Bye-bye baby (Childfree and Loving It)

Telegraph ^ | February 26, 2006 | Julia Llewellyn Smith

[beaversmom]

Fascinating research suggests that as many as one in five thirtysomething British women is planning a child-free future.

When Jemma North was eight years old she had an epiphany. 'At school, someone's mum was pregnant. All the other little girls were really excited, but all I could think was, "You go through all that and all you have at the end of it is a baby?" I decided then that I would never have children.'

Of course, Jemma's pronouncement was dismissed, much as if she'd announced a plan to be a circus clown. But today, aged 32, married and surrounded by peers who are starting families, she is as adamant about her choice as ever. Yet everyone from family to complete strangers is constantly telling her: 'You'll change your mind.' If they do take her seriously, they warn her: 'You'll regret it.' It infuriates her.

'I don't want children, my husband doesn't want them and we're happy as we are,' she insists. 'The only thing that makes me unhappy is people questioning my decision all the time.'

In our society few objects attract greater pity than the childless woman. She is, we assume, old, unfulfilled, shallow, emotionally damaged, out of touch with the greatest truths of the universe. Almost daily, headlines warn about thirtysomething career women risking heartbreak by delaying pregnancy. Couples spend thousands of pounds to endure the physical and mental ordeal of IVF.

Yet for Jemma, who works for an engineering firm in Northampton, such a vision had no power to frighten. 'I am more put off by the image of being a mother,' she tells me. 'I'm not saying mothers are stupid, because, of course, a lot are far more intelligent than me, but that was my early impression. It seemed to be the thing you did if you had no other ambition.'

Jemma is far from alone. According to the Office of National Statistics, one in five British women in their thirties has decided not to have children. And it may be that a number of these have had less choice in the matter than they thought. Geneticists at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridge have demonstrated in mice that mutations on a certain gene can cause mothers to neglect their offspring. The same gene also exists in humans.

But whatever the social or genetic forces that play upon us, becoming a mother is still seen as a defining moment. Magazines are full of celebrities such as Gwyneth Paltrow gushing about how her Oscar means nothing compared to the delights of changing Apple's nappy. In contrast, rare are the voices of women such as the actress Helen Mirren, who has admitted: 'I didn't have that desire to be a mother and I don't think a lot of women do. A lot are pressured into it and they're miserable.' And whenever such comments are voiced, they are usually drowned out by a clamour of disapproval and disbelief.

'Oh, I am fed up of having to justify myself on this subject!' explodes Nicki Defago, a 39-year-old married and childfree (to use her preferred jargon) broadcast journalist. She is the author of Childfree and Loving It!, a book written after she discovered Amazon offered more than 1,000 tomes about what children eat but none about the advantages of childlessness.

'When you say you don't want children, you get the same reaction you'd have got 20 years ago if you said you were gay,' Nicki continues. 'I imagine it's a bit like you must feel if you don't go to church in America. A big section of society is appalled at the notion that there are ladies who don't want to have a baby, and quite a lot of people aren't judgemental but still just can't get it.'

Until I started researching this article, I confess, I fell firmly in the latter camp. Aware of the devastation children would wreak on my carefree life, I nonetheless always hoped to have them. So fundamental was this desire that I was sceptical of women who claimed they didn't want children. As far as I was concerned, they were just trying to put a brave face on the fact that they were unable to conceive, or had never found the right man, or had been bludgeoned by their partner into agreeing not to have them.

Nicki doesn't see it that way. 'You get a far better reception if you tell people you tried and couldn't have children, than if you tell them you don't want them,' she corrects me. But why are people who, for example, are supportive of gay rights, unable to get their heads round the idea that not everyone wants to breed?

Nicki thinks it is because the issue of children 'goes so deeply. A high percentage of us now think there's no God and if you add to that there's no need to reproduce then what on earth is it all for? Choosing not to have children gets to the heart of all those big issues.'

Existential questions apart, much of the debate seems to be fuelled by a baser jealousy. However much they love their children, most parents still yearn for aspects of their old lives.

