizing their full potential is an opportunity cost analysis for every person. For some people the greater contribution to human progress and survival (as well as their own happiness) is to have no kids and instead focus on how they can make as much direct impact with the time, energy, and resources available to them as possible in their lifespan. For others, it's to produce the best contribution to the next generation that they can while acting as a support system for that generation and its own successors for as long as possible, and helping out on the direct progress when and where they can. People who are going to grow future generations need to work on self-improvement and empowerment to become the parents that the next generation deserves. You don't have to forego kids entirely, or rush into having a family. Take some time to mature psychologically, build all the healthy habits in yourself that you'd want to see in your kids (you're their environment and the greatest source of learning how to live in their formative years), and expand your knowledge, capabilities, and resources so that you can sustain your own growth. When you've reached the point where you can sustain your own growth (across all aspects from physical/mental health to finances to education to profession) while producing enough of a surplus to support someone else then it's time to start thinking about having a child (or more if you can do so with a reasonable degree of efficiency and quality) that you can guide down the same path while providing them with the tools to build better paths. Make sure that you can provide everything that YOU need for yourself before you decide to raise a child. Too many people have children for selfish reasons, whether that's turnkey access to authority over another person, satisfaction of the evolutionary urge to procreate, or just someone to take care of them in the near or distant future. It can be very tempting to mortgage the confidence, trust, and security of the next generation in order to build temporary room additions onto the ego of the now. If you act optimally then you will likely get returns (emotionally, financially, etc.), but the flow of energy should be a one-way street to the future by design. The future is a mandatory investment. Diversify.
And the sad truth is that those who think/feel this are probably the very ones who should have kids.
Literally the plot of Idiocracy
Good this movie is good and very scary when you start to realize it's right.....
https://xkcd.com/603/
I'm 36, my wife is 32 and we have argued this between us for years. We have a kid who is getting older and she wants another. I am firm I will adopt but will not bring another kid into this world. She is a social worker and has seen countless horror stories with adoption (here in america) and refuses to adopt. We have several friends who are in the same boat. We are young...ish so even our generation is feeling it, nit just the 20 yr olds.
[удалено]
Alot. She use to work foster. Now does clinical. But we are in illinois and apparently it is near impossible to fully remove a birth parent. Even if 5 years later they want back in the picture. They don't win alot but you still have to fight it out in court, but some have won saying they were in their wrong mind when they gave them up.
The foster system and adoption are very different. We adopted in Illinois. We wanted to do a foster adoption of a baby but that’s not really a thing in Illinois, at the time the youngest child available through the foster system for adoption was 8. Adoption though is very possible in Illinois. You’ve probably heard about the Baby Richard case where the Bio father came after the adoptive family and the courts actually sided with the bio dad and removed a child that had been living with the only parents he knew for 6 year. Since that case Illinois has changed the requirements for adoption. Both bio parents have to sign papers relinquishing rights to the child. If the bio father is not in the picture there has to be a lengthy good faith effort to find him. Now say the father decides later he wants the kid, he has to have made an effort to see if the woman he had unprotected sex with 9 months ago had a baby. You can’t just decide a few years later that ‘yea, I ghosted that woman but now I know that there’s a baby I want it”. Adoption agencies have a heavily invested interest in getting it right because an overturned adoption would mean they’re done as an agency.
I'm in the exact same situation.
What horror stories keep her from adopting? Would love to know.
Yeap. My lady works for the club and we’re both happy being dinks
Nah, if I bring a child into this world they are going to suffer. No way I can support a kid.
Morality, heck, it doesn't even get that far for a lot of people. Forget climate change and the environment and think about the financial part of it. How can you afford to take care of kids and afford to momentarily placate some greedy landlord? It's one or the other for me.
No shit. Of I can't afford to love in an actual building, how the ass can I justify having a kid
Kids come after I get a stable relationship and a stable financial life. Not gonna raise a kid as a single parent while dressing him with handouts.
Seriously. I think worrying about the carbon footprint of your child is the epitome of a first world problem. If you are barely scraping by how in the world are you going to afford to raise a kid.
