Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

MNers without children

This board is primarily for MNers without children - others are welcome to post but please be respectful

Why is a life without kids still not promoted as a route to happiness?

367 replies

OptimismvsRealism · 16/09/2024 09:12

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/15/parents-are-anxious-lonely-overwhelmingly-stressed-and-their-crisis-affects-everyone

Parenthood looks awful. Certainly worse than it needs to be in modern times but fundamentally wretched in many ways. An abandonment of the self.

Shouldn't we be telling young people not to have kids unless they really want to? Like we'd advise with anything so hard.

Parents are anxious, lonely, overwhelmingly stressed – and their crisis affects everyone | Emma Beddington

People keep coping until they absolutely can’t, and parents are at breaking point. Why aren’t politicians treating this as an emergency, asks Emma Beddington

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/15/parents-are-anxious-lonely-overwhelmingly-stressed-and-their-crisis-affects-everyone

OP posts:
minipie · 23/09/2024 13:45

LoobyDoop2 · 23/09/2024 13:21

I think it suits the narrative of both working mothers and SAHP to tell themselves that they would have progressed further and achieved more if they hadn’t had to slow down/been discriminated against for having children. They don’t realise that women without children experience exactly the same discrimination. We miss out on many of the same opportunities just in case we have children at some point in the future.

Sorry but I had to respond to this as it so misses the mark.

It was not discrimination that held me back career wise. If anything they were dead keen to have more senior women.

What really held me back was, shocker, having to look after the kids.

People say “hire a nanny”. We hired a nanny. But in my job the usual hours plus commute are longer than a nanny will work. So that meant reduced hours. And then there’s all the stuff nannies don’t do and parents still need to do, around their jobs. Plus my DC didn’t sleep - try being top notch at your demanding job when you’ve been up several times in the night and woken at 5 for the day.

I don’t deny discrimination exists - it definitely does. But the idea that women without kids are held back career wise just as much as women with, and that those women are somehow inventing a “narrative” that their kids held back their career, is laughable and rather offensive.

MerryMarys · 23/09/2024 14:10

LoobyDoop2 · 23/09/2024 13:21

I think it suits the narrative of both working mothers and SAHP to tell themselves that they would have progressed further and achieved more if they hadn’t had to slow down/been discriminated against for having children. They don’t realise that women without children experience exactly the same discrimination. We miss out on many of the same opportunities just in case we have children at some point in the future.

I have to disagree strongly too.

Before I had children I was doing very well in my career, my company investing heavily in women (and men) and my hard was paying off in terms of promotions and earnings.

It was my own choice to have children and give up my career.

MerryMarys · 23/09/2024 14:12

It was not discrimination that held me back career wise. If anything they were dead keen to have more senior women.

Same here. After my first born, I was encouraged and supported to come back. It was definitely not discrimination that ever held me back, rather my own choices.

PollyPeep · 23/09/2024 16:20

LoobyDoop2 · 23/09/2024 13:21

I think it suits the narrative of both working mothers and SAHP to tell themselves that they would have progressed further and achieved more if they hadn’t had to slow down/been discriminated against for having children. They don’t realise that women without children experience exactly the same discrimination. We miss out on many of the same opportunities just in case we have children at some point in the future.

I don't often reply to these kinds of threads because live and let live, and all that. But I had to reply to this because, as others have said, unfortunately it's simply not true. I just about coped with having one child and a career, but with a second it's become much more difficult. It's not discrimination because you're a woman, it's because you have more responsibilities outside of work and employers don't like that. They don't like that you have something that takes priority - if your child needs picking up early or is sick, a parent needs to leave work early or not come in. You can split this with your partner if you have one, but the responsibility often does fall on the woman because she's more likely to be the one on "flexible hours" after maternity leave. They don't like that your attention and focus may be elsewhere.

I also found I couldn't do the informal networking so often required to advance your career because I had to be back for the kids. Similarly, I couldn't / wasn't interested in working overtime. Compared to pre-kids, I was not as dedicated to my career, and therefore was not as attractive as an employee.

Testiment to this, myself and another woman were the only two with children in my office and we were the only two made redundant during the pandemic. We had to sign agreements saying we wouldn't take them to court for discrimination. Their argument was we weren't "team players" in taking on extra work, when we had to take care of our children during a global pandemic. Extreme example but it distilled what employers really think about mothers. The kicker is, my industry is female dominated.

OutsideLookingOut · 23/09/2024 16:49

PollyPeep · 23/09/2024 16:20

I don't often reply to these kinds of threads because live and let live, and all that. But I had to reply to this because, as others have said, unfortunately it's simply not true. I just about coped with having one child and a career, but with a second it's become much more difficult. It's not discrimination because you're a woman, it's because you have more responsibilities outside of work and employers don't like that. They don't like that you have something that takes priority - if your child needs picking up early or is sick, a parent needs to leave work early or not come in. You can split this with your partner if you have one, but the responsibility often does fall on the woman because she's more likely to be the one on "flexible hours" after maternity leave. They don't like that your attention and focus may be elsewhere.

