'Like a trap you can't escape': The women who regret being mothers

I agree with all this

I think we need to change neighbourhoods to make them more child-friendly. The increase in cars for one has made people a lot more reluctant to let kids play out.

As the cost of living grows, state support and public services fall apart and future opportunities for young people seem to be contracting, I’m not surprised that increasing numbers of women feel that they’ve been kind of mis-sold what life would be like after becoming a mother.
There’s so much social pressure on motherhood. And huge financial limitations on life after kids especially around housing which knocks the stuffing out of so many other plans women might have had.

Yes, this.

Lately I have been thinking a lot about other things I might have done if I hadn't married and had kids. Maybe I'd have gone to live in a bigger, more exciting city, had a different kind of career, married a different kind of person.

The main reason I am contemplating this now is that my two oldest kids are now at a point where they are making their own choices about these things, and sometimes we talk about it, and so I am reflecting a lot on what my experience has been.

Do some of these ideas sound appealing? Sure! But then, so did having kids and staying home to take care of them, home educate, and work on some other projects I was really interested in. And like all of us I made choices which opened some doors and closed others.

It's also very easy to put on rose tinted glasses about the choices I didn't make. Maybe if I had moved to London to become a spy and marry (redacted) and had a really amazing city garden in a listed house in a tree lined neighbourhood things would have been much more amazing. But that is a lot of "ifs". And even if I had done all of those things, perhaps I would wish I'd stayed close to my family and had kids. Who knows.

I think this is huge.

I think back to the early 80s when I was first in school at 5. My father worked away so it was mostly my mum taking care of me and she made me breakfast and said good-by at the door before going to work herself. I walked home to the neighbour's for lunch,then back to school. After school I would drop my bag at home and play out or at a friend's until mum came home from work. I would see the neighbour if I needed anything or wanted to watch tv or whatever. Mum made supper, I'd play until bed. I might have an art lesson on Saturday which she drove me to.

No school run, no packed lunch, no running to classes every day after school, not having to figure out how to entertain me all day. Even with a dad who was away at sea for eight months a year, I don't think it was as crazy as many parents find life now. And I don't think the children turned out particularly worse.

I was born in 1984. The boys and men I grew up with, while far from being raging feminists, weren't raised on a perpetual diet of porn and resentment. It had made a significant difference to the male-female dynamic and I'm worried for my girls growing up in it.

I feel I have far more to be worried about bringing them up as girls in the current social environment than my parents had to about me 30/40 years ago,

I wonder. Maybe when we were young we were liberated in modern society with equality and nothing to fear and we thought our parents were old prudes from a bygone age making a fuss about nothing.

(edited for rhetoric :-))

I agree that access to the areas you mention are valuable for women. But the idea we weren't already doing things of value, that simply weren't BEING valued, also flows through Western White feminism.

And as far as sexual freedom goes, I think hetero women were sold an absolute pup on that one. Not that we shouldn't be ABLE to be sexually free; but that within the patriarchal paradigm, that freedom is far too often manipulated into a different kind of servitude to me.

The most valuable sexual freedom to the heterosexual woman is the freedom to say no to sex frankly, and it is one for which we are still fighting. The freedom to say yes, which was granted with surprising enthusiasm by the patriarchy, while on the face of it equality, quickly becomes the obligation to do so under any and all circumstances in a patriarchal structure. Think of all the women murdered by their partners whose partners are now getting away with it by saying it was 'consensual rough sex'; any implication that OF COURSE no woman would be getting off on being beaten or strangled half to death by someone much stronger than her is dismissed as vanilla prudery, in large part because a certain flavour of feminism says that sexual freedom for women is having sex like men.

As far as the strengths of men go, I am not much interested in them. If some women find men useful for something that's all very well, but it isn't the work of feminism to identify their strengths and ameliorate their weaknesses. And the risks and hostility men as a class present to women as a class make me reluctant to take on that work in any way. I might feel very differently about that if I had sons. But I don't, I have two daughters, and I feel I have far more to be worried about bringing them up as girls in the current social environment than my parents had to about me 30/40 years ago, which is frankly horrifying but true. The idea of them submitting their beautiful hearts and bodies to the kind of men I see around me in the generation ahead of them absolutely horrifies me to be frank.

@ArabellaScott I think this is really the crux of it:
Nobody can ever fully know beforehand, though. You cannot 'inform' yourself of something so deeply unknowable. There is almost no way of knowing how things will unfold. Much is luck. We can make a rough guess, but nobody can know how their pregnancy, birth, post natal expwriences will be, how easy/hard/healthy their baby/child will be, what cicrumstances will play out with work, partner, health, etc.

