Is it selfish to remain childless?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by David_Cook
Your body has been designed to withstand physical exertion that accompanies childbirth! You wouldn't be doing it a disservice by raising a family, on the contrary you'd be realising it's full potential. Reproduction is also an entirely natural part of life. I fear for the mental health of those who seek to override their maternal/paternal instincts with this pessimistic form of logic.
If you're really going to use a "natural" argument then that is pathetically weak. It isn't "natural" to drive cars, use mobile phones/computers, even wear clothes (considering no other animal does so).
I fear for the mental health of those who views anyone who doesn't succumb to a banal instinct in a negative portrayal.
Original post by David_Cook
Are childless individuals selfish for putting their own needs ahead of the common good?
Society relies on the next generation for a continual improvement in living standards and to expand upon our stock of accumulated knowledge, if some people are deciding to abstain from parenthood are they contributing to the degradation of society?
Society relies on the next generation for a continual improvement in living standards and to expand upon our stock of accumulated knowledge, if some people are deciding to abstain from parenthood are they contributing to the degradation of society?
I don't believe it to be selfish. Let people choose if they want children.
Original post by David_Cook
Your body has been designed to withstand physical exertion that accompanies childbirth! You wouldn't be doing it a disservice by raising a family, on the contrary you'd be realising it's full potential. Reproduction is also an entirely natural part of life. I fear for the mental health of those who seek to override their maternal/paternal instincts with this pessimistic form of logic.
If I had any maternal instincts I'm sure the fact that I would like to keep my toned stomach would not stop me from having kids. I don't like children.
Original post by Bulbasaur
Not really. They should be able to do what they want to, I don't think we have much of a problem with birth rates at the moment thanks to immigration - so there's no real economic/social argument.
Edit: In fact I would say the population is rising unsustainably, 419,000 a year apparently! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23618487
Edit: In fact I would say the population is rising unsustainably, 419,000 a year apparently! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23618487
Agreed! I guess in a way having children is selfish because you are effectively claiming a lifetime's worth of food, clothing, air and other supplies for the child you bring into the world, which might deny those needs from someone else already born.
Original post by Hyde
If you're really going to use a "natural" argument then that is pathetically weak. It isn't "natural" to drive cars, use mobile phones/computers, even wear clothes (considering no other animal does so).
I fear for the mental health of those who views anyone who doesn't succumb to a banal instinct in a negative portrayal.
I fear for the mental health of those who views anyone who doesn't succumb to a banal instinct in a negative portrayal.
It's entirely natural for all animals to use the natural environment to their advantage. Humans have a greater capacity to shape the natural world, obviously, but in principle its no different to a bird building a nest, or a rabbit digging a burrow. We're just more adept at accomplishing these tasks.
When people strongly object to raising kids it suggests to me that they believe society is so dire that non-life is preferable. This is a sad (albeit possibly correct) way of viewing the world.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Per
This is how I tend to think about it. I always feel guilty when I think about having kids in the future. I remember back in geography class being shown an online counter that showed the estimated number of births per second and world population increasing, it was crazy.
I have a very similar outlook with the feeling of guilt. I don't think it's too bad to bring one child into the world, so long as they are loved and brought up with the correct attitude towards life and others, because they effectively only replace the two parents with one child (harsh way to look at it I guess, but I'm not sure how else to explain it).
Surely it would be selfish to have more than one child? Considering the planet is allegedly under threat from over population.
The only benefit from having children are personal, they benefit you and not really anyone else at this point- so that seems more selfish to me.
By having no children you're actually doing the world a favour.
The only benefit from having children are personal, they benefit you and not really anyone else at this point- so that seems more selfish to me.
By having no children you're actually doing the world a favour.
Original post by David_Cook
It's entirely natural for all animals to use the natural environment to their advantage. Humans have a greater capacity to shape the natural world, obvious, but in principle its no different to a bird building a nest, or a rabbit digging a burrow. We're just more adept at accomplishing these tasks.
When people strongly object to raising kids it suggests to me that they believe society is so dire that non-life is preferable. This is a sad (albeit possibly correct) way of viewing the world.
When people strongly object to raising kids it suggests to me that they believe society is so dire that non-life is preferable. This is a sad (albeit possibly correct) way of viewing the world.
I'm not against people who have children - I would rather just not have my own due to my own personal reasons.
I think you should reassess your view of people who would prefer not to have children and I think it's unfair that people who remain childless are seen as grumbling, pessimistic people when in actual fact quite a few aren't.
In actual fact, those who actively choose to have their OWN children could perhaps be seen as selfish - considering they would rather "spread their own genes" than adopt a child who is actually in need and improve the lives of those already living on Earth. It annoys me when you have infertile couples desperate for IVF and other methods to spawn their own genetic children when there is a much better alternative.
Having/Raising kids is certainly not for everyone - there are so many people who have children who don't deserve them (instances such as Baby P's abuse etc.) Those who know they wouldn't be able to raise a child are being much more mature than the cretins who can't raise children but have them anyway.
Definitely not, although I think the idea that having a family is a positive one I don't think that not having one is 'selfish'. If that is how the certain indiviual wishes to live their life then so be it. Besides, overpopulation is a huge issue and if every odd person opted against having children then it could send us in the right direction to overcoming certain issues. I do believe that it should be a personal decision and not a forced one, such as the one-child policy in China over the years. There are positive and negative ideas to both i guess.
