Posted on 01/03/2005 8:31:56 AM PST by qam1
Nita and Ken Eaton hit the stores last month, as they do every Christmas, to find just the right gifts for the youngsters on their shopping list.
The carefully chosen presents weren't for their youngsters but for their nieces and nephews.
The Eatons are part of a small but growing segment of American couples who have chosen not to have children.
"We spend a lot of time thinking about what we're going to get our nieces and nephews for Christmas. We want to get them something meaningful," said Nita Eaton, 38.
The Eatons, married for five years, never had the desire to become parents.
"People used to always say: 'Your clock is ticking. You'll change your mind. It's different when they're your own,' " Nita said. "When I worked in a law firm, we were all in the age group to have kids, and I'd go to baby shower after baby shower, and I'd have to say honestly that it never hit me."
Many childless couples say they find themselves drifting away from friends once children are added to the mix.
"We started feeling sort of socially isolated," said Andrea Wenker, 33, of Colorado Springs. "Our friends started having babies and their lives changed. It revolves around the kids, and for good reason. The kind of things you used to do with your friends aren't an option anytime.
"They're talking about childbirth and diapers. It's important to their lives, but you start feeling, 'I'm still here, I'm still a person.' You start to feel kind of invisible."
She and Peter, her husband of 13 years, are childless by choice, and she is the coordinator of Denver Metro NO KIDDING!, one of 101 chapters of an international social group of more than 10,000 couples and singles without children. The Colorado group has about 200 members, 10 to 20 of whom typically attend the monthly get-togethers.
Jerry Steinberg, of Vancouver, British Columbia, calls himself the founding non-father of NO KIDDING! He started the group in 1983, he said via e-mail, because he was losing friends as they started to have children.
"They were no longer available for phone conversations, getting together for coffee or lunch, going to see movies, or much else," he said.
"Most people who have children seem to understand why I felt the need for a social club for child-free people, since people usually like to socialize with others who share at least some of their interests and have a similar lifestyle. After all, most, if not all, of (parents') friends were made through their kids' activities - the soccer moms get together, the softball dads meet, the school parents become friends, etc."
The number of childless-by-choice couples can't easily be determined, but anecdotal evidence indicates that their ranks are growing.
The Census Bureau doesn't ask whether couples are childless by choice, but the bureau projects that the percentage of families with children under 18 will decline from 47.7 percent in 1995 to 41.3 percent by 2010.
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, 6.6 percent of American women said they were voluntarily childless in 1995, the last time researchers asked the question. The number was up from 4.9 percent in 1982 and 6.2 percent in 1988.
The State of Our Unions, a 2003 report by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University, reported Census Bureau projections that families with children will make up only 28 percent of U.S. households by 2010, the lowest number in at least a century.
"The underlying reason that there are fewer children is basically that women have other things to do," said David Popenoe, sociology professor at Rutgers and co-director of the National Marriage Project.
"Child-rearing in modern times is expensive and can be onerous, especially after you've been living as a single person or a couple without children for a while."
The decision to choose children, however, ultimately is very rewarding, he said.
"Over the long term, it's people who have children who are the happiest," said Popenoe.
Childless couples are used to hearing that their choice is either selfish or motivated by a dislike of children.
"I think it's being honest about what your priorities are and how you use them," said Wenker. "It doesn't mean everything's about you all the time. People don't decide to be parents because they're being philanthropic; it's because they want kids."
Nita Eaton works with children as a school psychologist.
"I like kids a lot and work with them in school," she said. "I see kids out there who don't have parents. That really played into my decision. If I decided to have kids, I'd go adopt one."
Population issues drive some decisions about whether to bear children.
"Whether or not I want to have kids is not the only consideration," said Wenker. "I believe there's a problem with population, serious issues with the environment, and I believe I have to be part of the solution."
Would-be parents should carefully consider their choice, said Ken Eaton, 42.
"It's a big decision that needs to be well-thought-out. There are a lot of unwanted kids out there. People didn't take the time to think about whether they would take the time to raise them."
Couples without children say they have more time to spend with their spouses and for volunteering.
The Eatons have three greyhounds and are board members of Rocky Mountain Greyhound Adoption, which they doubt they could do if they had children.
"They take a lot of time, energy and motivation. One has various autoimmune issues, one had a leg amputated, the other had a viral infection and has pretty bad arthritis," said Ken Eaton.
Having siblings who have children, say childless couples, tends to turn down the heat on family expectations to produce grandchildren.
Nita Eaton has three brothers with children, and all three of Ken's siblings have children.
"If I were an only child, I think, the pressure would be pretty great," Nita said. "I've always been pretty outspoken. My mom's pretty much backed off."
In a culture where parenthood is the norm, those who choose to bypass the baby boom often have their decisions questioned.
"Nobody's deliberately nasty," said Wenker. "From men, I get an odd reaction. The reaction (Peter) gets is, they get this look in their eyes that he's lucky. They like to get me to admit it's possible I'll change my mind. What I have to say to that is 'It doesn't seem likely' and 'It's just not an option.'
