Child-free Couple Life

[ballpencil]

Would like some insight from people with experience on the subject, not necessarily from actual child-free couples.

I'm basically on an intersection right now. Currently on my mid 30s and so far not really interested in having kids. I just love doing what i'm doing right now: work, hobby, being able to travel anytime and spending my hard-earned money on anything i want. I can't imagine having to, say, postpone it all for 18-20 years just to raise kids, assuming i live that long. I want to see the world as much as i can and don't see having kids would help me achieve that goal. However, seeing that for most couples having kids is something that you simply do and don't put too much thought in it, am i going to miss something if i decide to stay child-free?

My parents definitely want grandkids but it's me and the wife who will be working our *** off if we have kids.

 

[abraxalito]

I used to be half of a child-free couple, now contentedly single and still child-free. I don't feel I've missed anything by remaining child-free - how could I know though that I was missing something valuable? Ignorance is bliss in this sense.

Don't do something just because others say you 'should' - you'll only feel resentment later. Choices are to be made by the individual who takes the responsibility for those choices - as you've already hinted.

 

[Lojzek]

My parents definitely want grandkids but it's me and the wife
who will be working our *** off if we have kids.

Normally, when a couple is in love, the desire to have kids exists
and the kids make the marital bond stronger. If you want your marriage
to be successful, talk to your wife and make the decision together.

IMO, the best investment would be to invest in people. When you get old
and sick, you will understand.

 

[misok]

in general, men can live happier without kids, compared to women. he has his partner that embodies someone to care about, beside other things. sometimes women feel something similar, but in general this only lasts for a limited time, sooner or later they start to feel useless, tricks like you mentioned (hobbies, traveling..) don't work anymore since they have stronger internal clock. they are or are not aware of this, but it usually has an impact on her personality or psychic stability. there are very few 'extraordinary' women that have other life-long passions/devotions that suppress the strong inner urge to reproduce (be it hidden for themselves or not). so this is what i would personally see as a potential 'problem'.

 

[soundofvoid]

It would work for you (probably-men always stay kids) but usually it doesn't work for women.
Their urge to have kids grows exponentially as time passes by.
At the end, even if they will not ever tell you, they will secretly blame you for staying without kids...it's the nature of the beast!
With this resentment comes argue and grudge that will poison your relationship.
On the other end, it's a blast having a little of you and a little of her (the woman you love-remember?) in the form of a little man growing in your house.
It consumes your time -big time- if you want to be good parents and you will have to cut back on your hobbies and spending habits.
Teaching your kid about life, helping it shape up into a well grown individual, escaping the mistakes your parents did...and making some of your own...
It's a big adventure really, with a lot of effort and possibly little payback!
Hitler had parents too as did Einstein and Albert Schweitzer!
I see it like this:As a great gesture to the world and mankind saying thank you for what i've received, this is my effort to pay back making a better version of me...

 

[soundofvoid]

IMO, the best investment would be to invest in people. When you get old
and sick, you will understand.

I completely agree.

 

[misok]

I completely agree.

i've never understood this approach. doing something just because of fear of being sick and alone. more times i've heard 'i dont want a house on hill/without elevator etc. (no matter how amusing) because one day when i'm old i might have problems with legs etc.. or it's nice to have kids because if you are old and sick, someone might possibly help you here and there. all these things.. to live most of the life according to 'what if i'm old and sick' .. that is almost claustrophobic way of thinking to me. no offense to anyone, it's just something that i'm confronted by from time to time by others.

but .. if you feel like she is the one for life, and if you are more-less compatible with the society around, then i'd say go for it. if both of you are flexible and open-minded, kids won't bring a major life-brake. things will be different for sure, but 1. all present ones don't have to necessarily vanish, 2. other valuable life-experiences will come.

