to think that having kids is a little bit selfish?

[nightowlmostly]

Now, before you all have a go, hear me out! I was having this argument at work just now and the guy in question seems to think I'm some kind of monster, and I'm been mulling it over on my way home.

I have two main reasons for feeling this way. The first is that there are so many kids out there in need of a loving home, that having your own is a selfish act?

The other point I have is that there are so many humans on this planet already that the earth is struggling to cope as it is. Surely having kids, lets say only two, is putting more pressure on the earth's resources as they have their own kids and they have more etc?

But, I am not saying that this selfishness is a terrible thing, far from it. We are programmed to reproduce, at a base level and it's hard to fight instinct after all. We are TTC at the moment, having decided that it is what we want, ie from a selfish point of view. Peolple are selfish all the time, buying expensive things they don't need instead of giving the money to charity, spending all weekend doing things they want to do instead of things they should do. It's human nature and not something to be ashamed of.

The guy at work couldn't understand thinking it is selfish, but planning to do it anyway. Is that so wierd? It's like chucking a few bottles in the normal rubbish instead of recycling, it's not right but sometimes we do it anyway.

Am I making any sort of sense?

And finally, AIBU?

I think the human race (maybe not earth) needs us to reproduce ( or adopt/foster) as what kind of people would we become without having that halt to being an eternal selfish child that having children usually puts a stop to. I think having children is when people really grow up and learn to put others totally before themselves and start to think about the consequencies of our actions and such and the effect we are having on the planet.

If we just lived our own short lives with no thought to the future, we could be as selfish and destructive as we'd like as all that would matter is our little 60 yr or so window in the world. Why would anyone look ahead and try to create or build things that will do more for others like cure diseases etc. Wonder if society would tumble into anarchy before we eventually all died off.

hmmm OP ..I think you are over thinking things tbh...and this only having 2 thing..I stopped at 2 because i knew my limits ...but if number 3 came along what would happen?...bin it because it would be too much trouble??

Hi all, was offline for a while, good to see people discussing this like rational adults, with one notable exception!

It is a wierd one, wanting to succumb to the urge to make a baby whilst being aware of the reasons it might not be the best thing for everyone else. I'm glad some people out there feel the same as me. It's like the guilt of driving somewhere when you don't really need to, or having that really long shower.

Maybe 'selfish' was the wrong word to use, as it sits badly with people, it sounds really negative. Can't think of another one that fits really though!

"what kind of people would we become without having that halt to being an eternal selfish child that having children usually puts a stop to. I think having children is when people really grow up and learn to put others totally before themselves and start to think about the consequencies of our actions and such and the effect we are having on the planet."

Sorry, but I think that's a load of nonsense. Please don't be one of those 'righteous mums'. I have many, many childless friends who are mature, intelligent and responsible, to other people and to the environment. Having a kiddie doesn't flip a switch to turn you into a heavenly being. There are many parents in existence who were useless, dumb or even abusive before and after children.

As for 'replacing yourselves', biology doesn't quite work like that... My sister (childfree) experiences the equivalent of passing her genes on to one of her hypothetical children, by helping looking after her nephew and niece. As 'tribal' animals, we've evolved to help each other to breed, not to all have kids ourselves.

Begonyabampot - I'm childless. I'm sensible, mature, and care deeply about the environment. Am extremely at the notion that just because someone's had kids, they are a grown up, responsible eco-warrior. As someone who's worked professionally in an environmental field for over twenty five years, I've met many childless people who are deeply committed to a variety of environmental issues. Go take a look at your wildlife trust, RSPB reserve, FOE branch, etc - who's volunteering there? They are not all parents. I also tithe a portion of my income (try to make it 10%) to a variety of charities, volunteer regularly for a number of organisations and pay my taxes. I know quite a few parents who are entirely locked in the little bubble that is their nuclear family, give or do little for charity and for their wider community. Shall I tell you about the childless people I know who are school governors, football coaches, charity trustees, volunteer wildlife reserve wardens, carers for elderly relatives, hospice drivers, and so on. Should I tell them they are "eternally selfish children?"

For anyone who spouts "parenting makes you a better person" just go and look at the hell that is the scrum outside schools at picking up and dropping off time. The road network near the school is selfishly taken over by parents, all driving huge people carriers or 4 x 4s when most are living in easy walking distance, who race there in the mornings driving like lunatics, usually while on a phone, double park, cut up other drivers, don't signal and generally behave like they own the road. It is hardly a good advert for the environmental credentials or the selflessness of parents.

Well said, Scuttle!

Scuttle I hear you loud and clear. Parents like that are selfish in terms of environmental impact, and would be whether they had 1 child or 6.

However, not all of us are like that. Please rest assured that just as there are some unselfish childless people there are also people with children who do care about the environment, give a good portion of their income to charity, volunteer etc. Some of us even have small cars which are only used when health does not allow walking (as currently), don't phone and drive, double park, are considerate to other road users etc etc.

jings, having kids for many people is a big wake up call for many people, myself included. For the first time they have to put someone else first for a change and it can definitely make you think about priorities, life etc in a different way and makes me worry about the future in different way if i only had myself to think about. Having total responsibility for another life is IMO what makes a lot of people really start to grow up. 'Selfish' wasn't as meant as put down or to infer you are inferior for not having children - just a general point on human nature.

YANBU I have said these same points to people before, especially if people say that choosing not to have kids is selfish!

We stopped at two partly because we had ethical qualms about breeding beyond replacement rate. But we also instinctively felt that two was the right number, and as many as we could cope with. If I'd really felt the urge for three children (as opposed to normal baby-related broodiness) then I won't guarantee we'd have stopped at two.

Unfortunately stopping at two still means population growth in the medium term - the UK population (ignoring immigration/emigration) is growing unsustainably not because people are having "too many" children each, but because there's a population bulge and "too many" people are having babies in this generation.

Buttonmoon, I'd agree in saying that I've met some exceptionally nice and very green parents. I don't see environmental responsibility/sustainability issues as a straight parent/nonparent split. My post was very much in response to Begon who seemed to be implying that parenthood conferred adult status, maturity, responsibility and environmental awareness - sadly not true in all cases.

In any case, whether we are parents or not, our consumption of resources in this country dwarfs that of people in the developing world.

Perhaps not surprisingly, I get a bit pissed off at being referred to as an "eternal selfish child" after just nursing a friend through terminal cancer, and taking care of a close relative following a hospital visit, even though she lives 50 miles away and there are childed relatives who are considerably closer and not working. I can't even imagine saying that to another close friend who's an anaesthetist who spends her life running pain clinics; I'd probably need her services on a professional basis if I told her she was "selfish and destructive".

Oh, you absolutely sound like an eternal selfish child!

I think, essentially, that for many people, that moment of realisation re self-centeredness comes with the advent of parenthood. That's not to say that they would remain selfish forever if they did not have children, nor to say that some people are selfless from a much earlier point. It's just that the point coincides as being a parent is a microcosm of selflessness (if you want to be a good parent). I mean, who else would drag their sorry backside out of bed 8, 10, 12 times a night if you were hungry?! But that selflessness within your own family unit often is not replicated outside as if you subscribe to the survival of the fittest, you do everything to protect and further your own offspring but not others. So I suppose what happens then is people make two mistakes, a) think that because the two points coincide it 'only' happens to parents and b) think that being selfless towards one's own children makes you selfless full stop.

As always, these conversations become peppered with generalisations - unfair to both 'sides'.

And you're right about our consumption in relation to the developing world. But nor are they 'green'. In many cases, developing countries take the worst of the West and magnify and abuse it creating huge problems both now and in the future.

Sorry - nor to say that some people are not selfless from a much earlier point

I disagree it is selfish to want your own children. For most people it is only natural to want their own children. However, because of my really bad childhood I deliberately wanted to make a difference to two little lives and chose adoption instead of having children naturally. I guess, if you think that way about parents who want their own children, by putting my childhood experiences first you could also say I was selfish chosing adoption. I guess if you also think that way you could also say people without children are also selfish because they just want freedom etc. I think whichever one you decide on (including IVF etc) it is just a personal choice and too harsh to call selfish although personally I do have issues and concerns regarding selfishness if you deliberately have children when you are a single parent (I am a single parent with full time care of my 2 children).

The one I don't get is how come it is so hard to adopt kids that it puts lots of people off

Because the child is often damaged in some way, needs more psychological support, has already had a shit start to life so needs a second chance that will work.

It's a natural, biological urge for many... When you have kids you will realise parents are the most selfLESS people out there as the needs of the child come first. There is nowt more selfish than being a parent...

I would have happily adopted instead, I never felt that psychical need. Unfortunately in the UK it is almost impossible and we felt like criminals when we enquired and definitely encountered the most unpleasant group of human beings during the process.

Divorced households,people choosing to live on their own etc also have a massive environmental income however i wouldnt really say they were selfish.western lifestyle in general is wasteful however and that does worry me

We "deliberately" adopted, and luckily we lived in a country where that was quite easy. I'd never judge other people for having biological children, but we just felt that there were plenty of children in the world who needed a home.

It's still arguably selfish though - you could argue that we could have just supported children financially outside our family, but we wanted a child to raise.

(And we lucked out, as we ended up with the Best Boy in the World)

Sash "The one I don't get is how come it is so hard to adopt kids that it puts lots of people off

Because the child is often damaged in some way, needs more psychological support, has already had a shit start to life so needs a second chance that will work."

To be honest I am pleased it puts a lot of people off. The ones who actually do adopt are the ones that really want to and are prepared to do anything for their children even if it means putting their lives on hold for a few years (took me 2 years to adopt), personal investigations and countless training courses etc which may have been useful to others but because of my rubbish background and the different effects it had on me and my brother I learnt nothing I didn't know. However, by spending my time doing these things it did show how committed I was to adopting and having the right mind set to look after children in care.

Like you said many of these children like my son bless him (daughter is OK) have suffered considerably especially if abuse or neglect has been massive and in the first 2-3 years of their lives. Because of this (and a few other complications) my son has AD and is about to go to special school in Sept as the other two schools he goes to at present (including a special unit he goes to cannot support his difficulties anymore). Your average parent just takes these things for granted (if you bring up your children well they will be fine - the same rules do not apply with quite a few adopted children) and some would-be adopted parents do not realise the extra effort, attention and emotional support, and how emotionally fustrating and trying it can be looking after these children and spending a lifetime battling the system to get help for your child as the aftercare in the UK for adopted parents is very poor. To look after a child like this well takes I lot of dedication and emotional support and if someone is not even prepared to put in the effort and time it takes to adopt then in my mind they are not really suitable to adopt. These conditions are very difficult to spot in really young children so it is a lottery as to weather your child has one of these conditions or not. Most of the unsuccessful adoptions involve children with these conditions and if you have a child with RAD you really know it!!!!

I agree with much of what has been said. Yes it is selfish and selfless, but it is simple human nature to want to do it.

RoyalWelsh I haven't read the entire thread and this is in response to your first ( maybe only ) post on this thread.

Have you seriously looked into fostering yet? Just to let you know that the chances of fostering any child who does NOT have emotional or behavioural difficulties is negligible. The very fact that these children require to be looked after by someone who is not their parent inherently means they will be traumatised in some way. Children are not accommodated for nothing.

NOt wanting to be negative, but just want you not to be looking at it through , well meant, but rose tinted spectacles.

No, it's not at all selfish, providing you have the resources to provide adequately for their upbringing. Having children is a natural life stage. Saying it is selfish like saying that growing old and dying is selfish.

I don't think it is really. I am a mum and (shock horror) I don't drive a 4x4. I also know someone who doesn't have kids and drives a 4x4 - does this mean I think they are selfish - no! Where do we stop with the selfish act - do you also consider air travel selfish? Living in a house with electricity?
Have kids or don't have kids. Choose your choice. Unfortunately it doesn't automatically make you a less selfish person if you don't.