Why is it taboo to admit you are having children because you want to be looked after when old?

[KeenTaupeDog]

I’ve noticed that any time someone hints at this, people jump down their throats — “children aren’t your pension,” “that’s selfish,” etc.
But if we’re being honest, this used to be the whole point of having kids. In many cultures it still is. Even here, plenty of parents quietly hope their kids will care about them when they’re elderly — not just emotionally, but practically.
We act as if you’re only supposed to have children out of pure love or to “nurture the next generation,” and that expecting any return is somehow shameful. Yet everyone still wants family nearby when they’re frail, lonely or ill.
Why is it socially unacceptable to say the quiet part out loud? Is it because we’ve built an ideology of self-sufficiency that makes dependence feel dirty — even though in reality, we’ll all need someone in the end?
Not trying to be provocative, genuinely curious what people think.

This used to be the point of having kids?

who knew

I think it still is the point of having kids if you live in a country with no social security then what choice do you have?

In the UK though we have pensions and state funded care if necessary - no need to have kids to look after you then.

Given that life expectancy was something like 32 globally in 1900. I don't think this is true. People had babies because it was what you did and because they liked snagging, especially the men and there was no decent birth control.

This certainly did not enter my head when I chose to have a family and does not enter my head mow I am getting older.

I had children because it was a basic instinct for me.

I had children because it was a visceral need to nurture. I hope they will visit when we are very old and frail and keep their eyes on our care if necessary. We do not expect them to care for us.

Now .... not mow!

I do not expect my kids to do anything for me when older.

I don't think it's taboo. I think the vast majority of people (even those of child bearing age) realise it's totally unrealistic, for several reasons

It certainly was part of my decision making when we decided to have children.

Because I didn't. Let's be honest, we have children because of biological imperatives.

I loved parenting more than I ever expected and wanted to continue so had three. It was the revelation of my life - I expected it to be hard but didn't anticipate how much fun raising our children was.

That they still spend lots of time together as adults because they enjoy each other's company is wonderful. Them being happy is the point of it all

I don't expect them to nurse me in old age, I have savings/equity in the house to pay for that.

Whilst I hope my child cares about me when I am old, I do not want her to have to care for me.

Because you are trying to condemn your children to a life of obligation and guilt.

I think restricting yourself for 20+ years and spending £££ raising kids so you can be looked after in old age isn't a good exchange. Better to use your freedom to enjoy life and the money to buy in care later if needed.

We have children, but due to various issues they won't be able to look after us in old age anyway.

We should not put our dc under that obligation.

I don't think it's taboo. I think the vast majority of people (even those of child bearing age) realise it's totally unrealistic, for several reasons

I agree. I had my children primarily because I had a very strong biological urge to do so and I wanted my life to include the experience of being a parent.

The idea that your kids will emotionally and practically support you when you need care is unrealistic. Dont get me wrong, I hope they care about me enough to assist me in small ways and visit me/see me but the idea they'd be my carers is utterly ridiculous. I am presuming they'd have jobs and their own families by that point - where on earth would they find the time or the finances to drop everything to support me? I wasnt able to do that for my parents either. Its simply unrealistic to expect this. No matter how noble your mind set is- few people could afford to give up their jobs or leave their young children at home to go care for their parents.

It wasn't 32, but low average lifetimes are due to a lot of people dying as infants.
If you survived til age 5, you were likely to live until old age.

But if we’re being honest, this used to be the whole point of having kids. In many cultures it still is.

If that's true, it doesn't make it any less selfish.

Even here, plenty of parents quietly hope their kids will care about them when they’re elderly — not just emotionally, but practically.

Quietly hoping is completely different to having children for that purpose.

Ooft, your kids might be ill themselves, might move abroad, might just refuse, etc, etc. Never assume.

I think those life expectancy figures are not an accurate reflection of the age people actually lived to, as they are pulled down by child and infant deaths.

Why can't there be an in-between, though? Why would it be wrong to say that you have children because you want them, and you love them; but also - because you hope they in turn will love you too - you hope that they might want to help you and care for you (i.e. mowing your lawn, bringing you shopping, taking you to GP appointments) when they are independent middle-aged adults and you are frail and dependent on others?

Just like the vast majority of people marry out of love, but that doesn't mean that you don't also sincerely hope they will be there for you and help you, and vice versa - except its more serial with different generations (i.e. they do most for you when you are young; you do most for them when they are old), rather than parallel as with a couple.

My parents had their first two children because they wanted children. However they had me to become my disabled sibling’s carer when they died. I even found a will written by my dad when I was 5 years old to that effect

On a national/global scale, it clearly IS one reason why people have children - because elderly people frequently depend on younger people to care for them and today's children will be those carers tomorrow.

It may not be your own children caring for you, and it may well be done as part of a paid employment situation; but let's be honest about it: as a society, we'll always have elderly people relying on younger adults who were once children for their daily basic needs.

Agree. This is how I feel. I love my kids, had them for love. I dont expect them to care for me when I am old as in "be my carer"- I would never ever want that for them and wouldnt allow it, but I do expect them to show a bit of love in terms of maybe helping me find carers if I needed them or maybe take me shopping on occasion etc

What on earth is wrong with that? Noone has kids dreaming that as soon as you hit age 65 they'll cut contact with you and ignore you. Relationships are usually reciprocal- it would be rather odd if they weren't.

You don't need to have children because you don't have access to birth control, need workers for the farm or need care in your old age any more so not sure why it's relevant what people did in the past. Things change.

I hope no-ones having children for this reason. As a trapped sandwich generation 50 something who has just packed off to university but is completely stuck with elderly parents this is the very last thing I want for my child. I want her to travel, thrive and live her life free of the guilt and duty that is ruining mine. The idea that she'll feel the frustration and depression I'm going through and wonded if there'll be any of her life left when I've gone would destroy me.

Your life is your responsibility. It doesnt matter what your parents say. If its too much for you then its on you to tell them that and help them find paid carers.

Noone can make you be a carer for someone. Just because its hard to say no doesnt mean you cannot say no.