Top arguments of most that do not want children:
1.) I get to do whatever I want and don't have to worry about taking care of some needy child.
2.) I just don't want them
3.) Too many people in the world
Counter: How is this not selfish? Isn't this the very definition of selfish? By contrast, having a child puts you in a position to take care of another human being, in a parental role, where as you are responsible for someone other than yourself. You are responsible for someone who is helpless without you (until a certain age of course). You are the #1 role model in this human's life and mold them into the person they will become. So, becoming a parent that takes full responsibility for the child, and doesn't pawn the kid off to everyone else, doesn't neglect their responsibilities, and who grows as a person is definitely the less selfish option.
What is our role as a species? To prolong and make better the future of our own. People that don't want children are simply not progressing in maturity, most likely due to the many distractions our society has to offer. Why have kids when you can party all night, go to college until you're 30 or older on student loans, and have sex with random partners without really ever, truly committing to someone else? This debate needs to touch on the erosion of the traditional family due to a tragic decline in morals and common decency.
It seems the crowd that supports not wanting children at all costs also supports more progressive, liberal points of view that include the LGBT movement, abortion rights, and so on. This crowd is also usually the least successful (income wise), uses the most drugs, and has more casual affairs than the supporters of traditional families.
Do I think not wanting kids necessarily makes you a bad person? Not bad, but definitely immature and selfish. It is obvious that people that have families end up living more for others, than themselves, in most cases. It is true that some have kids out of wedlock, on accident, and even under the influence of drugs. These people are more of the crowd that is against traditional, conservative principals that have kids out of necessity, because of an accidental circumstance. However, even some drug addicts see the light after they have a child, and turn their ways around. The single, childless drug addict can continue on until they OD, more often than the drug addict who has something else motivating them.
This site's "debates" are pretty weak. Most of these people debating the subject don't even know what a debate is and type like uneducated nitwits.
When you look at articles, most of the reasons women cite for not wanting kids include things like "it would bring too much money stress" or "I can't picture myself being a mom" or "I don't want to change my sleeping schedule." That is selfish to me. Ask any mother, and she'll tell you yes, having kids is hard, but it's the most fulfilling job in the world.
If everyone chose not to have children , then humanity would cease to exist and i think for the stress that parents and grandparents experience raising their own children, i think that the next generation need to understand true unselfishness, which you can only understand once you sacrifice your life for your child
If you can afford a child, then yes you should really have as many as you can. This is because not only do families increase stability (it gives people something to do not revolving around hedonism or materialism for once) of a society, but they represent continuity. If we rely on migrants to fill in our demographic gaps, not only will the native population be resentful, but the nation will loose its legacy and character. And identity will be squandered and replaced with nothing but subgroups and division.
I plan to have three children, because I know with the strain on the safety net and the crowd of people who ARE having children, I cannot any longer rely on the public purse to come to the rescue thanks to all these childless couples who will grow old and not have any children to pay for their retirement,
The system only works to its fullest extent when EVERYONE makes a sacrifice. No sacrifice, no stability and no thriving, long - term society. Its that simple.
The people on the no side who don't want kids are wasting their potential (assuming they can afford them). The dedication they say having children requires (and they would have to put in) means that they may be great parents if they decide to procreate, and for once, children raised by educated, middle class professionals may one day become a majority of births (imagine what rational and level headed society that would create).
Plus, the state should do more as well and society should STOP promoting a consumerist lifestyle. Daycare should be free and covered, Families should get allowances of $450 each month per child (like in France). We need to spend in excess of 4% of our GDP (and reform the education system dramatically so that having children is strongly encouraged and children are "eased" into being a parent).
Thats the only way we save the nation from financial demise.
Yes. Children need devotion and love. Children are hard to raise. To have them is not only to bear them but to make personal sacrifices for them and to devote time for them. No one is lacking in the ability to have children but the selfless will to do so.
One needs to assume that the person, for all other purposes, would be a fit parent. I'm not addressing people who, for mental, physical, or even financial reasons choose not to have children. I'm talking about the person who has no reason other than 'I don't want a kid.'
1) The more intelligent, stable, affluent marriages are in the best position to produce children who will benefit the next generation of humans. These children have the lowest rates for becoming criminals, drop-outs, drug users, etc. These are things that benefit society as a whole.