Original post by carrotstar
I have a very similar outlook with the feeling of guilt. I don't think it's too bad to bring one child into the world, so long as they are loved and brought up with the correct attitude towards life and others, because they effectively only replace the two parents with one child (harsh way to look at it I guess, but I'm not sure how else to explain it).
I'm really sorry to hear that. I hope that one day you reassess what you've been taught in school so you can put the environmental impact of children to one side and at least think of family life without these pangs of guilt. There's really no need for it imo.
Original post by Hyde
I'm not against people who have children - I would rather just not have my own due to my own personal reasons.
I think you should reassess your view of people who would prefer not to have children and I think it's unfair that people who remain childless are seen as grumbling, pessimistic people when in actual fact quite a few aren't.
I think you should reassess your view of people who would prefer not to have children and I think it's unfair that people who remain childless are seen as grumbling, pessimistic people when in actual fact quite a few aren't.
The majority of people are biologically hardwired to procreate. Even if you don't want kids I wager that most guys can't even manage a trip to the supermarket without checking out the talent on offer. I know I can't. These instincts are natural, normal and healthy. If you've conditioned your intellect to entirely ignore the logical conclusion of these feelings then imo it's a sign that something somewhere is wrong, either with society or within yourself. If a tribe of people somewhere in South America decided that children were just too much hassle anthropologists would be tripping over themselves to account for this change of heart. But in the modern West it seems to slip by unnoticed. It doesn't seem right to me to allow this to happen with out at least questioning it.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by So Instinct
Surely it would be selfish to have more than one child? Considering the planet is allegedly under threat from over population.
The only benefit from having children are personal, they benefit you and not really anyone else at this point- so that seems more selfish to me.
By having no children you're actually doing the world a favour.
The only benefit from having children are personal, they benefit you and not really anyone else at this point- so that seems more selfish to me.
By having no children you're actually doing the world a favour.
It isn't sustainable for Western Europeans to only average 1.8 children per couple. In order to genuinely sustain the population birth rates need to be raised so we're at least replacing ourselves and ideally we should be aiming for an average of just over 2 children per couple so society can continue improving. The planet isn't under threat from over population, this is alarmist hogwash!
Original post by David_Cook
It isn't sustainable for Western Europeans to only average 1.8 children per couple. In order to genuinely sustain the population birth rates need to be raised so we're at least replacing ourselves and ideally we should be aiming for an average of just over 2 children per couple so society can continue improving. The planet isn't under threat from over population, this is alarmist hogwash!
Why do we need to sustain the current 7 billion population? Why is that so necessary?
When there are children in need with no parents and prices of food/petrol/homing and other resources increasing with the effect of increased demand perhaps it's a good idea to decrease the population. There was literally a debate recently about London having more demand for homes than it can support, thus the prices of renting homes and mortgages is sky rocketing (rent especially so). With that being said maybe people should look at adoption before having a second child, that way they wont grow up in a society where there aren't enough homes in capital cities to actual accommodate its population or the prices being so high it's not affordable.
"So society can continue improving"? Why would having more children aid that at all?
Unless you can prove it's "hogwash" I'll continue to believe what I'm seeing with my own eyes.
Not to mention I don't know if I want a child. They're a cost I simply don't need. They're expensive, messy, noisy, stressful, a time sink and I'd probably would probably be happier without them.
If I'm financially stable and my wife/gf wants one, then perhaps. But until then, no thanks.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by David_Cook
It isn't sustainable for Western Europeans to only average 1.8 children per couple. In order to genuinely sustain the population birth rates need to be raised so we're at least replacing ourselves and ideally we should be aiming for an average of just over 2 children per couple so society can continue improving. The planet isn't under threat from over population, this is alarmist hogwash!
If we need an average of 2 kids per couple, I'll let another couple have 4 and I'll stay without, thanks
Original post by Katie_p
If we need an average of 2 kids per couple, I'll let another couple have 4 and I'll stay without, thanks
Cats are no substitute for a loving family!
Original post by David_Cook
Cats are no substitute for a loving family!
I don't want to substitute a loving family though. I just don't want kids. I don't really want cats either but my bf does, and I can't have a dog if he doesn't have a cat.
Original post by Eva.Gregoria
No. We are overpopulated enough as it is.
The only downside I can see is there being a massive elderly population and not enough youngsters to take care of them.
Posted from TSR Mobile
The only downside I can see is there being a massive elderly population and not enough youngsters to take care of them.
Posted from TSR Mobile
already happening in Ireland within the next decade or so a third of the population will be over 70. Due to the economic crisis, emigration (of both native and immigrant workers) has seen huge highs, so many are gone
I don't think so
Some people would say that I am as some women don't have to ability to have kids but I'm just choosing not to when I'm older..however, I think its much more selfish to bring a child into this world that you can't support mentally, financially and emotionally
Some people would say that I am as some women don't have to ability to have kids but I'm just choosing not to when I'm older..however, I think its much more selfish to bring a child into this world that you can't support mentally, financially and emotionally
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