"I like my life. My husband and I have a very close relationship. We value the time between the two of us and can't imagine that interrupted. I've never regretted it."
Nita Eaton said she felt like an outsider when they moved into a neighborhood filled with young children.
"The woman who sold us our house said the neighbors had been asking how many kids we have," she said.
There is no cultural celebratory template for women who decide not to have children.
"I've thrown baby showers for girlfriends, and it's kind of this rite of passage," said Wenker. "We're going to buy you presents to get you started and treat you like Queen for a Day. It doesn't occur to anybody to celebrate a child-free woman in that way."
I said "should", not "could" ;~D
You have to do what you think is best. Mr. Ex and I had to do precisely what you described in order for me to stay home with the children and still afford to live a decent life.
We are debating the homeschooling/private schooling idea right now. If we can't afford private school, I will probably end up homeschooling our children. We still have a little time to think about it. My soon-to-be five year old won't start kindergarten until the fall, and I doubt much harm can come to him until after that. At this point in their lives, we are our children's biggest influence.
"no cultural celebratory template for those who decide to have no children"
---of course there is: I live in New Jersey and the NJ
Pine Barrens are named for these people.
====But seriously, what kind of half-assed special interest
mindset is at work here? Soon they'll be asking for tax credits for NOT bring more children into the world. (Somehow they already have it)
It' still very bad.
If someone is unhappy being a mother, what recourse does she have? She can't exactly quit, now can she.
Wanda Sykes has the best take on not having kids. "Kids. They're a lot of work - but they're worth it."
Quote: No society can be maintained with that sort of outlook.
Aren't you the salfish one.. wanting to make sure somone takes care of you in old age.
Nice to meet you, superiorslots! We too have chosen not to have kids. We simply don't have the desire to have kids.
I can't believe that people here are so quick to call childfree couples "selfish." Some women don't have the desire to pursue a career, but no one calls them "selfish" for not having a career. Some people choose not to have pets, but no one calls them "selfish" for not having pets.
It's really quite simple. If you have no interest in raising children, then it's best not to have them. The ONLY good reason to have children is because you really want them. Not because you want someone to visit you in the nursing home. Not because it's what everyone else is doing. Not because you want grandkids.
We are not liberal, and I am not a feminist.
Face it, just because some of you find joy in having kids doesn't mean someone else will find it a joyful experience. And having kids doesn't make you any better than people who don't have kids.
They just come back and whine about how it is up to the Gummint to subsidize their CHOICE. It is just like welfare, only to a lesser degree. If it wasn't for folk like you and me (I calculated it would take 7 people at average income to replace my tax revenue, NOT ADJUSTING for the wear and tear they put on the system with kids that I do not) the schools would be a LOT worse off.
Let's be fair: Remove the child tax credit.
Mine, too. :) Sloppy baby kisses are the highlight of my day. It makes up for cereal dumped on the floor and baby spit up on all my clothes. :)
The only reason we need to keep growing the population in the US is because we have set up the social security pyramid scheme. Without an ever-increasing taxpayer base, SS falls apart.
Other than paying for the welfare state, there is absolutely no reason that we need anything more than replacement rate fertility in this country.
"we are our children's biggest influence"
Keep it that way. It will not hurt anyhting.
dirty diapers too
Or better yet, sue the government to remove it under the 14th Amendment.
Downthread from where you are, I gave a more detailed reason for our current decision to not have children, at 320. I know for the people in this article, its an "us" versus "them" thing. It isn't that way for me at all, just might not be something we want to do. I don't bring an agenda to the thread, except, there are lots of ways to live in life.
You have raised a critical point. If we were to have an accident, so to speak, he or she would be our little blessing. We are starkly anti abortion even though we are still childless.
Married over 20 years with no children ... both my wife and I are conservatives and vote republican. So your assumption that married couples without kids are liberals who drive a Volvo, and voted for Kerry doesn't hold water. In fact we have friends of many years, who, like us, didn't have children. They're strong Bush supporters ... they live in a very blue New England state.
What then is the purpose of marriage? What about the biblical admonition to be fruitful and multiply?
The purpose of natural marriage is two-fold: the mutual care of husband and wife, and the creation and care of children.
Christian marriage elevates marriage so that the two-fold purpose is the couple's aiding each other in attaining heaven, and the creation of children for the purpose of preparing them for heaven.
I'm one of those people who shouldn't have children. I didn't. Big deal.
That's true. If being surrounded on your deathbed is important, then you need to make sure you have a loving caring family. It is one reason out of many that people have kids.
Having children is the one thing that ANY man and woman couple can do. There is no license to get. There is no test to take. There is no fee to pay.
Anyone can do it. And there are a lot of people who have children and shouldn't. You are correct, it is not your place to decide for them. That's why we live her, and not China.
But you definitely have a stake in it from a societal point of view. Birth rates, tax dollars, crime rates, everything is tied into the "simple" act of child rearing.
Understood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.