 

[ballpencil]

I truly realize the latent danger of being child-free to the wife's sense of fulfillment and, to an extent, to our relationship. I guess it's a bit too late for us to discuss this since we're already married. This is the kind of thing that we should agree first before we decide to be together. I did talk about this to her in passing before we tie the knot but i guess we both thought that we might change each other's stand on this issue. So far the wife never nag me to have kids as she wants me to WANT kids as well.

I see it like this:As a great gesture to the world and mankind saying thank you for what i've received, this is my effort to pay back making a better version of me...

Well, right now my version of thank you would be to hold myself from populating this already overcrowded world 🙂

IMO, the best investment would be to invest in people. When you get old
and sick, you will understand.

Nice choice of word: investment. I have to agree because there's no guarantee that your investment would payback. Your kids can be the biggest a-holes to roam the earth despite your best efforts to raise them properly, mainly because you're not the only one raising them. Society, TV, internet, etc all come into the equation. You don't decide to have kids because you want someone to take care of you when you're old and sick. Sorry, but you're on your own on that matter. Being child free can help you though 🙂 You have more money to pay for healthcare and better retirement homes.

 

[soundofvoid]

Ok, i get your point but there's nothing claustrophobic about investing in people!
I think it's exactly the opposite.
There's nothing more selfish and claustrophobic when all your life is about me mine my...
If you are optimistic about life, you raise children, if not, you don't.
And that is coming from a recently divorced man with two kids 17 and 11 who is having a ton of hobbies with very little money and time to spare on them...

 

[freax]

Buy a lotto ticket. If you win the lottery you were destined to have as many children as you want to.

Having kids is a million dollar investment nowdays, I personally wouldn't want to have to tell the poor kid that he cannot go to college or MIT because his father cannot afford it.

Just having sex and then the pregnancy is not the way to think about having a child, yes sure some parts of it can be enjoyable but once that parts over you've gotta put up with 8 more years of "I hate you!, Drop dead! *Slams door*" And that is IF they leave home, which isn't the case now, most kids are staying at home well into their 30s and 40s. Why is that? Its because of a shortage of affordable homes, a shortage of (livable) room on earth.

Not only this but the world is at its breaking point now let alone 10 years into the future. The only reason why politicians tell you to have more kids is because its good for their voters, corporations, to have cheaper slave labour.

If you want to live forever then live forever, invest in Alcor Cryogenic freezing and using multivitamins to extend your current life, please don't have a child based upon the notion that it is somehow preserving your soul.

As to the poster just above me, what about the environment? How much resources do you think it takes to have to feed and clothe this human being for the rest of their lives?

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=documentary+overpopulation

https://www.google.com/search?site=...m=isch&q=environmental+cost+of+overpopulation

STARH: Impact of Sex & War...: March 2009

 

[ballpencil]

There's nothing more selfish and claustrophobic when all your life is about me mine my...

Ah there it is: selfishness and child free. How is it selfish if a couple decide NOT to bring another human into this world along with the risk of making it worse? At worst, they are conserving this world's condition the way it is!

 

[misok]

Ok, i get your point but there's nothing claustrophobic about investing in people!
I think it's exactly the opposite.
There's nothing more selfish and claustrophobic when all your life is about me mine my...
If you are optimistic about life, you raise children, if not, you don't.
And that is coming from a recently divorced man with two kids 17 and 11 who is having a ton of hobbies with very little money and time to spare on them...

I mostly agree here, i used that word only for a specific reason for having kids (the fear about one's comfort in future). the need for kids should be more spontaneous and less calculative.

