To think people are nuts for not having kids for environmental reasons?

[LewishamMum]

I guess in a community of Mums, I may get support, but I just don't understand the increasing number of people in the media who won't have kids because of the environment.
I can't help thinking a lot of them just don't want kids (which is fine), and are trying to come up with a good/virtue signalling reason for this. I mean, if you wanted kids, wouldn't you just do it? (Oh, I do get why they are bad for the environment though!)

Do totally agree as a passive aggressive response to a sexist question you are sick of being asked, then go for it. I just doubt that is really actually the reason - if you've got the maternal urge then I don't think ozone layers and rising oceans etc would stop you.

I think it's a perfectly good reason. To see beyond yourself to the bigger picture is a commendable thing.

If it's the truth or not, only they know and tbh it really doesn't matter. It's their choice.

@SantiagoSky
Here are the temperature anomalies over the years, what we are seeing now has never happened before:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:T_comp_61-90.pdf

Oh, but it has happened before it just hasn’t happened in the last 1,000 yrs because that is as far back as the chart goes and Wikipedia talks about in your link. You need to zoom out and see the larger picture. The Earth has been warmer before, from 5,000 to 3,000 BC temperatures were 1-2C warmer than today.

@MMMarmite

It was 3-4C warmer during the Bronze Age and that is what helped civilisation develop. This is not true.

Er yes it is true. It was 3-4C warmer than the average “baseline” global temperature during human history. Which is 1-2C warmer than what we have today in 2021.

I only have one. The primary reasons being : pretty much hated the first 4 yrs and had awful PND. Can't risk that again.

Having said that, the planet is clearly overpopulated. I think reducing the number of kids a person has is sensible

Since humans and the planet survived temperatures 1-2C warmer than today back in 6,000- 3,000 BC then we and the planet can survive it again.

However, I don’t think civilisation could survive another Ice Age. The population we have certainly could not. There would be mass die off of humans, animals and plants. So fewer resources when most ofbplanet is covered in ice. Which is what we were headed towards until anthropomorphic global warming started. Yes we are keeping the planet warm contrary to its usual natural cooling off to another Ice Age. But not sure that is a bad thing?

@KeepSmiling89

I know right! I know it's not great for the environment but if we stop having kids for the sake of he environment, by the time the environment is saved, there won't be anyone left to enjoy it! Animals would also take over as everyone will stop eating them...but then vegans and vegetarians would die out because they and animals eat the world's supply of plants...I've just got lost down a rabbit hole!

Bottom line, I agree with you OP!

By the time the environment is saved there won't be anyone to enjoy it?

Animals would take over as everyone will stop eating them?

This is the most vapid, ignorant post I have ever read on Mumsnet.

I'm sorry OP but this is what you spent your time thinking about? Whether people who don't want kids are being "truthful" about their reasons?

What business is it of yours? And how amazing that you know all childfree people who have the environment as a reason for not wanting children well enough that you can judge whether it's their "main" reason or not

I'm struggling to see why this is anything to do with anyone else. Do you judge parents about whether their reasons to have kids are good enough too?

What a horrible thread.

Ot alternatively, I care about the environment but not to the extent I intend to stop driving a fast car, flying on holiday, eating steak or having stuff. I don't want kids so as far as I'm concerned I've done my bit for the environment since having a kid more than out weighs any potential environmentalism an individual can do - that kid will produce more CO2 and environmental damage than a person can possibly not do themselves.

So in a way its one reason....

More to add, I don't really care because I'll be long dead before the environment is an issue and as I have no kids, I have skin in the game

no skin that should be - bloody phone

Who cares about people in the Sahara, Seychelles, and Bangladesh, right? Cos, you know, things in Britain are not going to be so awful.

I've had 2 and u will not be having anymore and further contributing to the over population of the world which is one of the top contributing factors of climate change. I think about the kind of world they would be trying to live in!

Obviously I meant, I ^^

Wow....some weird reactions....I don't doubt that kids contribute to environment damage, or that the latter is happening. (Said so in my OP.) Also, totally agree that women shouldn't be asked let alone constantly pressurised into why they don't have/want kids.....just find it difficult to believe that the environment is the main reason for not actually wanting to have them......

