Having a child is the worst thing you can do for the environment

[saveourtrees]

I disagree with this wholeheartedly. My family of 7 (I will not apologise for my children's lives) create less waste than my brother and his girlfriend. In fact we take in their pet waste and food waste for composting.
Virtually all of our clothes, toys, boardgames, furniture is secondhand. A couple of white goods (does oven count as white goods?)
we grow our some of own food, process and preserve, batchcook and freeze, hardly ever use the heating (hot water bottles and blankets), bake, make dinners from scratch etc.
I knit (using wool from the charity shop), sew badly to fix holes in clothes.
we don't buy cards or wrapping paper, we do absolutely everything we can.

We still make about 1.5 black bags full of rubbish a week though, solely from food packaging. We just don't have enough to stretch to a zero waste bulk shop in the city center. But one day, when I go back to work I think we could probably manage it.

So why am I feeling guilty for having children? If it wasn't for my children I probably wouldn't have even cared as much about the environment and the state of the world. A big drive for me changing from a typical consumer to a more conscious one was the birth of my first child. Suddenly when people asked 'what world are we leaving for our children?' they were talking about my children.

I think the eco conscious people not reproducing to ''save the planet'' is stupid. If the people who care, who would teach their children to mend and say no to fast fashion, eat less meat, don't holiday abroad, etc. .. if they don't have children but the avid consumers do then isn't that worse? There will be less eco friendly grownups in 20/ 30 years but just as many grown-ups who weren't taught by their parents how to be eco friendly

I don't know, but don't come onto mumsnet and tell mums they shouldn't have had their children. That really is horrible.

So you accept that having children in bad for the environment?

I know you were asking OP, but I most certainly do not accept such a child-phobic statement.

@BritWifeInUSA

1.5 black bin bags a week!!! Just from food packaging? But you say you cook from scratch. I don’t think I create that much waste from food packing in a year and I also cook from scratch and make all our bread by hand. If you don’t buy processed or pre-made foods where is the packaging from? At most I buy something like olives in glass jars but they go in the recycling. I can’t remember the last time I bought food packed in plastic except plastic milk bottles and they get recycled.

Sorry this is including recycling. Still considering the amount of recycling that actually gets recycled i think I will still call it just 'waste'

@SmaugMum

I’m the ultimate recycler: I adopted two children!

Haha brilliant!

How is it childphobic to state a fact?

Some people would be happy if the human race died out.
I won't apologise for my 2 either besides more women are choosing not to have DC so it balances out.
I don't drive, don't fly, eat little meat and no pets.
I think decent human connections are priceless.
But 7 DC will make a big impact and cost tax payers for their education etc and is frowned upon, unless you're a millionaire.

@coachmylife

Btw it is utter rubbish that we contribute only 1% to world emissions - we import almost everything we consume, and NONE of that is counted in ‘our’ emissions. We badly need consumption-related figures, not just production ones.

But how would you then attribute the % to each country. It would become a very complicated calculation. I agree entirely about consumption and have over the last 20 yrs consciously tried to avoid buying from outside the uk but it is impossible to check every nut and bolt. Food is a start we no longer eat foodstuffs that are imported. I cook meals from scratch. The only exception is bananas. But we live rurally in one of the county’s that produces a lot of food, so local farm shops buy direct from local farmers resulting in fresher food that can be stored far longer and is considerably cheaper than supermarkets.

Just to be clear I have a child and one on the way. Live vegan and zero waste as possible. I am still capable of understanding the environmental impact having children has.

The argument was that under capitalism it is not profitable to distribute food worldwide. Which is utter rubbish because food is being distributed world wide profitably

I think you’re focused on “world wide” and missing what that poster meant by “distribute”.

Yes it’s possible to send food all around the globe, we do it every day. And yes, capitalism has certainly pulled people out of poverty, (however many people it’s put in there but leaving that as a separate issue for now).

But she’s not wrong that it’s not profitable under capitalism and other systems (warring nation states, etc) to equitably distribute the food we’ve got. That’s why we have enough food on the globe to feed everyone, and still people going hungry.

I don’t think the answer to this is “well I’ll have one fewer child then, that’s one less person eating.”

I do agree with the op..kind of.
I have 2 and due a third surprise baby soon. For many years I've only bought second hand, that's clothes and toys apart from things like underwear or something specific needed for the dc that I couldn't find second hand.
I also make a lot of my own things whether it's home deco things or knitting blankets and scrapes etc.
We grow out own veg, but local where we can and have little waste.
We walk wherever we can possibly walk rain or shine.
My childless neighbours on the other hand both have a 4x4 each, go on many holidays, buy takeout everyday, have new clothes all the time and never recycle.
Why would I have less dc when so many people don't give a shit about the planet. I'm not going to change my life choices to offset their carbon footprint.

@EmeraldShamrock

Some people would be happy if the human race died out. I won't apologise for my 2 either besides more women are choosing not to have DC so it balances out. I don't drive, don't fly, eat little meat and no pets. I think decent human connections are priceless. But 7 DC will make a big impact and cost tax payers for their education etc and is frowned upon, unless you're a millionaire.

Actually I frown upon millionaires. Capitalism is the single biggest contributor to the mess we are in, that is, materialism is valued more highly than sustainability.

‘Btw it is utter rubbish that we contribute only 1% to world emissions - we import almost everything we consume, and NONE of that is counted in ‘our’ emissions. We badly need consumption-related figures, not just production ones.’