 

[jerryo]

I have not ever really wanted to be a parent and neither has my wife. However we have always thought that if it happens then so be it. Parenthood is the byproduct of sex if you are not careful or get unlucky. We were not always careful so we got lucky and have no kids. I'm glad as I'm 51 and the thought of running around after toddlers makes me feel exhausted just thinking about it.
If you do want kids, then do it young and don't delay, would be my advice. If you do not, it is purely your choice, so never feel pressured by anyone to have them. Bringing a child into the world is a very, very, serious but joyous thing to do and should not be done lightly. You have an immense responsibility to your children which will and should consume your entire being if you are to succeed. There are a multitude of consequences if you fail them!
Good luck

 

[billshurv]

I'm probably not the right person to comment as I have child number 5 on the way. Luckily in UK children are not AS expensive, but I am skill skint and have limited time for some of my hobbies. Oddly at 20 I never thought I would have any! Best thing I ever did and they enrich my life far more than a big house, flash car or giant stereo ever could.

 

[freax]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNxctzyNxC0

http://www.inquisitr.com/1623948/ov...jections-more-dire-than-previously-predicted/

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/284619.php

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/beach-642863-long-city.html

http://sciencewa.net.au/topics/pers...fix-for-overpopulation-let-s-focus-on-climate

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/history-re...-drought-led-assyrian-empire-collapse-1474250

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/...pulation,-that-causes-inequality#.VHMHiVc2yuI

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/23/living/cnnphotos-landfill-dogs/

Remember the recession of the 1970s in the US and 1980s in the UK? that was caused because population growth slowed, the answer to fixing the economy according to experts was to give people credit and make more people, a rather stupid solution to the problem because now we have too many people and the economy is going to collapse far harder than it ever has.

Mark my words, The population is going to have to stop at some point and that means the economy will collapse because the economy is based upon perpetual growth (which is an impossibility on a finite-sized planet). Because if we got to 10 billion people or 15 billion people (and its not far away) what will our lives be like?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational...on-and-the-10-billion-person-question/4889816

The 10 billion person problem is used to justify all manner of policy propositions, including the need to release GM foods without due diligence or to raze the rainforests of the Amazon, Indonesia, Malaysia and Myanmar for crops.

 

[billshurv]

I'll take that and raise you Hans Rosling: Stats that reshape your world-view - YouTube

 

[soundofvoid]

"If you win the lottery you were destined to have as many children as you want to."
-So, only the rich can populate.The poor must stay without children-if they want to.
" I personally wouldn't want to have to tell the poor kid that he cannot go to college or MIT because his father cannot afford it."
-And who said that only the kids that go to MIT -provided that your kid has the ability or the will to go to MIT- are the happy ones?
It seems nobody wants to be a plumber or it seems than no plumber can have a happy life?
"Please don't have a child based upon the notion that it is somehow preserving your soul."
-Who said that?You only transmit a portion of your genes...your souls is your own only.
"invest in Alcor Cryogenic freezing and using multivitamins to extend your current life"
- Obvious contradiction...the planet has enough resources to keep your frozen head
and feed your need to live forever with expensive supplements but not enough to feed the people.
When people live better they tend to have less kids-see the western world.
When they are poor they overpopulate to compensate for dead children disease and hunger...
As the world is, the problem of food is not about quantity, it's about equal share.
But of course that would make our -western life- a bit worse, and our "a bit worse" is more significant than their "a lot better"

 

[freax]

I'll take that and raise you Hans Rosling: Stats that reshape your world-view - YouTube

I live in a country where the price of a house for everyone is skyrocketing to a million dollars per property, there is an entire generation of 20-30 somethings who will never own their own home because they cannot afford it.

Finding a job also means that you are up against 1,000-5,000 applicants per job opening.

It must be pretty scary in the UK to live in a world where nobody around you cares about how many kids are born. I would be terrified to live in such a place. Just a weeks lapse in the supply of food to the UK is enough to wipe out a significant proportion of the population and bring on deep seated recession and poverty as economic systems collapse.

Think about it, 7 billion people fed by a single planets food supply, what happens if the earths ecosystem has a hiccup? Woops, there goes a billion people.