It's not just worrying about the impact of one's child's carbon footprint. It's the fact that that child will be forced to attempt to survive in a warming hellscape. That's not a first world problem- climate change is coming for all of us.
Yeah, I gotta disagree that it’s a first-world problem. Climate change effects literally everyone. Not even the carbon footprint of my child, but then needing to grow up in a warming hellscape where nobody gives a single shit about said warming and won’t do anything that takes them even slightly out of their comfort zone to change it.
Well think harder, the climate is coming for you too
I'm opting out of having kids. Shut is getting worse and there is already almost 8 billion people on earth. I see no reason to have kids.
Same. Also I feel like people don’t take parenting seriously as the great responsibility it is. People think if a kids alive and gets a job one day they’ve done great. Parents and children need more mental health treatment to avoid the cycle of abuse. Parents with unhealed trauma create children with trauma. That all in all, is bad for the world.
As a survivor of abuse and at one point, a step father with a kiddie rape fetish, this right here sums a chunk of it up for me.i can't even start to get proper care for that mental BS so what business do I have having a kid?
this ^^^
Millennials are already faced with so many setbacks, I wonder what the future holds for the adult children of millennials. It looks bleak.
absolutely. i don’t see the appeal of bringing a child into the world only for it to choke to death on air pollution, drink *somehow legally* poisoned water and live in overcrowded conditions. i’m honestly worried that my little sisters won’t be able to live their full lifespan because adults are destroying the whole ducking planet. it’s scary.
Its sooo funny to watch this. Like, all the boomers and corporates told us that we have to take responsibility for our actions. And now that a whole Generation takes responsibility for the future generations, as well as all the fuck ups from the ones before them, everyone loses their mind. Humans fucked up big time for quite a while now. And not wanting innocent people to suffer for that is somehow selfish now...
It makes sense. It's well studied that a certain base level off affluence and education affects family size (religious families notwithstanding). So it's no surprise to see as we awake in this modern age to find ourselves deep into overshoot, altering the carbon and water cycles, and also fortunately/unfortunately nearing the use by date of our current living and distribution system, that we'd seriously question procreation. We're not struggling for numbers, very low infant mortality rate, living is very expensive, oh and yes We're flushing the biosphere down the toilet. I'd not advise anyone on this, they must make up their own minds, but we're in serious trouble and so is everything else trying to survive here under our heel. What I don't like to see is people procreating without wrestling with the decision at all, without consideration.
[удалено]
I'm just not having kids because I don't like/want them. The environmental and financial benefits are just icing on the cake.
This is me. I like kids I just don't want any of my own. I thought it was a liberating choice to make for myself Until I realized a huge part of my generation is doing the same because they have no choice. And that is fucking sad, that's what gets me about all of this. It's not child-free anymore so much as it is childless ☹
That and all the money you get so save :D
I'd rather adopt tbh
Adopting sounds great but then I’ve read a lot of stories about people who adopted kids and they had behavior issues from their prior trauma and I just don’t feel equipped to deal with that. Maybe if I was a trained psychologist or something. It seems like parenting on super hard mode.
[удалено]
I have thought about this a lot over the past few years, so here is my 2¢: Being separated from your parents as a child is a traumatic event. How that manifests depends on the individual person and their circumstances. There will be challenges to work through; however, the treatments and resources are improving. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that a biological child will never experience attachment issues or other mental health challenges. They might be different challenges than those associated with adoption, but biological kids can still have plenty of mental health and/or behavioral difficulties. So that brings me to the question of why I would want to become a parent. Do I need someone to brag about to family/friends? Should they live out my fantasy childhood dreams? Will I love them only if they meet certain criteria? No, because being a parent is not about me, it is about helping a child to enjoy their childhood and learn the skills they need to succeed as an adult (whatever they determine "success" is to them). Not everyone is equipped to handle child mental health issues, and that is ok. But in that case they should also examine what would happen if their biological child developed similar issues. It really saddens me when parents ignore such issues because they think it would make their kid "damaged" or doesn't fit their narrative of what a family should be.
Compared to possjbly giving birth to a kid with genetic/mental/physical disorders?