I also found I couldn't do the informal networking so often required to advance your career because I had to be back for the kids. Similarly, I couldn't / wasn't interested in working overtime. Compared to pre-kids, I was not as dedicated to my career, and therefore was not as attractive as an employee.

Testiment to this, myself and another woman were the only two with children in my office and we were the only two made redundant during the pandemic. We had to sign agreements saying we wouldn't take them to court for discrimination. Their argument was we weren't "team players" in taking on extra work, when we had to take care of our children during a global pandemic. Extreme example but it distilled what employers really think about mothers. The kicker is, my industry is female dominated.

That is an awful and I am sure common experience. I am sorry that happened to you.

This doesn't mean however that there were women just floating along in a career or job before children. Not everyone is dedicated to a career before children. When I look at my last job fathers progressed the most. Children seem to be a dagger to the mother's career but bolster his though they also promoted parents more because and I quote, "Parents have something to lose so will work harder."

On the other hand though women can be discriminated against just because they may have children (young). And god forbid you don't allow yourself to be taken advantage off - working every Christmas, picking up extra work all the time - people are let go just for asserting themselves when the powers that be do not like that. Not to mention the usual things that can happen to anyone can happen to those without children too; sickness, elderly care, bereavement and some companies are very unforgiving and inflexible when these life events happen.

The thing I'm saying is that not everyone would progress well in a career without children, it is fine to accept this. And many parents to extremely well especially if they can rely on each other or external help.

MerryMarys · 23/09/2024 17:39

It's not discrimination because you're a woman, it's because you have more responsibilities outside of work

Exactly. Any employee that has childcare responsibilities will obviously have less time and energy to devote to her employer.

Before I had children, I enjoyed working late, traveling for business and even spending some weekends preparing for important meetings. I had all the time and energy for my career.

This obviously changed after I had two children - my priorities changed and became focused much more on my children and home (a sacrifice I was happy to make).

MerryMarys · 23/09/2024 17:43

The thing I'm saying is that not everyone would progress well in a career without children

Of course not. But we were responding to the previous comment that "it suits the narrative of both working mothers and SAHP to tell themselves that they would have progressed further and achieved more if they hadn’t had to slow down/been discriminated against for having children."

And without doubt I would have progressed further in my career and achieved much more had I not chosen to have children.

BestZebbie · 23/09/2024 19:23

I think there is also a pull factor to having children in order to experience the stage when they are independent adults, as well as when they are dependents (who are expensive, poor and stop you reading your book on holiday etc). You can't have the relationship with an adult child unless you had a least a good chunk of time with them when they were young.

TaraRhu · 23/09/2024 20:34

PollyPeep · 16/09/2024 09:37

People are being told that. And many, many more young people are choosing to remain child-free for all sorts of reasons. It's not the assumed route now. But having kids is a biological urge and lots of people feel unfulfilled until they have kids. Most people go into parenthood knowing it'll be hard - the information is most definitely out there. But many people think it's worth it regardless.

^^ this exactly. It was something beyond reason that made me want kids. I knew fine well it would be hard. But I also find it more meaningful if not enjoyable. Not everyone will feel this way and that's just my feelings. There are of course many other ways to find meaning in life.

KimberleyClark · 23/09/2024 21:35

Someone will only find true happiness in childlessness if they've chosen it.

I don’t agree. I didn’t choose childlessness (fertility issues) but I’ve healed from it and I am truly happy and contented now in my 60s. My DH and I have just celebrated our 34th anniversary. There was a silver lining to my childlessness in that I was able to retire earlyish five years ago aged 58. I feel these are truly golden years.

PollyPeep · 23/09/2024 22:56

@OutsideLookingOut thank you, I appreciate it 😊 And as another poster noted, I was just responding to the notion that women with kids use it as an excuse to not progress in their careers. I'm not suggesting child-free women are all high flyers or that women with children are all sacrificing their careers. Simply that employers do discriminate against women with children, and that the responsibility of having a child has the "unfortunate" side effect of making it much more difficult for women to progress in a career. Not impossible by any means, but more difficult.

daliesque · 24/09/2024 20:16

TwigletsAndRadishes · 23/09/2024 07:30

Why on earth should it be 'promoted' as a route to happiness though? It's a valid lifestyle choice increasingly embraced by many, but it's no more likely to guarantee you happiness than having a family might. In fact loneliness is known to be a killer, especially of men. If you lose your life partner then you are far more likely to end up lonely, depressed and isolated in later life, with no children to feel connected to, or to want to carry on for.