To see a childless friend enjoying the orderliness, extra cash and spontaneity they have lost, with no apparent sense of 'missing out', can be horribly undermining. Recently the 53-year-old model Marie Helvin explained that her youthful looks were down to a life of no children and, therefore, no stress - a comment that sent a visceral pang through every mother slathering Touche Eclat on her eyebags.

'I know one father of small children who's always saying things like, "Ooh, it's not fair, you are going on holiday next week, we have to go in the school holidays,"' says Jemma North. 'He doesn't seem to appreciate that it's not a question of fairness, that I made a decision to live like this.'

For Regan Forrest, 30, a museums exhibit organiser from Leicester, the downside of children starts with conception. 'I'm uncomfortable with the physical changes of pregnancy and labour,' she admits. 'In my twenties I had body image issues. I've learnt to put up with that but the idea of putting your body through an unknown process is completely terrifying. The turning-point came at a work dinner when a colleague started going on about how his wife had disembowelled herself during labour,' she recalls.

'My partner's a doctor and the obstetric part of his training completely repulsed him. I'd never want him to be repulsed by me.'Equally daunting was the prospect of combining her career with childcare. 'I like to give my career 100 per cent. I don't think I could do the at-home mum thing.'

To parents, such misgivings may seem narcissistic and defeatist. But, Regan retorts, 'I'm demonstrating a degree of self-awareness. I may be selfish but at least I'm not going to let my selfishness affect another person. Anyway, what could be more selfish than propagating your genes? People say that on a biological level that is what we are here to do, but as a species we have transcended our biology. We don't live in caves any more and we don't need to breed.'

Like all women I spoke to, Regan is unconvinced by the arguments in favour of parenthood - the almost transcendent love you feel for children, the joy of watching them develop. 'Maybe women like us are mentally deficient,' says Regan. 'But we're so lucky to be born at this point in history. In the past, I'm sure, women felt like us, but they didn't have a choice.'

The polarity between the two camps could not be sharper. When I told friends who are mothers, or hope to be, about this article, they repeatedly said that - while intellectually respecting the position of the childless - emotionally they found it completely alien. Similarly, child-free women are politely disbelieving when they listen to friends describe a yearning for babies that is almost like a physical ache.

'I'd love to be sympathetic when I hear about women breaking their hearts trying to get IVF, but I can't. It's the opposite of what I feel,' says Anne-Marie Greenslade, 28, a mental-health worker from Warrington, Cheshire. 'I must look so callous when they're telling me, but I can't help it. I simply can't imagine being in their position.'

And there are compelling statistics to back up Anne-Marie's decision. Surveys show that people who choose not to have children (as opposed to those who desperately want them, but can't) tend to have better marriages, better finances and are no more likely to be unhappy in old age than parents.

Alison Townley, 55, a civil servant from Glasgow, toyed with the idea of becoming a mother in her twenties because it was what society expected of her, but felt unable to take the plunge. Today she has no regrets. 'The anguish I was warned about simply isn't there, which surprised me but in a wonderful way. My husband and I revel in our freedom and we resent implications that our life somehow has no purpose. When people have children they seem to give up on their own aspirations and pass the buck on to the next generation. I love the idea that I can still achieve my potential, rather than foisting all my hopes on some other sap.'

[Atlas Sneezed]

People who want kids and have kids just don't understand those of us who don't want kids. That's really what it boils down to. And people therefore try to find an easy explanation for those who don't want kids: selfishness, ungodliness, immaturity, liberalness, etc.

---

The ironic thing is that if these advocates really thought that childrearing was such a unbridled joy, theywould be selling it as such, instead of trying to convince us that we are godlessly selfish.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Truth is, most people don't really know about life and what is important if they've not had children.

---

Wow! What arrogant bigotry!

Indeed, there are some idiots who think that one's brain does not start working until there is a little human running around to whom one has contributed genetic material. Of course, one can come up with countless examples of people who have achieved this reproductive milestone without reaching any meaningful threshold of mental activity.