I think often the shock about "not being told" how hard it would be comes because we have so little control over the temperament of our child. And that has such a huge impact on our mothering experience. That's relatively unusual for most decisions that we make. Generally speaking, at least in Western middle class circles, we can be pretty sure that if we put our minds to something we can achieve it (running a marathon, getting a job, learning a language) and that the outcome is roughly proportional to the effort exerted. But, in the same way you can't just effort your way out of birth trauma, you can't just work harder at parenting and get a child who is easy to parent.

I assumed that nurture and parenting style would have a much bigger impact than it actually seems to. So we hear stories of other mothers finding it extremely tough with various things (sleep, breastfeeding, weaning, tantrums). But we also hear of other parents who don't have these difficulties. And we know there are strategies and parenting techniques to deal with things. So it seems like by reading the right books and applying the strategies well and being loving and kind and gentle, we will have a lot of control over how our child behaves, how and when they sleep, what they eat, how they settle at school etc. (See also childbirth!)

Of course, there are parenting strategies that are genuinely helpful, but babies and children start at such different places with all kinds of different strengths and difficulties that it makes it almost meaningless when considering whether to have a baby. As a case in point, a colleague has 2 children who both slept through the night consistently from a young age and are totally happy to be left with a sitter. They are calm and play well independently. These are skills my DS is still developing at nearly 4 (and I haven't just passively waited for change, I have put in a lot of effort)!

Our experiences of parenting are absolutely poles apart. There was no way to predict this ahead of time. But if I was a prospective mother hearing both our experiences, I would probably think something like "Well there's no way I'm being like that sucker. She must have done something wrong. There's no way my child will be like that."

Not having children when most of your family and friendship circle does must have its own difficulties, though? I guess the voluntary 'child free' people must tend to seek out others like themselves with whom to socialise

It does bring challenges - I've lost friends where we've drifted away from each other because we lived very different lives. I have found that the parent-friends who drifted away were generally those who, for example, didn't take account that not everyone can meet for coffee mid-week or catch up at play dates, and who designated weekends as 'family time' and wouldn't incorporate any other social activities at those times. So we just lost touch because there wasn't ever a time I could see them and I guess they naturally excluded me as their socialising tended to revolve around children and other parents.

But some old friendships have endured because we've both made the effort to maintain them. I've also seen their kids go from bumps to almost-adults now and it's been really lovely. I've made other friends too, sometimes through the shared bond of being child-free, or through activities which are naturally child-free.

As for family, we're not close but I have received criticism of my decisions and that, erm, hasn't helped foster better relations! And for relationships, differences in wanting children has ended several. I'm much more careful now of being clear on the matter as it was often assumed I'd change my mind, although my advancing years are thankfully making that a very obvious non-starter

I'm not making personal comment here directed at you.........but my daughter in law was fearful of having children ( even though she knew deep down she wanted a family) because she was scared she'd get post-natal depresion like her mother did. Also she'd remembered the tales of how her mother almost died whilst giving birth to her.

She was also worried she'd not be able to conceive at all anyway because she has polycystic ovarian syndrome - and actually did lose her first pregnancy in the first 10 weeks of gestation. Her approach has been to take control as much as is possible.........of her diet; her health; getting the best medical advice; planning out exactly how she wanted the birth to go etc

Her first child was born in October last year.....it went well; healthy baby; no trauma; no post natal depression...though she is finding the early months and breastfeeding incredibly tiring - and soon she has to go back to work ( but has decided she'll go P/T initially - fortunately she can work from home and has control over her workload).

She obviously wanted to have a baby ( as did my son - her husband) and so accepted the inevitable ups and downs.....but if you don't particularly want a baby and neither does your partner - and you know you don't want to have cope with the inevitable downsides and other scarifices then there is no compulsion on you to do so. It would be a waste to spend your life regretting it. Not having children when most of your family and friendship circle does must have its own difficulties, though? I guess the voluntary 'child free' people must tend to seek out others like themselves with whom to socialise

But motherhood is a.multitude of things, highs and lows and deeps and the unexpected. Its going to be a mixture for almost everyone, depending on so many factors.i'd say trying to decide its unmitigated good or bad is impossible and pointless. And regret isnt absolute either. You might regret for an hour one day or regret for long periods or frequently but that might also be balanced or outweighed by times of gratitude. The idea of 'permanent' regret is questionable. Feelings fluctuate and change.

But that on balance it seems far healthier and conducive to personal equilibrium to attempt a more philosophical approach to one's sufferings and diificulties - as being part and parcel of life's variation. What is the purpose of nurturing regret, and what does it change?

And that's fair enough for "sufferings and difficulties", although it's possibly not an approach everyone wants or is able to take. But my point is about avoiding those "sufferings and difficulties" to start with - if that's what you want to do or how you'd see them if they arose - rather than being stoic about them afterwards.

It wasn't intended as a personal slight, but as a general perception.

And I, for one, have never said that there are not down-sides. Of course there are. But that on balance it seems far healthier and conducive to personal equilibrium to attempt a more philosophical approach to one's sufferings and diificulties - as being part and parcel of life's variation. What is the purpose of nurturing regret, and what does it change?

Well absolutely, fucking hell, if you dont want kids don't have them!

Parenting cant be like you imagine because its not really possible to imagine until you've done it. And once you're doing it its constantly changing. Was my point.

General abstract "you'.

@ArabellaScott That is true but when you know you value quiet and solitude and independence (not just from others but the freedom to come and go as you please) as well as hobbies which take up a lot of time and money, as well as intensely disliking being tied down/not being able to walk away from a situation, there is at least a chance that children aren't for you.

Sure, maybe I'd have changed beyond my wildest thoughts but...maybe not. And if you find you don't like it, you can't undo the decision. Surely it's not hard to see that someone wouldn't want to take the risk?

As for there not being one 'image' of parenthood, I'd agree but that doesn't mean that there isn't sometimes a somewhat 'disneyfied' representation of parenthood that is detached from the reality of what some experience. I can only take the word of those who said they found parenting wasn't anything like what they'd expected and that the upsides weren't worth the downsides.

I did also point out to them that nationally girls do better at GCSE and A levels... but they were less impressed by that than my increased blood count lol

I really got through to him at the time! They were all discussing "sports" that could showcase what women are uniquely good at and I told them the stuff we are better at (like higher pain thresholds and resistance to disease) aren't gamifiable and they all got a bit serious.

I then had his younger brother in my form group two years later and he was way less Tate-y so I'm hoping the trend is on its way out!

I love this!

Otoh I'd argue that stuff like strength or longevity should arguably be de-emphasised. Men do better at a lot of sports because they're naturally physically stronger. Ofc sports players work hard, but that's on top of that. And women's longevity ditto. Things that people can't control aren't relevant to their character etc .

I ageee though that in the situation you were in in the class, that reply was more suitable.

'who will admit on the quiet that they desperately wish they'd made different decisions. Their argument is usually that they were swept away with the 'lovely' image of parenthood when they found the reality very different, or that they were told the things I was, only to find they weren't true for them'

I am not sure there is any one 'image' of parenthood? Or any one truth.

I think the difficulty here is you are attempting to.imagine how you would feel based on others' experiences.

It is almost impossible to know how one would feel because it changes you so enormously. Motherhood is transformative - physically emotionally and in its impacts. Yes Lifelong. I am not the same person I was pre kids. Nor as I was post partum or in the toddler years.

None of us nor our lives are static, so trying to predict or guess how a future self may feel about a future hypothetical situation is ... hard.

(I dont mean transformative in necessarily a sparkly shiny way. I feel it remakes you in many ways).

When you say : ' there are strengths to women that men overall do not have', would you also say vice versa?

I teach teenage boys and this comes up a lot. I once had the most ardent Tate admirer in my form, and one day he was saying that men could beat women at almost any sport.

I told him that sports, for the most part, were originally developed to showcase what men are good at. Women win at bigger "competitions", like living longer. I told him that athletes go to high altitude places and train there for months to increase their blood count by a few percents to give them an edge, but in pregnancy, women almost double their blood count in just the first trimester. (I was pregnant at the time and said it like I was bragging!)

So yes, of course men have strengths we don't have. They have literal strength, speed, and height that on average surpass women's. But we "win" at far more important stuff. Not to mention we generally care about each other more than men do.

I've had to give this lecture to my dd too, who is only 5 and loves football and sometimes says that it'd be easier to be a boy.

I agree mainly with this.

But when you say : ' Even feminism was created within patriarchy, and bears its hallmarks, i.e. the presupposition that what men did (politics, war, industry, academia, art) and had (physical dominance, sexual freedom) was inherently valuable and desirable and women should have access to it, which implicitly supported the patriarchal assumption that what women did (childbearing, care-giving, community-building, crafting, story-telling and oral history transmission) and had (endurance, longevity, freedom from overriding sexual instincts) was weak, valueless, trivial.'

Surely wanting access to stuff like politics, academia, art etc didn't necessarily mean feminists were devaluing traditionally female domains? I mean, surely we needed to win access to politics, art, sexual freedom etc?

And plenty of feminists have affirmed the value of things like caregiving, community, crafting etc. Gloria Steinem for one, plenty of feminist historians, the cultural feminism strand etc, and many radfems. I agree too many have ignored those things, though.

When you say : ' there are strengths to women that men overall do not have', would you also say vice versa?

I see what you mean, but morally and practically, fathers should be held to account.
There's also strong evidence that fathers being around is increasingly important as kids enter adolescence , so boys but also girls. The effect father absence often has shows that the consequences of that connection being severed can also be momentous. That may be a more crucial stage than when the child is younger

As I said in pp, fathers having a crucial role is part of what makes us human. Otherwise we'd be like tigers etc with their perennially deadbeat dads...

Probably also that they didn't want their children to one day find out ..

Great post

Makes me think of Alfred Tennyson :

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.