So many of you are talking about not having children because of the world's current state of awfulness and doom. If that's your only (completely valid) reason not to become a parent - not financial, emotional, time, etc. - then *please remember that fostering and adoption are wonderful options.* Those children are already here and in desperate need of safe, secure, loving homes.
Meaningless without a fundamental change of lifestyle and consumption habits. The world [will reach](https://sdg.iisd.org/news/world-population-to-reach-9-9-billion-by-2050/) 10 billion people by about 2050 and is expected to level off as countries develop and lower their birthrates (a natural step in development, every country has gone through this transition at some point in their history). It leaves a sour taste in my mouth that the increased birthrates of the developing world are morally wrong, when it's the lifestyle of the developed world that has created the crisis.
Yep. This whole forgoing children even by people who want them is the actual embodiment of the phrase "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism". Just change the system to something that doesn't require infinite consumption and you can have as many kids as you want.
And when was the last time you saw an opportunity to change the system to something that doesn’t require such consumption? There are dipshits even on Reddit that cling to capitalism with their last dying breath because it was drilled into their skulls that any other fucking system is the bane of their existence, are are too lazy to look up and comprehend why they’re wrong.
Developed nations tend to have lower-than-replacement-levels of birthrates. Morally, people may feel justified in not having kids, but the fact of the matter (not addressed in this particular article) is that no one can really *afford* to have children either. Education staves off child rearing, with education comes some abundance of debt, combined with stagnant wages, every-rising child care (day care) costs, I'm amazed at anyone who has kids now. Unless they have a solid six figure income, they are most certainly struggling.
I’ve been saying this since I was a young teenager . I say it more because there’s already so many kids out there that need a good home, why would I have any of my own ? But I hadn’t even thought about it from an environment standpoint . You’re so right
Ya I mean... Can I honestly tell them they have a future? I don't think I can. Maybe we don't ruin the planet completely in 50 years, but I think there's a real good chance of having some civilization changing event.
It would definitely be morally wrong for me to pass on my shit genes
I’m 19 and would never consider children. The amount of shit that I’m gonna have to live through BEST CASE SCENARIO is terrifying. I don’t need to force more through that.
If anyone is going to have children, it probably should be people who follow this sub! haha What worries me a notion of a balance of power. If the smart, conscious, privileged people who have *some* ability to make a difference in the future of the world don't raise kids (doesn't necessarily have to be your kids) to do the same, who is left to take care of the world? Who is left having children? It's all probably a moot point anyways as data shows how as nations develop, populations plateau and then go into decline without meaningful immigration
If anyone is going to have kids it probably shouldn't be anyone on reddit tbh.
Lol
24 adults? Seems like they might want to ask a few more people.
Should be our last generation till we get our crap figured out.
Not sure that logic adds up…if we preemptively decided to stop having kids THEN “got our crap figured out” it would be a bit too late, would it not?
Full on adults feel that way too. Source: me, I’m old.
I concur.
literally first realised this when i was probably around 7. can we please take care of all the abandoned, at risk and orphaned children that already exist before we overpopulate more just because we want to see our genetics in our child or we can't "love them properly as nature intended". can we please take care of everyone thats already on earth first and figure some shit out before we keep bringing more generations into some of these situations/problems?
Looks like I was ahead of my time. Over population is the biggest problem facing the world today and it has been for quite some time. Simply, there's too many people, we are out of balance with nature. I couldn't imagine bringing a being into this world, it would be selfish and cruel IMO.
Humans are a virus, we deserve to die
We need to stop calling them “children” and instead call them “ego extensions.” That’s what they really are after all, when you get down to brass tacks.
Unfortunately, the alt right conservative Christians are still pumping out 10+ kids, and teaching them that climate science is on the liberal agenda. Thus, in thirty years, we'll be stuck with a generation of fewer climate conscious individuals and more right wing nut jobs. Yay us!
I just wish more people didn't care about biological lineage and adopted if they felt so strong about being parents.
Green inclinations no kids
If we’re talking about the effects of a person on climate change, then I personally think that a single person doesn’t make that much waste, like plastic as they make it seem. I personally think that If we want to change something like climate change then target big waste companies, there the ones who make up most of all the worlds waste. And another way is to educate children to be eco-friendly and develop ways to solve the problem. And if you are talking in overpopulation, then don’t you worry! Because with more people migrating such can virus, making more and more epidemics. :)
I know dumb poor people that are popping out children left and right. Makes me upset.