I was about to come on to say exactly this. It’s all well saying India and China are mainly responsible when they are basically factories producing the stuff we demand. We’ve simply exported our carbon footprint elsewhere.

@Hortonhearsadoctorwho

How is it childphobic to state a fact?

It’s not a fact. The statement: “Children are bad for the environment” is an opinion. Not a fact.

Fact is every living creature including humans are part of the environment. Mere existence is neither good nor bad. Good or bad comes into issue of unbalance in the environment...so too many children or too few children are “bad” for the environment because we are all part of the ecosystem and an apex predator in a delicate food chain. Humans are part of the environment just like birds, bees, trees, squirrels etc etc.

To see if there are “too many” children we look at a country’s birth rates. And voila, the birth rate for U.K. indicates we definitely are not having too many children for our region of the planet.

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]@LobsterNapkin
That’s not even remotely what I said?
The argument was that under capitalism it is not profitable to distribute food worldwide. Which is utter rubbish because food is being distributed world wide profitably and more food for free as food aid.

The fact that there is not yet zero world hunger is not due to “capitalism”. In fact capitalist societies have done the most to reduce world hunger.[/quote]
I think the argument was that under capitalism it is not profitable to distribute food to all the people who need it. Which is true. It's profitable to send it to those who can pay. If it were profitable to give it to everyone who was hungry, you would have very few people going without and food insecure.

Even in the UK there are people who starve and are malnourished, and it's not like they are being prevented from accessing food because of war or anything like that.

Whether you like it or not, having kids IS the worst thing you can do for the environment. They will have their own kids possibly, buy and drive cars, have their own homes that will use energy. Use laptops and phones.

It's incredibly naive to not understand that even if you're very eco friendly having kids (especially a family as large of 7) is very bad for the environment.

With that said, if you want a big family that's fine and lots of people don't have eco friendly lives but why pretend?

To see if there are “too many” children we look at a country’s birth rates. And voila, the birth rate for U.K. indicates we definitely are not having too many children for our region of the planet.

Too many children for what?

Actually I frown upon millionaires. Capitalism is the single biggest contributor to the mess we are in, that is, materialism is valued more highly than sustainability.
True.
People really forget the DC are the future wether you like them or not.
OP it sounds like you're doing a great job and will send 7 young adults into the world knowing you've done a good job.
My only issue with some families with lots of DC is when they don't nurture them, invest in them.
I know a lady with 8 all well mannered, older 3 DC in college they'll all be valuable parts of society.

Children are bad for the environment though.
Each child brings an extra carbon footprint, each child uses resources, each child grows up to gets their home, drive a car, create waste etc
Doesn’t mean people shouldn’t have children but some people do consider the environmental impact when choosing to have more children.

saveourtrees

PS I am incredibly ashamed and embarrassed about making that much waste. It still isn't as much as what me and dh made before we had children though.

OP going off piste a bit
But just curious, how did you generate more waste before children?

Microwave meals, buying clothes new, not batchcooking and just throwing away food. loads of things. Buying a drink or snack out.

I thought we were doing pretty good, how much is everyone else throwing away? Even on the hard-core zero waste sites, 1 black bag a week is the goal. Its pretty impossible to get under that without a big pay increase. We still shop at aldi, I would love to go to the butcher and the Baker and the candlestick maker but in reality most of our food has to be cheap. Except what we can grow but I can't really grow enough yet, I'm still a newbie only about 3 years in and the first year I harvested nothing!
This year has been amazing though, almost everything in summer was home grown, winter is trickier.

@GoldenOmber
But she’s not wrong that it’s not profitable under capitalism and other systems (warring nation states, etc) to equitably distribute the food we’ve got. That’s why we have enough food on the globe to feed everyone, and still people going hungry.

I agree human greed is the cause. But capitalism itself is not a cause of world hunger, as it is the only system that has actually reduced world hunger. The primary reason people are still going hungry is due to corruption in the supply chain and food waste. Free food aid is sent where it is needed, but then corrupt government officials/warlords then decide to sell to highest bidder to line their own pockets. Meanwhile, in the richer countries, we waste and throw away food constantly...so it’s not distributed when it could be.

Here's a question. One family has four kids who all learn to live very frugally. That's their baseline. Old or no cars, simple food, no or camping vacations, just stockings at Christmas, and so on.

Another family has one or two kids, but their baseline as adults is eating a varied global inspired cuisine, vacations overseas every year, new expensive cars, everyone in the family has their own bedroom and en suite bath, etc.

As adults, who will use more resources, and what will they teach their own kids to expect?

@coogee

To see if there are “too many” children we look at a country’s birth rates. And voila, the birth rate for U.K. indicates we definitely are not having too many children for our region of the planet.

Too many children for what?

Too many for the planet to support. That’s what, we know it can support the population we have today. So any birth rate at zero growth or below, means not too many children.

Also I don't see how children are bad for the environment. My gran was one of 7 my grandad one of 8. They lived completely differently to now.
Its not the people its the system.
If things changed so drastically in my grandparents lifetime, perhaps it could change drastically back.

@Hortonhearsadoctorwho
Children are bad for the environment though.
That is your opinion, it is not a fact.

Also I don't see how children are bad for the environment.

Are you serious?
You genuinely can’t see that each child has an environmental impact?! Jeez, have a million kids if you want but there’s no need to be so ignorant.

OP you're looking at the here and now. Do you not see how 7 people added to the earth's population is going to create more of a burden to the planet? If doesn't matter how conscious people are to reduce waste, none us live with zero effect on the planet. I mean it doesn't matter, but don't kid yourself.