Face it, people who resent those who choose not to have children are probably at least subconsciously unhappy with their choice. That's too bad.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Who cares for the childless widow when all her friends are dead and there is no one left alive in the world who even knows her?

---

The caregivers she hires with all the money she saved by not having children, silly!

And not to shatter your preconceived notions, but people can make friends during their life, and these friends can include younger people who can be reliably expected to outlive one. And it is probably easier to make such friends if you're not annoying the hell out of them by constantly talking about diapers, minivans, and preschool admissions.

[Atlas Sneezed]

I bet they don't turn down OUR kids when OUR kids are the ones wiping up their butts in the nursing homes because they don't have anyone left in the world to take care of them.

---

If your kids are qualified to do nothing but be butt-wipers, then they should be grateful to have the employment, paid for those who were able to save enough money for the service.

[countess]

Take the same poll of Dr. Laura listeners and see what you get...

I've yet to hear a Dr. Laura caller that sounded intelligent and mature enough to be raising children.

[muir_redwoods]

"So people who choose a different alternative than you are "immature"? Hmmm."

It isn't the choice, it's the reasons.

[Atlas Sneezed]

"So people who choose a different alternative than you are "immature"? Hmmm."

It isn't the choice, it's the reasons.

---

So choosing not to have children because both would be more fulfilled in a happy marriage is OK with you, or is that selfish?

How about choosing to have children because that would make married life more fulfilling? Is that selfish, too?

What reasons are acceptable to you? Just curious.

Are Bob and Liddy Dole selfish?

[muir_redwoods]

If one can have children, and one is mature enough for the responsibility, one should. It's as simple as that. I can explain it to you but I cannot understand it for you.

[chinche]

Are Bob and Liddy Dole selfish?

Yes, if Elton John and David Furnish are not selfish, I suppose so."

[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

"I am among those who did it quite traditional. I am married to the nicest and prettiest girl you can think of and our three wild little boys are the proof that it was worth doing it. "

Kudos to you!

[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

"Go back and read my comment. You'll find that you and I are in complete agreement."

LOL. I thought the same thing when I read Ma's post.

--Interesting screen name (MaDuce) for someone who isn't a "ma", as it would give me the impression that motherhood is THE role this person wants to be identified with.

Goes to show, if jumping to conclusions counted as exercise most of us would be in great shape.

[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

"To change Europe into a "Eurabia" it would be necessary that Islam is starting a intellectual push to find new members among the native populace. This will not work: Native Europeans are either catholic, protestant or are absolutely not interested in religion. Islam has simply no chance to inspire native Europeans (except of some very few idiots). "

I've seen you make this point on this forum in the past, and while I certainly respect your perspective, as you are living it, and am encouraged by it--not to mention greatly appreciate you sharing it here on FR--I hope that you are taking into account Muslims creating growing enclaves --both in number and size--that allow them to use elections and courts to get their way, and with increasing numbers through immigration and higher birth rates gradually overwhelm native populations'regardless of whether they accept their ideology, until they reach a point they can make it the norm rather than the exception.

[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

"Does Europe want to survive? Most of the Europeans I know seem to almost have a death-wish..."

The same could be said about many Americans.

The self-loathing that characterizes the BBC's coverage of their own nation is found on CNN--particularly CNN International--and the rest of the MSM for the U.S.

Many Americans are apparently ashamed of our being Numero Uno for so long, and feel we should be apologetic about it and need to be brought down to make them feel better.

[Antoninus]

I've yet to hear a Dr. Laura caller that sounded intelligent and mature enough to be raising children.

Uh, the people with problems are the ones that call her, dear.

[Fruitbat]

The self-absorption of the women interviewed in this piece is truly breathtaking. I'm glad that they have decided not to reproduce.

My initial thoughts as well. Can you imagine what kind of moms they'd be! Eeeech!