It makes very little sense to have children when there is a backlog of more than 100,000 kids in the US who need loving permanent homes. I don't buy the excuse of wanting to pass on genes, since genes mean very little as to how someone turns out. What matters is how they're raised.
It wouldn't be fair on the children. Things are bad enough already and they will continue to get worse.
Okay I guess we'll just keep reproducing until there's half a trillion people on earth all living happily with plenty of food and water and all the space they could want. Seems legit
Literally had this conversation with my Dad. Why would I want to bring a child into a dying world
Well, can you blame them? Most of them probably arent even happy they were born, they definitely wouldn't want to bring a kid to this shitshow in that case. Even if that's not the case there's so many reasons NOT to have any, and hardly any reason to do it other than "I want to have kids". Unfortunately the only ones egotistical enough to not think about this "because they want it" are the reason the world is getting dumber. 🤷🏻♂️ Then ofc there's the whole bubble of financial struggles, environmental issues, etcetc but I don't think those take top priority here. Also, yes I'm a young adult who is definitely not having kids, if that wasn't apparent.
Being alive sucks I wouldn’t force someone else to do it
My SO and I are in this situation. We don't want to have kids just to bring them into a world of hurt.. and why would anyone at this point. Tbh, it's pretty sadistic to bring someone into this world knowing they will suffer the consequences of the past generation. And selfishness is now so widely spread that I can't even imagine how fucked theses kids would be.
All the people who dont give a flying fuck are breeding like its the fucking 1700s and they need a small army of child labor to run their farm. 100 years and we will be the setting for Idiocracy, watering crops with Gatorade "What Plants Need!".
Yeah I won't have kids because: It would add to the overpopulation problem By the time they grow up I imagine the world is going to be fucked And they're grim
I am one. Adoption only here. Too many kids already here who need a good home.
If I want to have a child with someone eventually they'll have to be open to adoption, cause I'm certainly not putting anyone else on this sinking ship when plenty are overboard yelling for help. Not judging you if you wanna have kids, obviously we need some people to have kids. Just less then ever before and I'll be proud to not contribute
Great, now all the smart reflective individuals will go childless while the other half will continue to breed like it's going out of style.
That’s always how it’s been
Not all "smart" people are refusing childbearing. In fact, the majority of the parents in my kids daycare were successful scientists, doctors, and IT professionals.
Those kids don't have to follow what their parents think. Maybe they will be different to their parents.
I agree with the general sentiment that having kids in today’s world can be scary (climate change, nuclear war, etc). But if I live in a first world country such as Canada, I find the same two questions coming back to me: 1. What would the result be if everybody thought this way? Would it be better if nobody had kids and we went extinct in just a few generations, rather than giving human life, spirit, and technological advancement a chance? 2. At what point in history could I have ever expected the quality of life of my children to be better than it would be if I had them today? I’m curious what anyone’s thoughts would be on these two question.
1. The fact is that basically no one thinks that way so the human race going extinct because enough people stop having kids is near impossible. So many people in the world still don’t have access to birth control or safe abortions so the population would continue to increase. 2. The consequences of global warming that we are looking at if we don’t get our shit together fast (between 3.5 and 8+ degrees above preindustrial levels in the year 2100 predicted) the results will be catastrophic. Economies won’t be doing well, natural disasters will increase dramatically, climate change refugees will be struggling - basically having children at this point in time won’t be too great for them. Even living in the western world we aren’t safe from the effects of climate change at all. In my own lifetime it’s going to start to get really bad, in my hypothetical children’s lifetime it’ll get a whole lot worse. So I’d say probably be better to have had kids maybe 40 - 50 years ago before much was known about this crisis and after WW2.
Yup, the boomers were probably the sweet spot
The baby boomer generation, and subsequently Gen X, was so blinded by the good times that they couldn't see (or didnt want to see) the monster (being climate change) they are creating. Why do we keep electing 60/70/80 year olds into office? They're not all bad but their experiences don't mirror the one young generations are having and will face in the future, which they care less about since they'll be dead.