All being child-free guarantees you is more free time and more money in your pocket, assuming you earn reasonably well to start with and children are not the cash cows that unlock access to better housing and more benefits for you. Having a life with no children doesn't necessarily guarantee you less stress, or better health or a better career or a more enriching or interesting life. I'd urge anyone who isn't going to have children (whether through choice or otherwise) to seek an enriching and interesting life and to avoid falling into a hamster wheel of tedious responsibility. I'd urge them to harness the freedoms of childlessness and enjoy them to the fullest, but ultimately you still have to make that life happen for yourself. It's not a guarantee that comes with being child-free. When I look around at most of the child-free (by choice) couples I know, their lives are as ordinary as everyone else's, which I don't really understand. It seems like a wasted opportunity to me.

There is less pressure on you, so if your life is going to shit and your job is giving you burnout you can jack it all in and downsize, go off round the world, live off-grid in a yurt or whatever, and not have to think about the needs and wants of anyone but yourself. You can devote yourself to hobbies and passions and travel, and if a relationship is bad you can leave it without fear of how it will affect your children's security and happiness. You don't need to 'settle' for a sub-par relationship, or tolerate poor behaviour for fear that you don't have time to find anyone better to have children with. For women in particular, that must be incredibly empowering.

There are undoubtedly many benefits to being child-free on paper, but very few people choose not have kids based on a tick-box exercise of rationalisation. If you feel an unexplainable yearning to have them then no amount of rationalising or 'promoting' childlessness is going to make a difference. No amount of extra money in the bank or extra 'me time' is going to fill that void in your life. And what, ultimately, is the point of amassing a load of money anyway, if you don't have children to pass it on to? It's the very thing that drives us, and has always driven us, whether it's to go out hunting and gathering or to push for the next promotion.

DH and I often ask ourselves how much money we'd be worth by now, if we hadn't had three kids to shell out for. DH has been a high earner so it would be an eye watering amount frankly, assuming he'd made the same career choices and I had carried on working instead of being a SAHM for years and years. But what on earth would we have done with it all? How many fabulous holidays and nice cars and expensive restaurant meals can you have, how much golf can you play or gig/theatre going can you do before it all just feels a bit like a giant displacement activity to cover for something else that's missing?

Someone will only find true happiness in childlessness if they've chosen it. And in most cases they choose it because they come to realise they just don't have any strong maternal/paternal insinct and the idea of having children actually makes them panic and recoil in some way. I can't imagine many people make a conscious decision to ignore that biological urge or deny themselves the permission to give in to it, in favour of a simpler, easier life with fewer pressures and more disposable income. That's rational and there is nothing rational about wanting a baby. It's a instinctive urge that most of us can't switch off.

I totally get that people who are childless not through choice, could learn to be happier by embracing all the positives instead of dwelling on the negatives. They should absolutely grasp the opportunity to fill their lives with every enriching life experience possible, that most of us with children never get the time and space to do. Because if a life without children is your unchosen destiny then you may as well make that destiny as fulfilling and thrilling and distracting as possible, instead of living a life of dull routine and responsibility and always feeling sad and unfulfilled.

But frankly you are only ever going to sound like a patronising knob if you tell them this, especially as a person with children.

What utter twaddle.

Choosetolivelife · 25/09/2024 11:28

KimberleyClark · 23/09/2024 10:23

Why on earth should it be 'promoted' as a route to happiness though? It's a valid lifestyle choice increasingly embraced by many, but it's no more likely to guarantee you happiness than having a family might. In fact loneliness is known to be a killer, especially of men. If you lose your life partner then you are far more likely to end up lonely, depressed and isolated in later life, with no children to feel connected to, or to want to carry on for.

It's possible to be lonely despite having a partner and children though. Family life is not a guarantee of happiness. I see loads of "I have no friends" posts on Mumsnet from people who are married/partnered with children.

Yes, i hear of so many elderly people that are lonely; of whom you wouldn't even sadly know had any children at all. They live away, or barely visit them.

I do agree with the idea that dcs can keep you going. My dcs did just that after losing my close parent. I am stronger for them, and they have made me smile again. My sibling seems to cling to the past more, fixated on our old family life, despite having friends and a good life. I will always treasure those memories, and miss them, but it helps having new ones with my dcs.

imverynosey · 25/09/2024 21:44

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

bringincrazyback · 25/09/2024 22:01

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Mature.

KimberleyClark · 26/09/2024 09:59

bringincrazyback · 25/09/2024 22:01

Mature.

What did she say, in terms that don't break the talk guidelines?

bringincrazyback · 26/09/2024 19:45

KimberleyClark · 26/09/2024 09:59

What did she say, in terms that don't break the talk guidelines?

Something along the lines of having spotted the thread and thought it sounded stupid, plus some sort of throwaway that wasn't 'looooool' but was in that general ballpark sentiment-wise. (My memory's terrible on weekday evenings. 😄)

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread