Parents are unreliable friends?

[FanGirlX]

My sister is 45, she was unable to have children due to infertility. Lovely sister, great auntie,

She has been running a group for child free people for about 5 years. They do hiking, camping, trips away, theatre, cinema, dinners. She has always said that it's difficult being childless from mid to late 30s onwards because most of your friends start to have children and are no longer free to socialise. So that's why she set up the group on meet-up, has made loads of friends and has a great time.

She told me today that there has been an influx of mid 40s women into the group, who have children in their teens. The group have voted to remove anyone who joins and turns out to have children, no matter how old the children are, reasons being:

The group is advertised as being for child free people

Parents trade in their friendships and social life for children, that's a choice they make but they can't expect to waltz into a ready made friends and activity group, once those children grow up develop their own social lives

Parents are unreliable friends

I told her that I can see why women whose children are growing up join - they've spent the last 15 years, or so, tending to their children and now they feel lonely now the kids are old enough not to need them. They don't have childcare responsibilities in the same way that they did when the children were younger. They see the group out doing fun things and think they'd like to join and have fun too. She said that she felt lonely in her 30s as her friends basically left her out because she couldn't have children, so she doesn't see why she should provide a social scene for mothers.

Is there really such a barrier between parents and non parents?

As an infertile woman, parent do have a habit of bringing EVERYTHING back to their children at some point. That's to be expected, but most likely not welcome in a child free group, because they have different life experiences.

Also people with kids can be quite patronising to those of us without kids ('you don't understand what love is'/'you don't know what tiredness is' etc), so I can see why the group would prefer it to be child free only

I meant that being at menopause stage, 30 years into careers, having parents who are getting elderly and needing more help/care, being the same generation, may mean they have more in common than woman who are 20 years away from that. Given the issue of children being so all consuming for the first decade at least, those who are completely done with that, with kids in the adult stage, might find more common ground than woman of a range of ages who only have in common that they didn't have dcs, either through choice or infertility.

But if she wants a group who are purely childless (not just those who are now child free due to dcs no longer living at home), then that's fine as long as its really clear what the group is for and the majority of the membership are in agreement. (Are they flexible on step parents?)

I’m in the NW and this sounds like something I would enjoy, I’m single and child free but increasingly my friends are not.

I am starting to realise there may be a barrier.

I am an older mum, had my first and only baby last year. I have tried hard to keep my friendships with my friends who don't have children as it is all of my oldest and closest friends and we all live far apart.
I don't send photos/mention my child unless asked, don't post much on SM, have met up without my husband and baby when we have been able to. But they are definitely drifting away from me despite my best efforts and I have wondered if it is because I am a painful reminder of what they don't have (and would like) and also that they assume things will be different now.

I see nothing wrong with a group for non parents only, the example above about a non pregnant woman going to an NCT group is a great one.

That sounds like it comes from a place of deep hurt in your sister. She needs to have this for herself and not have it be about talking about children. So much of women hanging out together is about their identity as parents. I can see why that's painful and claustrophobic if you never get a break from it. This is still her break. Not particularly admirable perhaps, but this is her reality and way of coping.

I don't necessarily agree with your sister's view that parents "trade in their friendships for children", but I do get why a group for child-free adults wouldn't want parents to join. People bond, at least initially, over shared experience, and any time parents get together, they talk about their kids. It's one of the biggest shared experiences there is and it goes on forever. It's boring for non-parents to listen to and they can't really contribute.

She said that she felt lonely in her 30s as her friends basically left her out because she couldn't have children, so she doesn't see why she should provide a social scene for mothers.

She sounds bitter

What harm is it if an older parent whose children have long left home joins the group for company

She is punishing parent members of the group because of the way she perceived her friends treated when she was younger

I meant that being at menopause stage, 30 years into careers, having parents who are getting elderly and needing more help/care, being the same generation, may mean they have more in common than woman who are 20 years away from that. Given the issue of children being so all consuming for the first decade at least, those who are completely done with that, with kids in the adult stage, might find more common ground than woman of a range of ages who only have in common that they didn't have dcs, either through choice or infertility.

The group is for childless / child free women of any age though. They are removing women in their 40s and 50s who have adult children from the group. Several posters on here have explained why they are probably doing that.

Many groups are run for a specific demographic - that's surely not hard to comprehend? People with kids don't fit the demographic.

I run an empty nesters group for women 45+ whose DC have flown the nest. I have 3 criteria for joining: are you a woman? Are you aged 45+? Are your DC leaving or have left home? If a child free woman, or man, applied to join I would politely decline their request.