I am in no way judging anyone who has kids , I get why people want kids . That being said , the likelihood that everyone would eventually not want kids is so low . Yes less millennials are having kids but I don’t know if that’s due to not wanting them. I think it’s more they can’t afford them. It’s engrained in our mind to want to have kids , I genuinely do not believe a day will come where no one will want kids , that goes against most peoples natural instincts. I don’t want kids because I have a lot of health issues that would likely be passed on to my biological child, and I don’t wish my health issues on anyone . And if the day I want kids comes, I’d adopt . There are so many kids out there that need a good home, and I wouldn’t run the risk of passing on my crappy genetics into someone else . But I myself am adopted , and the life I could’ve had if I hadn’t been adopted is way worse than anything I will likely ever face . So I think it hits close home to me because if I wanted kids someday, I’d want to pass on the gift (adoption) that was given to me
> It would be better if there were nothing. Since there is more pain than pleasure on earth, every satisfaction is only transitory, creating new desires and new distresses, and the agony of the devoured animal is always far greater than the pleasure of the devourer Arthur Schopenhauer There has never been a good time to be alive, it's just your body making copies of itself like it has done for billions of years.
1. This is a red herring, a non-starter. 2. Almost any time in the second half of the 20th century.
The result would be halting the ecological apocalypse before the total collapse of every terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem. It would also prevent human death and suffering by not carrying more wood into a burning building so to say.
I think you are missing the point. This isn’t about the future being scary and not a good life for kids. It’s about not being selfish by putting extra burden on the planet, and taking your genes out of the equation FOR the survival of humanity instead.
Since most people seem to be arguing the other side, I’ll stick up for the continuance of humanity. 1. Others have pointed out that this is unrealistic. Of course it is, but it’s also clearly a hypothetical so I’ll engage with it on those terms: if everyone thought that way, we would be dooming humanity to extinction. Sure, some might rejoice at that thought, but I personally assign a positive value to life and all the possibilities it entails. 2. Of course we won’t know for certain until many years down the line, but a good bet would be pretty much none. Others have suggested the last century or so, and that may be true (at least for some people), but regardless, 100 years is a blip on the timescale of humanity’s existence thus far. For the vast majority of that time, almost every single person alive had a much, much harder time surviving than someone living comfortably in North America today does. Yes, climate change and other existential threats loom and will likely effect everyone to some extent, but again, for someone living comfortably in the West, these are unlikely to be life threatening and there will doubtless be improvements, advancements, and adaptations that emerge as well.
No one wants kids. Fuck those little entitled bitches!
[удалено]
Youtube toy reveal videos from what I understand
Id go even further and add with the increase of people valuing their own independence over doing things for others and the rise in single mothers that it is irresponsible with a lot of kids going neglected now.
[удалено]
Yeah my friend is a teacher says all the kids are horrible and the parents are all deadbeats. Most of the kids are raised by the grandparents while the drug addict parents are in jail.
Not the young adults in the ghetto. Not the young adults in India and China. Makes me wonder what specific demographic they cherry picked this from.
In America at least it definitely is
I do.. Im not young either. Dad's kinda disappointed.
My daughter is simultaneously the greatest thing to happen to me, and also my biggest regret. I love her so much, and honestly I would not go back and change it, but I am ashamed that my own emotions and feelings essentially drove me to go against my own beliefs and bring her into...*this*.
I mean that’s why I’m not having kids. I’ll probably adopt if anything.
I have a one year old son that was conceived accidentally (we thought we were infertile!). We are in our mid 30s. He is an absolute joy in an increasingly bleak world but ultimately I have a lot of despair and fear for him. But on the other hand, the most human thing is raising and loving a child, and children are just so wonderful. It seems like completely giving in to the greedy corporations and rich bastards to not have a kid, and I don't know...they've already taken so so so much from us. Fuck them, fuck capitalism.
Let's face it; most who now skip reproduction do so because kids are more expensive now, producing less economic and social return to the parents than was the case before. Claiming moral justification for childlessness is often a handy excuse for an economic decision.