I wrote this at age 21 and had an abortion because I never wanted to have children. My mom always haunts me with talk of pregnancy, as she had me when she was young and had to give up her dreams for me. She didn’t regret it but didn’t want me to make the same sacrifice. When I was 15, I watched a show called ‘The Fosters’ and loved it so much that I decided I wanted to adopt children in the future rather than have my own. I used to teach art therapy for stateless and refugee children and felt a deep connection with them. I saw their potential but recognized the lack of resources to support them. I made a promise to myself that I would never bring innocent children into this cruel world and that I would adopt these exceptional, suffering children instead.
I’ve been a fan of philosophy for as long as I can remember, and I stumbled upon the concept of anti-natalism. It piqued my interest, so I did some more research on it. Although I don’t want to label myself as an anti-natalist, I value the idea behind it. I wish people around me would respect my decision and stop telling me that I will change my mind when I get older. I put a lot of love, elbow grease, and brainpower into making this decision. It wasn’t just a whim or a hasty choice - I did my research and gave it some serious thought. I’m pretty firm in my decision not to have biological children, but I’m definitely open to the possibility of adoption down the road.
Having children is not life-affirming and is immoral. When I was pregnant, I thought I loved this baby so much that I didn’t have them. It’s unethical and immoral to bring a child when you know there are so many suffering children that you could use your kindness and help them survive in this cruel world instead of adding one or more.
I wrote FAQs below to give you some of my common arguments with people who want me to have children and give you answers /reasons why I don’t want to have children.
Just because we can’t be 100% sure of the outcome doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have children!
Actually, it does. There are two problems with this. One, you’re gambling with someone else’s welfare, which is wrong. And two, it’s incredibly glib. Extreme suffering is real and should be grappled with, not just conveniently hand-waved away. If your child ends up in a long-term suicidal nightmare of existence, will you be content to say, “I’m sorry you’re in hell, but when I was rolling the dice, I had a good feeling!”
Unborn children can’t give their consent to being alive. Therefore, you don’t need their consent!
Consider the following thought experiment. Suppose hell was absolute, and the inhabitants of hell were allowed to procreate, thus dooming young children to a hellish existence. Some of the inhabitants suggest that it’s immoral to have children in hell, especially without their consent. Still, others point out that you don’t need their permission because they can’t give it until they’re alive to provide it. And after all, they say, isn’t it better to be alive and in hell than non-existent anyway?
In response to the above scenario, most people tend to say it’s not ok to reproduce in hell without consent, even if it’s the only opportunity for the unborn child to exist. Why does the argument that it’s ok to bring children into our world without their consent (because they’re not alive to give it) make sense in our world but not in the hell world?
To be clear, the point is not that our world is equivalent to hell (at least for everyone). The fact is that the argument that unborn children can’t give consent, so therefore we don’t need their consent, is fallacious.
And, yes, it’s true that most people wouldn’t want children in hell, not because they can’t consent, but because they think hell is a bad thing, period. But that doesn’t mean consent isn’t a factor. Suppose some people willingly decided to go to hell because they wanted to experience it and made an informed decision to go there. Would you support that? I think plenty of people would. Now, suppose these same people decide to drag others to hell who didn’t consent? Would you be against that? Most people would be. This demonstrates that it’s not experiencing hell’s inherent badness that people oppose. It’s forcing others to do so without their consent. Consent is key.
I’ve been through the worst and still have kids! And you’re arrogant to tell people they shouldn’t have kids!
It’s arrogant to make other people suffer just because you want kids. And it’s arrogant for anyone to claim they have been through the worst. It’s far more humble to assume that others out there have it far worse than you or I. Just because you have suffered and come to terms with it doesn’t mean everyone else has or will. And just because you’ve suffered doesn’t mean you have empathy for others. There are plenty of drug-addicted prostitutes who have children even though they hate their own lives because they think having children will make them happy. And not just addicts but regular people. If you were genuinely content, why would you want children? Wanting is a form of desiring, which is a form of suffering. Having children is a way of relieving YOUR suffering.
It’s also arrogant to think you’ve got what it takes to be a great parent. All sorts of smart people have tried and failed, but you think you’re different?
You’re such a control freak! You must learn to “let go,” trust the universe, and quit trying to control things!
No one would say that to someone who was trying to end rape, slavery, etc. The world’s natural state is filled with problems, and people constantly try to control them. But rather than trying to control ME and others like me, why don’t you “let go” and accept the fact that this world is no place for children? Why don’t you give up your fear of a baby-free world and trust that things will be ok if people stop procreating?
But my maternal/paternal instincts are so strong, you don’t understand!
If your maternal instincts were so strong, you wouldn’t have children. This world wouldn’t be good enough for them. The fact that you think it is proves that you DON’T have strong maternal/paternal instincts. It’s proof you have SELFISH instincts.
But if we stop breeding, we won’t be able to create our future utopia where everyone is happy!
There’s no evidence that humans are moving toward a future utopia. More importantly, even if they were, that still doesn’t make it ok to create suffering humans without their consent to use them as stepping stones to your future utopia.
But I love being alive! Life is great!
That’s great, but it doesn’t justify you imposing life on someone else without their consent. And furthermore, life isn’t great for everyone. Just because you ignore suffering doesn’t mean it’s not there.
I have faith! Yes, there’s suffering, but it’s for a reason!
Why are you so eager to have children if your faith is so strong? Why not wait to have children in the afterlife or some other realm you claim exists? Or why have kids at all? If your faith is so strong, you should be able to endure the pain of not having kids. Furthermore, your “faith” is not a trump card that justifies any immoral act. It doesn’t justify you raping people, and it doesn’t justify imposing life on others without their consent.
You’re just trying to be edgy!
Got any arguments or just insults?
Even if you’re right, convincing people is a hopeless task.
Maybe, but you don’t know until you try. If you asked someone in 1950 whether gay marriage would ever be a thing, they’d probably think you were nuts. The same goes for lots of issues.
Also, you need to think about what kind of world your child will grow up in
Babies aren’t great for the environment. From disposable nappies to air conditioning to all the other resources a new body consumes, an ecological cost is attached to bringing forth new life. And when, if ever - is it right to inflict another resource guzzler onto an already-guzzled world? Moreover, our children will have to live in this resource-guzzled world, and if some of the climate trends are to be believed, it might not be the nicest place to live.
‘Moral’ path to parenthood
If becoming a parent is central to your definition of a meaningful life, there’s one “morally magic” option available to you: adoption.
If we adopt, we don’t inflict an additional life on the world, and we improve the life of someone who already exists. There are so MANY suffering children in this fucked world that need more of our help than bringing or adding one.
After educating myself with all these, I began to think more about, wow, if I have kids, they will not grow up with a sense of environmental stability. Creating a new person is a huge life decision. You don’t need a scientist to tell you that.
If you disagree with all these arguments, don’t you think would-be parents should be forced to grapple with these issues? Most parents never seriously consider these issues. What does that say about the gravity or lack thereof, the average person possesses when deciding to have a child? Most parents are never forced to defend their choice. Isn’t it about time that parents are, at the very least, put on the defensive and forced to explain themselves? And I think you should have a license to become a parent.
- your cyborg girl, alta :)