2) Society programs (such as social security) are dependent on the beneficiaries having children. These programs are not paid for by your working dollar, they're paid for by the working dollar of the children or grandchildren who are working when you are retired. Basically, if you are childless you should not receive any society benefits when you retire. This is going to become a bigger problem as people choose to have fewer or even no children.
3) The most common reason someone gives is that they are either not comfortable around children (indicating they believe that there is something wrong with them and did not inherit a parenting gene... Which studies show doesn't exist, parenting is learned, so these people are simply ignorant), or that they want to be free to pursue their own interests. Since the definition of selfish is "lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure." then choosing something that would negatively affect the next generation but personally profit yourself would be selfish.
4) Even when the person will not be using society programs, there is the burden of an elderly couple who have no children to help take care of them. A large percentage of elderly who need help, but are not bad enough to live in a nursing home yet, are cared for by their family, often children or grand-children. Assisted living places are not cheap, and insurance paying for them drives up the insurance for, again, the working age group which the couple did not contribute to.
The argument then becomes whether it's wrong to be selfish. Many today live for 'number 1' and look out for number 1. Excuses of "well, it's better for the planet..." ignore the fact that the population growth is actually at a negative when it comes to births in most places in the world, and that a 'zero population growth' is actually what most advocates argue for, not a negative one. Negative population growth can have extreme effects as the retiring group leaves and there's not enough workers to replace them. So, if you're going to go that route, then anything above 3 (taking into account infertile couples or children who die) would be selfish, but up until then it serves society to at least maintain a zero population growth.
I only have 2 because Im worried about the environment. If say someone decides not to have kids due to population issues as some claim, Then they can adopt. I find people who argue against kids for this very reason never actually adopt any.
So if you don't have kids it is (health issues aside) it is usually a lifestyle choice.
Society is becoming more selfish to the point of well my parents made sacrifices to have me but I sure won't.
It is selfish because having kids is the best thing in the world. Also, If you don't have kids, Then the population might decline and people will be put out of their jobs and the jobs will go away since no one is there to take over. Also, People who don't want kids probably HATE THEM
People who are like that are not only selfish, they lack humanity in them and are likely to not have empathy, why? Because people who i know that are childless, mainly women, are really selfish and mean. And besides, women need to have children or else the human race dies out.
This is not addressing those who are infertile, incapable mentally, or even financially unfit, but to those whom this is a true choice. Selfishness is defined as "lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure."
1) If a couple is fit, then they should contribute to the next generation of society in order to benefit the future of society. A couple who are stable are less likely to have children who grow to have problems that are to the detriment of society. By removing the children of this stable couple you are making that society less fit.
2) If a couple are planning on using any society or insurance programs when they retire, these programs are dependent on the current working population of that society. By having no children they are not contributing to these programs while adding to the burden. Unless they save up the money they have, they are hurting future society (insurance does not count as, again, it's dependent on the healthy working group they did not contribute to.)
3) Children are part of taking care of you in your own age. There are many people who don't want to move into a nursing home who, instead, have their children take care of them on different levels. Assisted living apartments are not cheap, and having insurances cover them again puts the burden on the working class, the group of people they did not contribute to. Basically, the childless are a pure burden, and if it was something they chose to do then it's not only not benefiting the future it's hurting it.
4) Most people who choose childish states are either afraid they don't have a parenting gene (which is ignorant since this behavior is learned, not inherited...) or say they just want the freedom they are accustomed to (self-serving even at the detriment of society, basic definition of selfish.)
To counter some of the arguments presented... If the world is at a high population and should not increase population, the experts recommend attaining a negative population growth, which requires a 3 child average in order to replace the parents and take into account mortality and those naturally infertile. Currently, most places in the world are at a negative population growth, which causes an increase of burden on the working class and hurts the overall health of society. Since a negative population growth hurts society, having at least 2-3 children should be considered necessary for society's health, though it could be argued having more than that would be selfish but having none is as bad or worse.
I can play with children, take care of children, and if I see a child run out in traffic I would not hesitate to jump in front of a car to protect them. Does that make me special? Of course not. We as human beings are hardwired to take care of children and want them to be happy. But does it make mean you only care about yourself if you decide not to have children of your own? Sure people can say I didn't have them because I didn't want to change diapers, and wanted to be able to go out whenever I wanted to. But I say there are plenty of people out there who had children for purely selfish reasons. To have someone love them unconditionally, be dependent on them. Someone they can mold into a "mini-me". Someone to carry on the family name. Someone to take care of them when they are sick. Maybe even just because it's what everyone else does so they think they have to as well. I maintain that not everyone who decides not to have children is a selfish person. I think it is a shame that questions are drawn on a person's (especially a woman's) character if they decided not to be a parent. People make that decision for all kinds of reasons, and it can't be automatically assumed that those are selfish reasons. They may be sad reasons (or not so sad), but those reasons should be respected. God bless the parents of the world, I ain't one of them!
There so many people on the world that need to live, Learn, And earn money and a war is always possible on this world. Not having children means no dead. So in a big way it is not selfish. Also it means no worries. A relationship without babies is better
It's a personal choice to have kids, And people shouldn't try making couples who don't want kids change their mind. Let them live their life the way they want. Also, Have you ever noticed when you ask people WITH kids why they had children they usually start with "we wanted. " Isn't "want" one of the words most associated with selfishness?
You have children to create your legacy, To create a mixture of you and the person you love, To carry on your family name, To be fulfilled, To have someone who loves you unconditionally, To have someone to take care of you when you're older.
You have children despite not being perfect in your socio-economic situation, Your mental and physical health, Your understanding of humanity or the meaning of existence. Despite knowing that like all humans, They too will suffer and hurt and struggle with their own meaning of existence.
You have children, And then expect the world to congratulate you, Create holidays and celebrate you.
You have children because they're cute.
And let's be honest, You have children because humans enjoy being the martyr, And no one plays martyr better than a parent.
All of these reasons are selfish.
Humans are hard on this planet. The more of us exist, The more all earthlings suffer. To have children is selfish.
There is only one way not wanting children can be selfish: if you have them anyway. What a terrible thing to do to another human being. It's too bad there are people who would force those who don't want children to have them by restricting access to birth control and abortion. That's also pretty selfish.
If I had to do it all over again, I would’vie waited. I’vie sacrificed my entire life and now I have type two diabetes. Guess where my son is? He’s out living his best life! My daughter still lives with me for now. I don’t believe it’s selfish not to want children. Do you know how many children are Abandon or murdered each year? Parents will have children only to leave them behind. For all the people that don’t want children, Please don’t have them! Some people are not psychologically meant to have children.
Some people can not have children due to a medical condition/s or choose NOT to have children due medical issues. If a female (or male) decides against having kids because they suffer from a debilitating condition, I think that is selfLESS. They are looking at the reality of their particular circumstance and making a choice based on the positives but also the risks and the future. How can someone be expected to look after a child or children if they struggle with their own medical needs whether it be physical, Mental/emotional? It’s a very personal decision, Which no one should be judged for either way
If you don't have kids and thus there's no one to be "selfish" toward, Who is it they feel we're denying anything? Hypothetical children don't exist and aren't being denied anything ffs. If an individual has struggled their whole life with sleep disorders and having a kid would literally make them ill, Both mentally and physically, That's not "selfish", That's called taking care of your health, Well-being, And life. And another thing:someone else deciding not to reproduce, For whatever reasons, Does not affect your life whatsoever. You(the judging control-freaks voting yes)aren't allowed to have control over another adult's personal decision. So mind your own business.
You don’t have to be a parent. Some people just aren’t right for it, And forcing them to have kids will only lead to more unwanted children in foster care.
Only have kids if you are 100% sure and are able to give them a good life. There are other ways to contribute to society and have meaning in life.
So, I have heard all my life that every woman has that drive to want to have kids and it's been that way since man and woman walked on earth however times are changing. We can be complete without children, I'd rather focus on research (personally) rather than bring a child into a world that is falling apart, And that isn't selfish infact it is more selfish to bring children into a world for your own happiness.
With existence comes suffering, So why create an individual who you know will go on to suffer one way or another. To me, Wanting and having children is selfish. If everyone just stopped having children, Humanity would go extinct and so would suffering. That I say is the solution. Haha