Convince me that I should have children.

How to pass, fit in, eventually set an example, and ultimately lead the way.
EMJ
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:37 pm

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by EMJ »

saving-10-years wrote:
EMJ wrote:What are you willing to do/support to avoid having children?
Celibacy
Vasectomy
Abortion
Um that is a short list. Are you stating that contraceprion is not an option/does not work? That's certainly not been my experience.
A provocative list, perhaps, but these are the only absolutely sure ways.

And by maybe by considering how far you are willing to go you can consider how committed you are.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6359
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by Ego »

Philosopher David Benatar argues that we are all naturally biases toward reproduction because we are the offspring of the offspring of the offspring of those who reproduced. You can't poll the children of those who made the decision and were successful in not reproducing.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Because if you keep having sex with the same woman month after month without knocking her up, her PMS will become worse and worse until one of you ends the relationship. I think I read this in "Sociobiology for Dummies" so it must be true.

Also, if you do have kids, you should have at least 3 (preferably all female to offset the current abortion statistics)because there is a growing world-wide shortage of middle-children and the future ramifications of this trend may be quite terrible according to sibling relationship theory.

But most importantly, ask yourself "Am I a good mammal?" I don't think reptilian types should raise children although it might be okay if they are sperm/egg donors in the interest of maintaining the hybrid vigor of our out-breeding species.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by jacob »

In terms of "outbreeding the competion", consider this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory

It includes the idea of inclusive fitness and explains why it may make sense for some soceties/species to focus more on the quality of the offspring than the quantity. Given declining birthrates as countries get richer it does seem to be the empirically preferred strategy to have fewer children. Wealth leads to a change in strategy UNLESS the strategy is embedded by religion. Which is what we're seeing.

It also explains why despite many generations of humans we don't all have an all-encompassing drive to have children. Apparently, it makes sense to human DNA that some phenotypes contribute in other ways that direct procreation... for example by exploring unknown frontiers and expanding territory. Compare "breeding soldiers" to "researching weapons" as a way to increase the species domain. It would make sense that the species is not 100% focused on procreating and parenting a billion man army as that strategy will lose to a strategy that is maybe 20% focused on building more advanced weaponry instead.

Also, consider that while DNA certainly gets transmitted by procreation, that's not the case for culture and information. Children are not born with human knowledge instinctively available. It must be added via a different mechanism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics

Religion does have a strong vertical transmission ("inherited/infected" by parents) which is probably why strong(ly opinionated) and closed (no outsiders please) religions are surviving despite the overall increase in wealth. However, things like culture and opinions seem to be more influenced by vertical transmission (friends, peers, and bloggers on the internet :) ). In fact it seems to be a prime reason to send kids to college in order to get "infected" by wealthy liberal atheists ;-)

5to9
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:32 pm

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by 5to9 »

Big disclaimer, this is not an attempt to convince anyone to have kids, as that is a very personal choice. Also, I have a 3 year old and 10 month old, so my experience doesn't cover the full range. However, the OP asked for points in favor of having kids, so here are some.

* Watching a young mind develop is absolutely fascinating. Seeing them struggle with and overcome basic concepts gives you insight into how the brain works at whole new level.

* It's a good excuse to slow down your life and just play. Theoretically I could have been playing with Legos, building pillow forts, and making snow angels all these years, but I didn't.

* It has helped me accept that life isn't perfect, things will be messy, and it doesn't really matter.

* The love I feel for my kids is the most intense emotion I have ever experienced. This one sounds very cheesy or cliche, but it's really something you can't describe well. It opened a whole new, and unexpected world to me. Jeff Atwood has a good essay that touches on this http://blog.codinghorror.com/on-parenthood/

Overall, I find that the biggest difficulties I have in being a parent are trying to fit kids into the standard 9-to-5 American life. It's what drew me to ERE in the first place. It largely would depend on what you want ERE to look like. If it's traveling the world without any attachments, that certainly would be harder.

And just to make sure the above doesn't come across as me sugar coating things, kids can be exhausting, frustrating, and parenting is 24/7 no matter how tired you are. I just find that it's worth it.

henrik
Posts: 757
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: EE

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by henrik »

5to9 wrote:Jeff Atwood has a good essay that touches on this
It's a great essay and I agreed with almost everything until he wrote:
Having a child is a lot like running a marathon.
No, it's not! What is it with everyone comparing everything to running a marathon? Raising a child is what he said above that sentence. Running a marathon is running a little longer than most people usually do:)

Seneca
Posts: 915
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:58 pm

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by Seneca »

To repeat again, I would never try to convince someone to have kids.

For me there are two great reasons people speak in such superlatives when it comes to kids. Jenny and FFJ touched on two whose impact is so massive, I've found there is simply not even the vocabulary to communicate it to non-parents.

RE Relationship & JP's comments- My experience matches the focus she puts on this part of the discussion. Your relationship with your partner will be radically altered, and it really needs to be strong to survive and to give your kid(s) the best shot. Your relationship will change on every level, starting with physiological changes (especially in the mother) how your family/network treats you, and how decisions are made, to how you talk to each other over your pillows at 3AM on the 4th day in a row of less than an hour of sleep at a time during a "Wonder Week". (Wonder Week = code for "living hell week" for parents)
I am not exaggerating here. The kids will always come first in every decision you will make for a long time. All unaccounted free time will disappear. That was the hardest one for me. All of your hobby money goes to diapers, formula, etc. Extended family expectations increase; try keeping the newborn away from Grandma. Pesky religious questions start to pop up. You'll drive differently, buy cars you don't want, suffer through horrendous school programs, be forced to carry an arsenal of clothes changes, extra diapers, and milk everywhere you go. School appointments, doctor appointments, dental appointments, waiting in line at the pharmacy, it never ends. If you aren't at work, then you will be doing something for or with the kids, probably both. Children are huge, long-term commitments and anybody that says it stops when they turn 18 is full of shit. The commitment only lessons with time.
Re-read every word of this and try to understand the implications. Most parents have been through every one of these.

My sister had kids young, we had ours old. For every negative she can list for a young parent, we can list one for the older, and same for the positives.

Only non-parents talk about diapers being not fun, they are the least of the worries!

There are studies that show mothers almost always are happier after children, men almost always less happy. But married men tend to be more happy. And I'm sure men married to happy women are happier. So...statistics and lies and all that. :)

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Jacob sez: Given declining birthrates as countries get richer it does seem to be the empirically preferred strategy to have fewer children. Wealth leads to a change in strategy UNLESS the strategy is embedded by religion. Which is what we're seeing.
Mary Eberstadt in her rather fascinating book "How the West Really Lost God: A New Theory of Secularization" presents some fairly convincing evidence that just the opposite is true.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by jacob »

@7wannabe5 - I don't think there's any disagreement here?!

I haven't read the book but what I guess from the gist of the amazon reviews is that
1) family and religion is intertwined.
2) the decreasing need for families leads to a decrease in religion.

And I'll add:
3) The increase in wealth leads to a decrease in the need for families

Above I simply say that there are some (a few) strong(*) religious holdouts to this overall trend.---That strong religious beliefs/tradition will keep people procreating (creating families) even if they/society is wealthy enough to no longer require a [large] family to serve as a social safety net.

This is why families with many children either tend to be poor or quite religiously driven. With exceptions of course. I'm talking generalities.

(*) I would classify religious beliefs as "weak" in this regard if someone is not making procreation decisions based on what their religion dictates/strongly suggests.

User avatar
C40
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by C40 »

Thank you everyone for your thoughtful replies.

While I've already heard or read most of the information shared here, many of you have a knack for writing in a way that causes me to think about it more and in a different way. So this definitely helps.

My girlfriend and I broke up the other night. (like 6 hours after starting this thread :| ).. Mostly because of our differing views on children and on spending money. My reason for the thread is still valid and it's good that she drove me to consider the issue more.


(This is a whole other thread, so ignore it in this thread please, but It's on my mind today so I'll mention it: I'm worried about how difficult it will be for me to find women that share my views on money AND children AND who I'm compatible with. I wonder if I'll end up "giving up" on one of the first two at some point... or if I might just be alone - and even "weirder" then.. I did the math today on how much longer I'd have to work to fund incremental "girlfriend" at what's probably a common amount of dates and gifts. 1-1.5 years for me. )
Last edited by C40 on Fri Mar 07, 2014 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

Agreed with Bigato, and since you forbid it, my responding to this may fall under the category of me being an asshole as per other recent threads, but if you posted about it, I reserve the right to respond to it!

You're probably hurting and may or may not appreciate this, but if it's any consolation... I kinda got the feeling just from your previous posts here that your GF was not compatible with you. IIRC you were even forced to allot an expense line in your budget for her to accommodate her required level of "consumer courtship". I've never had to do this with my GF. She hasn't changed my spending much at all. The few things I spend money on are things I would've done anyway and things we enjoy together. To her a gift is me writing her a short story and a date is going to the park.

I only say this because I know we're fairly close in age, lifestyle, etc, and I feel like I've had EXACTLY the same thoughts you're having now. Granted, not wanting kids is an extra wrinkle (personally, I'm just ambivalent about it, not adamant one way or the other) but I don't think even that is insurmountable. There are compatible people out there. Don't get bitter, that just makes you less likely to find them.

Maybe look for slightly older women, single mothers, or divorcees? People who've already been down the kid road and gotten it out of their system, or at least no longer need your help to do it? (Not sure if you're as opposed to being "step-dad" as you are to having your own.)

User avatar
C40
Posts: 2748
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by C40 »

Yep.. I did see that we had some incompatibilities. (I didn't really understand how big of a spending incompatibility until more recently). We got a long very well outside of / even with those two things so that makes it tougher..

I'll look into splitting the thread / starting a new one.. I think there is already a thread about this though (?)

George the original one
Posts: 5404
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
Location: Wettest corner of Orygun

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by George the original one »

Relationships are more important than money, so a new thread, even if duplicating, is worthwhile to everyone.

JohnnyH
Posts: 2005
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Rockies

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by JohnnyH »

Sorry C40... Biological clock is such a huge issue for females ages over 26. I've had a few breakups because I wasn't willing yet (really still not).

Back on topic, mitigating some of the negatives ideas (from FFJ's post):
- All unaccounted free time will disappear.
- your hobby money goes to diapers, formula, etc.
- Extended family expectations increase; try keeping the newborn away from Grandma.

+ Having a large extended family is a huge plus... If I have kids with current gf I will have half a dozen eager relatives I trust watching my kids, on top of 2 sets of grandparents... Should really help alleviate the free time issue.

+ Waiting until ERE should really help with the money issue... Especially when considering the cost of daycare.

pka222
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:09 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by pka222 »

I think it has a lot to do with how you set up the experience. In my case if I had had my first child when I was living hand to mouth, with a immature partner, and had not yet had a great deal of life experiences (traveling, working, adventuring) having a child would have been a burden. However, after finding a mature capable partner I love, having traveled the world, jumped off many cliffs, and having a surplus of funds that- while not FIRE yet- would allow me to take a 10 year sabbatical, as well as having access to nearly unlimited very cheap nannies - having a child is awesome- lots of fun, growth, experimenting, reliving my childhood etc.. without the sleep loss many of my colleagues have - or the lack of time with my partner - things have changed- less time working out for example - however I knew it would change- I know it is temporary and I accept these changes as part of the experience -
In brief - set your self up for a fun time- don't reproduce when you don't have you sh*t together
good luck

1taskaday
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 11:45 am
Location: England

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by 1taskaday »

In my opinion the best gift my kids have given me or to put it another way,the best reason for having kids is the the gift of "selflessness".

I read MBGI's journey of self-discovery and evolution and I think raising kids can bring about the same personality evolution, if allowed.

It is a sharp shocking journey at the start but then as the parent evolves it becomes rich and nuanced. It makes you question and challenge every idea and belief you ever had.

My 2 are teens now, one male and one female.

I often just stand back and laugh at their energy, lust for life(which I definitely don't have anymore, because they've drained it all out of me),and I say "you go guys!!".

They are the best fun to be around, much cooler than "worry-wart”, anxiety ridden adults. They just grab life by the scruff of the neck and are fearless.

I love this; they are my teachers in so many ways.


7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Jacob sez: @7wannabe5 - I don't think there's any disagreement here?!

I haven't read the book but what I guess from the gist of the amazon reviews is that
1) family and religion is intertwined.
2) the decreasing need for families leads to a decrease in religion.

And I'll add:
3) The increase in wealth leads to a decrease in the need for families

Above I simply say that there are some (a few) strong(*) religious holdouts to this overall trend.---That strong religious beliefs/tradition will keep people procreating (creating families) even if they/society is wealthy enough to no longer require a [large] family to serve as a social safety net.

This is why families with many children either tend to be poor or quite religiously driven. With exceptions of course. I'm talking generalities.

(*) I would classify religious beliefs as "weak" in this regard if someone is not making procreation decisions based on what their religion dictates/strongly suggests.
The reason why I read this book a while back is that I was looking for an answer to the question of "Why did the extremely intelligent/nerdy, highly educated, relatively affluent 30-something year old daughter of two liberal Maine atheists become the leader of the local branch of a rapidly growing American Female/Feminist Muslim Convert group/community?" IOW, why does this trend in modern society co-exist with the other modern trend, most strongly exhibited in Western Europe, of young women choosing no-religion and no-marriage? This book answered my question or, really, confirmed my theory, which in over-simplified explanation differs from yours mainly in the way you link or the level at which you put affluence and/or intellectualism into the equation (related factoids being that both John D. Rockefeller and Isaac Newton were known for being more religious than their peers, not less.)

If you start from the premise that "irrational" is not a dirty work and just means something like "not easily quantified" then you can move from something like "financial independence" which is measurable to a concept like "freedom" which is not. People seek social support to move towards concepts such as "home" or "family" and joining a conventional religion is often a highly rational (although perhaps not fully conscious because, obviously, highly personal spiritual matters also come into play) decision in alignment with this desire.