[hinckley buzzard]

I don't have preconceived notions. All I know is what I see and hear every week as I work with the aged in nursing homes in several nearby locations, and in my office with those still independent. The idea that eighty-odd year old women are likely to have many friends who are much younger than they, is a fanciful one. It happens, but so does winning the lottery and finding true love amid the ruins.. I wouldn't want to bet on either of them.

[beaversmom]

Thanks for your thoughts. You are over there so we appreciate your perspective. Have you heard about and read Mark Steyn? He is from Europe, is a Canadian citizen, but now lives in the U.S. He writes on a variety of worldwide subjects and is very knowledgeable. This is one of his latest articles about
Muslims in Europe. What do you think about what he is saying?

[wgflyer]

From the German standpoint, Turks are the issue and Turks have typically been less extreme in their Islam, though this may be changing. From the France perspective, muslims tend to be N. African. France was the home of Khomeini prior to the Iranian revolution in 1979. I enjoyed the roving markets that visited villages there in Provence, each on a different day, but I noted that many of the stalls were run by people speaking arabic. And many of the market goers also spoke arabic. France has a decidedly worse muslim problem than does Germany. Their muslims tend to be more extreme, more violent and less restrained by the French. I think you underestimate the muslim problem in Eurabia.

[Atlantic Bridge]

Thank you for the ping. Steyn is always brilliant. Anyway his conclusions are only half true if we talk about Germany. The reason for this is that he predicts that all immigration into my country is islamic. This is definitly wrong. In the meantime only a very limited number of Turks or other muslims is flowing into Germany. Most of them through marriages.

Since the beginning 80ties we became growing immigration rates from eastern Europe. Former Russians, Ukrainians and Poles (so called "Aussiedler" - people with German roots whose ancestors came from Germany) are mixing into our population. A interesting graphic:

http://www.isoplan.de/aid/2005-3/images/s19_grafik1.gif


Somehow a subtle irony of history: Today even more jews immigrate to Germany than to Israel.

Although it is true that the Turks have a bigger offspring than the average German, you should not forget that over the time the young Turks adopt the western style of living. It is very unlikely that they start a broad jihad against other Germans.

Furthermore political power is a question of education and know-how. All those immigrants seem to be trapped in the lower class of the society. Maybe they can start some riots, but they will never be able to topple our system. BTW - most of them do not want to do this anyway, since they would destroy their own livelihood in this case.

Espechially in the UK things are more dangerous due to the numberous moslems from Pakistan. There is a simular situation in France with their north Africans. These guys are gung ho to spread their religion with all means. But - until now those idiots weren't even able to do some effective terrorism in Europe. If you have been in the millitary like me (being a civil engineer and architekt with the permission to dynamite I know what I am talking about ;-))you probably will know that it is extremely easy to cause really a lot of trouble in a civil society as long as you act intelligent and ruthless. Until now there was only one really massive blow to western civilisation: 9/11. This is a good indicator to their collective incompetence. The background for the intellectual failure of terrorists is also clear to me: Somebody who believes in their crazy interpretation of the Koran and into their crazy form of Islam anyway must be a complete moron.

Of course we have to be careful and we have to steer against dangerous developments. Europe is at a point of inflection. We have to restore our society and our values. No doubt about that. If America will stand on our side like a old friend in troubled times, it will be for sure helpful, but the driving force for such intellectual change must come from ourselves. I am quite optimistic about that. Things are moving and we will invent ourselves completely new within the next few years and something very different will be the result. Merkel and Sarkozy are the first skylight after long years of darkness under Mitterrand, Kohl, Chirac and Schroeder. We have a new and spiritually powerful pope and the future does not look that bad. Inside a settled Christian society such heresy like Islam will be just a ridicolous nuisance.

BTW - Believe it or not - the German interior secret service (co called "Verfassungsschutz") is quite effective in dealing with islamist scum. There is no reason for panic. Things are under control and they will stay under control.

My best regards to America!

Andreas

[Atlantic Bridge]

Take a look to my #199