Thank you for sending me that video, I'll watch the video you sent me after I'm done watching this at the moment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InzmlclgQm0

 

[ballpencil]

People like billshurv who enjoys having kids so much that he decided to have five are the ones making it hard to decide. He seems genuinely happy despite having very little time for himself. Sadly you can't "try" to have kids to see if you like it or not. There's no refund here.

 

[freax]

"If you win the lottery you were destined to have as many children as you want to."
-So, only the rich can populate.The poor must stay without children-if they want to.

Better than them starving to death.
or being sold to sex trades.
or living on the street without a job.

" I personally wouldn't want to have to tell the poor kid that he cannot go to college or MIT because his father cannot afford it."
-And who said that only the kids that go to MIT -provided that your kid has the ability or the will to go to MIT- are the happy ones?
It seems nobody wants to be a plumber or it seems than no plumber can have a happy life?

So what you're forcing your kid to be a plumber? Isn't that just as inhumane as what you're suggesting that I would do?

I don't think you understand the realities of the world that we live in today, today you need a college or university education to even be able to afford a home.

There are 7 billion people in the world, the richest billion earn approx $100 per day, the other 6 earn less than this, $1 a day for the billion of the poorest and in the middle is $10 a day. That means 3.5 billion people in the world earn less than $10 a day. We can never hope to achieve to raise that to $100 a day if we keep on having kids.

if the world wasn't so overpopulated and there was only 4 billion people in the world I still wouldn't have any kids, know why? Because the planet can't handle it. This isn't me trying to enforce my will on you or anyone else, this is me facing the FACTS, this planet is DYING!

Every single person over 2.5 billion is supported ENTIRELY by fossil fuels and the byproducts that they produce and the fertilizers that we dig out of the ground from mining, so what will we be doing once they dry up? Dying off.

The planet can only support 2.5 billion or less, if we are lucky, by its own by natural systems and organic farming.

"Please don't have a child based upon the notion that it is somehow preserving your soul."
-Who said that?You only transmit a portion of your genes...your souls is your own only.

Some people think that raising a child means that they can 'live on' through them. Shocking I know.

"invest in Alcor Cryogenic freezing and using multivitamins to extend your current life"
- Obvious contradiction...the planet has enough resources to keep your frozen head
and feed your need to live forever with expensive supplements but not enough to feed the people.

If you actually knew anything about the technology you would know that it is only possible to freeze a human being for up-to 100 years at best before irreversable cell damage occurs. In most cases its far less than this.

Infact Alcor has a company policy of resurrecting a human being inside a virtual world, in the future your brain is reconstructed and uploaded to a computer server, have a guess as to why they chose that option?I suspect its not just because it would be difficult to reproduce another human body but its also because of overpopulation concerns, nobody would want to resurrect a frozen human being if there is already 25 billion people in the world.

When people live better they tend to have less kids-see the western world.
When they are poor they overpopulate to compensate for dead children disease and hunger...
As the world is, the problem of food is not about quantity, it's about equal share.
But of course that would make our -western life- a bit worse, and our "a bit worse" is more significant than their "a lot better"

I agree that reducing consumption is an option to prevent overpopulation being such a burden on the environment, but as you've just demonstrated, free will also means that you and other people will do whatever the hell you want to, including consume as much energy and food as you want to without realizing the consequences for others who are also living in the same cesspool that you think is a beautiful place.

They banned energy-efficient incandescent light globes and everyone went out and bought these vintage style horribly-efficient edison light globes simply because it screwed with their mojo while mating.

They cannot even light a room effectively, while drawing 40-60 watts. The best they can do is equivalent to the brightness of a 6 volt incandescent torch.

I don't actually care anymore about people, thats how bad overpopulation has gotten, you would think that with less people around there would be less chance of an ******* ruining your day. Think about that when you read my posts. And hope that this world can stop producing them. If there was less people in the world I would be far more interested in investing in a real world friendship. But because there are so many people to choose from to become friends with, friendship has become as disposable as toilet paper, the same has happened with employment, the same will happen with the next world war.