Another example of what I mean is that there are many examples of individuals, like Amy Dacyczyn, author or the "Tightwad Gazette", who develop good practice in frugality/wealth acquisition because they want to afford large families and homes rather than vice-versa. Or there are people like me who practice frugality because they want a lot of free time to lounge about and read (like you) but also because they want to be at home with some human babies or cabbages (like Amy Dacyczyn) but not because they want free time to do stuff like Martial Arts (blech.)

RootofGood
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 9:51 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by RootofGood »

I'll toss out a few random thoughts. Today is my oldest daughter's 9th birthday, which marks the half way point on her journey to adulthood. Bittersweet. The bitter is that half her time living with us (as a child) is gone. Sweet because she's transformed from a pee/poop/eat machine that cried all the time into a rather smart, crafty, cunningly complex little creature that can think and rationalize independently, has her own interests and ideas, and amazes us at times (both good and bad).

We also have a seven year old and a two year old.

I managed to retire recently after reaching FI at 33. Although "stay at home dad" might be more appropriate for the next three to sixteen years since I spend at least a few hours each day engaged in some parenting role and it does prevent me from pursuing other interests (reading, writing, relaxing, drinking beer with friends, etc).

In my experience, kids aren't that expensive, although we have been creative and made compromises to keep costs down. We do plan on spending low to mid five figures on each kid for college, and possibly a full ride if our portfolio grows as projected over the next 9 to 16 years.

Some might say we should spend way more on our kids. I figure we do "enough" to enrich their lives as is (travel, camps, entertainment, activities, love from parents, education, safe environment, etc). But there will be some parents who would criticize us for not enrolling our kids in more activities, or buying a boat or vacation house or large SUV. All things that some people associate with "the best way to raise kids".

From virtually any kid's perspective (if they were to be overly contemplative), they would prefer to exist and be a child of a frugal parent than not exist at all. Don't fall into the trap of binary thinking. There are options beyond (A) don't have kids because they are expensive and (B) have kids and spend tons of money on them because you have to or else they'll end up fcuked up later in life. Lots of the best things in life are free or very inexpensive.

I enjoy my kids a lot but it's a lot of work, too. No way to sugarcoat it! The good news is kids are a great way to keep you busy in early retirement. The bad news is they take up a lot of your time in early retirement. :)

As for wanting kids and its impact on your relationship with a significant other, I'd say you need to reconcile differences early on. If someone adamantly wants kids, and you definitely don't, then there's an issue. I'd say a bigger issue than differences in religion (you can totally phone that one in if you are forced to convert, for example!). If you are ambivalent about kids, and your SO really really wants them, hey go for it. If you are against kids, it would be tough to sign up for an 18+ year sentence of doing something you don't want to do. That's roughly a quarter of the average human lifespan.

I never gave kids much thought until I married Mrs. RootofGood. She wanted six. We had 3, and she's happy now (they are a lot of work!). I'm happy having kids too (probably 90% of the time). Although I bet I would be just about as happy without kids. I don't mean to say want to get rid of my kids, as that's absolutely not true. Rather, if I never experienced the joys and trials of parenting, I wouldn't know what I was missing. In my alternative kid-less life, I'd have a lot more time to party it up and fill my limited time with other valuable and rewarding pursuits.

But standing here today, halfway through my oldest child's period of youth, I would miss each of them (even the snot-nosed 2 year old) very dearly if they suddenly disappeared from my life.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6359
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Convince me that I should have children.

Post by Ego »

RootofGood wrote:From virtually any kid's perspective (if they were to be overly contemplative), they would prefer to exist and be a child of a frugal parent than not exist at all.
What about from the perspective of the kid that does not yet exist?
Consider two couples, the A’s and the B’s. The A’s are young, healthy, and rich. If they had children, they could give them the best of everything—schools, clothes, electronic gaming devices. Even so, we would not say that the A’s have a moral obligation to reproduce.

The B’s are just as young and rich. But both have a genetic disease, and, were they to have a child together, that child would suffer terribly. We would say, using Benatar’s logic, that the B’s have an ethical obligation not to procreate.

The case of the A’s and the B’s shows that we regard pleasure and pain differently. Pleasure missed out on by the nonexistent doesn’t count as a harm. Yet suffering avoided counts as a good, even when the recipient is a nonexistent one.

And what holds for the A’s and the B’s is basically true for everyone. Even the best of all possible lives consists of a mixture of pleasure and pain. Had the pleasure been forgone—that is, had the life never been created—no one would have been the worse for it. But the world is worse off because of the suffering brought needlessly into it.
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/b ... ntPage=all

Post Reply