@bonetiredwithtwins

She said that she felt lonely in her 30s as her friends basically left her out because she couldn't have children, so she doesn't see why she should provide a social scene for mothers.

She sounds bitter

What harm is it if an older parent whose children have long left home joins the group for company

She is punishing parent members of the group because of the way she perceived her friends treated when she was younger

It is a group for specifically for non parents. The parent should not be in the group at all. That's the issue.

OPs sister wouldn't rock up to a mums and tots class, because the people are of similar age to her would she?

Parents trade in their friendships and social life for children, that's a choice they make

I suspect women who have conceived through rape probably feel a bit differently about that statement.

Also, if the argument is that parents are flakey because they cancel plans when their child is sick, does that mean people with other caring responsibilities (elderly parents, cater for spouse etc) are also excluded?

It sounds like a great idea. I completely agree with the NCT comment and people can set up whatever group they like on Meetup. Welly wearing chocolate button munchers meetup?

I know people love their kids but the conversation can revolve around them and it's very dull if you don't have that set up yourself.

I think its a lovely idea and I think it should just be for childless people. Like if anyone else's Child rings (or doesnt) they are top of conversation. And if people have struggled either fertility last thing they need is people.giving off about their child etc

If I was childless not by choice, I imagine that I would very much welcome a group like hers. I suspect it's no easier not having offspring, when other people's kids are grown up and possibly having their grandchildren.
Somewhere where it could be guaranteed that you won't have to listen to someone saying how well their DD is doing at uni, or how hard it s when the kids have flown the nest/looking after grandchildren, would be a wonderful oasis I imagine.

So yes, I fully support your sis in her bid to keep the group to non-parents. And kudos to her for providing a 'safe space' conversation-wise, for others.

Am I right in thinking these women are already in the group and will be removed now???

@justasking111

Am I right in thinking these women are already in the group and will be removed now???

The group has been running for about 5 years. They've suddenly had a number of women join who, having been along to a few meet-ups, have mentioned teenage / adult children. The original members of the group have voted to remove these women from the group.

Christ this makes me cross:

Children = has children
No children = has no children

How hard is this to understand?

@FanGirlX

One example she mentioned, of a woman who they plan to remove, is someone who in her late 40s, divorced, children have left home and she lives alone. The woman has been along to a few outings and then mentioned to other group members that she had adult children living away from home. I found it surprising that are going to remove her because she's unlikely to be unreliable due to childcare.

I hadn't considered that the group bonded over their childless / child free experience though. That puts a different perspective on it.

The example above shows exactly why women who have grown up children should be removed. The woman has been coming along to meetings and then told other members that she had grown up children. This is completely changing the dynamic of the group and not what this group was set up for.

If those women, whose families are grown up and left home, want to attend a group for walking, outings etc., there is nothing stopping them from forming their own group. Perhaps that could be suggested, when these woman are told they are being removed from this group!

@bonetiredwithtwins

She isn't bitter at all. As for your other points, other more enlightened posters than me, have addressed these.

The group is advertised as being for child free people

I can see how some people might read that, misinterpret it and join because they are now 'free of children'. So she probably needs to change the wording on the group publicity to include who qualifies/doesn't qualify for membership.

@nightmarelife

Christ this makes me cross:

Children = has children
No children = has no children

How hard is this to understand?

But as the OP says. it's advertised as for the childfree. Not the childless. So it's not as clear cut as you make it sound.

I'm free of children. My offspring are now adults who've moved out.

@SallyGoLucky

It's really really not the same as your analogy

A mums and tots class is a specific activity to socialise mums and babies. Bit like you wouldn't join a cycling club if you didn't have a bike - you wouldn't join a mums and babies group without the baby

The sisters group is for lonely people to make friends - you can be lonely with and without children

however It would be interesting to know the exact wording of the group name

Urgh ffs.

It’s a group for women who don’t have children.

Doesn’t matter if the other women have children aged 2 or 32, they have children, so can’t join.

Nothing bitter about it.

They've cocked up by letting them join only to boot them out, that's a bit harsh.

I would suggest they set up their own satellite group with the old hands showing them the ropes finances, meetings locations, events etc. I couldn't be as cold as to cut them off cold. They may find other members maybe are uncomfortable doing that type of segregation in that way

OP was the wording clear, were the parents just trying it on?
We had some of that when I was in a childfree group before but it was mixed sex and I think some people were using it to covertly find a love life.