@MumUndone

Who cares about people in the Sahara, Seychelles, and Bangladesh, right? Cos, you know, things in Britain are not going to be so awful.

Exactly! Where do people think that the millions of people who live near the equator are going to live? Because of colonisation, a lot of them in the UK probably, which is already hugely overpopulated. It's not going to be nice for anyone.

I don't care. It's absolutely none of my business whether you want children or not.

@MumUndone

Who cares about people in the Sahara, Seychelles, and Bangladesh, right? Cos, you know, things in Britain are not going to be so awful.

Hah, funniest thing I’ve read all day. Half of Britain will be under the Sea. It will be Doggerland all over again. “Not awful”...I think the people of Britain already living cheek to cheek with twice the population density of China will have trouble squeezing everyone into half the land.

Climate change creates awful situations in some places and better situations in others. It’s always been that way and why humans have constantly engaged in mass migrations all over the place through all of human history.

@LewishamMum

Wow....some weird reactions....I don't doubt that kids contribute to environment damage, or that the latter is happening. (Said so in my OP.) Also, totally agree that women shouldn't be asked let alone constantly pressurised into why they don't have/want kids.....just find it difficult to believe that the environment is the main reason for not actually wanting to have them......

The point is OP, why do you assume that these people need to give a reasons that's "believable" to you?

It's literally nothing to do with you and people shouldn't have to be judged about their decisions to have or not to have children. This whole thread just adds to that judgement.

A lot of them say it around the age of 30. I'll be interested in this phenomenon if in 10 years there are lots of 40 year olds who have indeed not had children for this reason

I had my kids in my 20s and I think I was quite naive. I think very differently now at 40 and I wouldn’t have kids now and that’s mainly due to environmental reasons.
I do what I can for the planet now. Being vegan is the biggest difference I can make so I do that.

I agree, not having children is of course a perfectly legitimate choice - and for some, the environmental card may be a convenient / virtue-signalling cop-out. But, if people really want children and feel that they shouldn't only because of environmental concerns then I think that is really sad.

Why? Because, for heaven's sake, in the UK (apologies but I can only talk for the place I live in) we have the best conditions here. Check our privileges - access to the NHS, abundant food, reasonable allowances for freedom of belief and speech (ok there is currently some push back on this), no war or famine. And we have the vaccine so we are ahead in terms of learning to live with Covid. And before anyone else says it, yes I know there are a lot of current issues that impact really badly on people ( eg underfunding of public services, lack of equal pay for women, zero hours contracts etc etc). For me, tackling these and so many other issues assume priority way ahead of climate issues.

Bearing in mind in times past, if people who were born into the Middle Ages and regularly had to deal with plague, famine and low life expectancy took that view (oh it's a terrible world, too terrible to bring up children) then the human race might have died out already. Come on, there have been times in the past where this country has been a really shit place (two world wars, anyone?) so I have no time for the people who hang their decision on not to have children due to the environment. I think such people are really missing the point of life.

We don't really have abundant food - the UK only produces about 60% of our food requirements. We import the rest from areas of the planet where climate change will likely have a bigger impact, and perhaps also impact our food imports.

@Ivebeeninlockdowntoolong
Good post. We live in a golden age compared to past human history.

@lavieengrenache

We don't really have abundant food - the UK only produces about 60% of our food requirements. We import the rest from areas of the planet where climate change will likely have a bigger impact, and perhaps also impact our food imports.

This is true, but keep in mind that the last time the planet was 1-2C warmer than it is now, we had the agricultural revolution. In addition, globally we only use 25% of arable land to produce food. Currently, we produce enough food to feed ten billion. Yes...we have excess food. The cause of hunger today is food waste, not lack of production.

And quite frankly, whatever the impact of climate change will be, it won’t be as bad as entering another Ice Age. An Ice Age is a civilisation crashing, extinction level event. Civilisation has never survived one, although humans as a species have survived several.