It is harder to have a family the more intelligent you are?

[TheTribe]

I remember reading that more intelligent women are not having children. Is this choice or not do you think? Should we be encouraging smart people to have children in some way? I saw idiocracy...

www.mic.com/articles/58579/women-without-children-aren-t-selfish-they-re-smart

@AllsfairOrisit how often does that actually happen though? I’m not saying it’s not a motivating factor but I can’t think of anyone I know who married only for money.

@BogglesGoggles

I would agree that it isn’t very common for several reasons, not least because said billionaire would have to be not terribly bright and very naive to marry a woman solely for the purpose of procreation without having some sort of pre nup in place. One would expect him to have some wits about him.

Also, the last time I checked, there were not so many billionaires knocking around that, making it not a terribly realistic option in lieu of working.

It was not my example but gingerbreadsprinkle put forward a quite ridiculous and unrealistic example which I responded to.

When I went to the GP with PND in the early days she said that women who have been career focused prior have a harder time adjusting.

Obviously just a throwaway observation and I think that overnight change hits us all like a ton of bricks.

But I guess there's some factual basis to the fact being perceived as intelligent may mean you've got a degree or career or skill / hobby that you do full time and enjoy / have dreams of progressing in. And that the change from that old life to motherhood is massive.

Women are having children later for these reasons and choosing to not have them and not sacrifice the freedom / profession is a totally valid choice.

Whilst linking these things to intelligence is a bit of a rude generalisation, I can see that women in successful fulfilling careers etc may be putting off having children or opting not to have them at all.

I guess if you say that to some people who have decided to not have children then they don't want to have a discussion, they'd rather just get butthurt that you dare to question their life philosophy.

Hmm. Sounds rather like a lot of projection going on here...

AllsfairOrisit

Lol, you don't know what the meaning of "example" is? I had to make it as extreme as possible because knowing some people here, they'd rather poke holes and get lost in details, missing the entire point. You really don't believe that some marriages are more valuable than career choices, that's fine. I'm not as close minded to believe that pursuit of career is always more valuable than pursuit of a family.

Hmm. Sounds rather like a lot of projection going on here...

Sure. Whatever you say.

I'm not as close minded to believe that pursuit of career is always more valuable than pursuit of a family.

Interestingly I don’t think almost anyone has actually said that they consider a career to always be the more valuable path. Also, interestingly, it’s often those who consider themselves “open minded” who reveal themselves to be the most closed to new ideas...

But, I have work to do now so I’m going to bow out of this conversation. Cheerio and I fully expect some sort of attack in your next post ginger.

I think intelligent people tend to have more foresight and can visualise the impact having children has on themselves as a couple and society around them. Having children comes with enormous responsibility. Admittedly, I question women who, like on another thread here, just have reckless, unprotected sex with random partners and then end up pregnant. I just think, "Why go about it that way, such a risky path fraught with insecurity? Why didn't you think that through?" I get upset by women who don't think through the enormous burden of bringing kids into a really unstable environment. There are women who actively choose to do so. I think there is a lower intelligence going on there in that regard. Lack of awareness and foresight.

I do think some women have kids just to have them, without really giving it much thought.

Interesting thread.

I'm childfree by choice (though sometimes wavering now that it's "crunch time" = 38. I certainly don't dislike kids and have never been able to say "never, ever") and I suppose I'm what people would call a high achiever (did very well at school and university and now run my own business).

There is the element of having more to lose, I suppose, if you have a well-paid career. I can't imagine how I'd be able to do my job after having only slept 2 hours, etc., and I wouldn't have the luxury of maternity leave because I'm self-employed. I have a very equal relationship with my DH but often observe that that balance goes out the window when children come along, also because of biological factors that don't tie in well with equality (childbirth, breastfeeding).
And after years of being able to fund nice holidays/meals out, etc., it's very hard to imagine having to give all of the things you enjoy up (at least if the things that make you happy are obsessive travel and dining out - from what I read on here, certainly not the most compatible with small children) for something that you have never experienced with benefits that are hard to grasp, at least for me.

I think high achievers often have (or have been socialised to have) very high expectations of themselves as well. To me, a baby would be yet another thing that I'd feel I'd have to do exceptionally well and that seems like a lot of pressure on top of keeping up my career, maintaining a good relationship with my DH and friends, staying fit and healthy. Especially if all of the things that I currently use to compensate for stress (exercise, excitement about travel) go out of the window, it just seems like a long hard slog for an uncertain outcome.

Interestingly I don’t think almost anyone has actually said that they consider a career to always be the more valuable path. Also, interestingly, it’s often those who consider themselves “open minded” who reveal themselves to be the most closed to new ideas...

It's in the opening question.

It is harder to have a family the more intelligent you are?

It's insinuating that intelligence = formal education = pursuit of career = not having children.

It's propaganda, and a lot of people can drink the koolaid and think they are better/more intelligent than others who have don't have a formal education or took time out to pursue a family. I don't buy it though. I think A LOT of those same people just want to humble brag about being so smart, but are really pissed about not having something that others do so they want to put them down.

@shoesandwine makes a really good about socialisation. I would say that about 80% of high achieving girls/women I have known have been socialised down the get good grades, get a good job, then have a family route. Quite a few have burnt out along the way. And many seem to get to the point of having a good job and feeling like they can’t maintain that and have kids (the way they are supposed to anyway). I think it’s definitely easier to take the leap if you think it’s fine to just leave children with a nanny/nursery/boarding school or you don’t think that having a career in the traditional sense is important. If you put yourself under pressure to have a high flying career and be a super mummy that must be exhausting though.

There is a correlation between IQ and no. Of children - I.e. the higher the one, the lower the other.

Remaining childfree by choice requires strength of character and independence of thought. Of course, plenty of women who have children are strong and independent too; but others will just have gone along with what they felt society/their families expected of them, and it's that sort of 'follow the crowd' woman that you don't tend to find amongst the childfree by choice population.

I think there is some truth in this. I’m a very highly educated professional. I have 4 degrees and a consuming career. I didn’t even start having children until my late thirties. My friends in the same profession, with similar education, have done the same. Many have not met the right partner, or required IVF, or tried IVF but didn’t conceive. I actually only know one who is without children by choice. I think it’s probably more likely that women in these circles are childless or have fewer children.

There are some quite insulting comments on this thread against women with careers. Many many women have a high flying, successful career and manage to be a good mum, without nannies and without boarding schools. I certainly feel I have both, and it’s a juggle at times, but my family are all happy and we manage to make it work. Yes I’m less perfectionist than I was before children. But that’s probably been good for me.
Most of my friends are the same, although one has a nanny, but only one, out of many.

Lockheart , completely agree. Also, looking at the opportunity cost of becoming a mother.... Parenthood fundamentally changes you because a woman is still expected to be the primary caregiver to children by the society - there is a break in your career with maternity leave, the long-term loss of earnings if you go part-time afterwards, perception that you are less committed to the job as a result, and the resulting loss of potential promotions etc etc. This then snowballs with each addition to the family. Women who worked really hard all their lives to over-achieve at uni and build up their careers may indeed question whether or not they would want to have more children or any children at all.

Gardenbats, your GP is correct:

Older, more highly educated, middle class mothers with more established careers are more likely to have PND. It’s because the change to their life is more dramatic when baby is born.

That’s what the research shows.

Not sure about stopping people have kids but they sure worry more, especially if they delayed having them to 40+. We are quite unusual in that we are educated and had kids in our 20's but many friends waited, they worry about everything, I've also noted (though perhaps because of our circumstances) that autism has a much higher than average occurrence but it could be that university friends are seeking me out knowing I have a child with asd now grown so have been through the whole process, it could be chance but literally half of my close friends I was at university with have autistic kids.

Intelligence isn’t the same as education level. But on a population level, this is observed almost universally. In countries where women have access to education, the fertility rate is far lower, and it decreases in line with the quality of the education available.

Hence why accessible education for women around the world is vital to address the overpopulation crisis.

Yes, education increases the number of opportunities and choices for women and all of a sudden motherhood is not the highest status a woman can achieve. The lower the educational level the more desirable being a mother would appear. With more education comes more focus on other things besides procreation and marriage.

As an aside, there was much talk about intelligence on this thread, but need to distinguish between IQ and 'street' intelligence. Even if you have a high IQ it won't help you if you are not able to grasp the right opportunities in life.

Better educated young women have far more abortions than more poorly educated young women. More poorly educated young women if they get accidentally pregnant, tend to have their baby.

Agree with pps that education doesn't necessarily equal intelligence. I know some monumentally thick graduates. In fact there are more now that are thick than twenty years ago just because so many people have degrees these days.

I think what further education does though is serve as a rite of passage or a marker of adult status and if you have that open as an option to you then you are less likely to choose the "adult status by parenthood" route because education, compared to parenthood, has less of a financial/physical impact.