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."
oh shite....I'm sorry I missed this one....man....this is bound to be full of goodies.
Procreate baby!
I look forward to reading the whole thread.
*LOL*
Okay, I know most FReeper parents are probably the greatest and all, but there has been rarely a time I've gone shopping and *not* seen screaming, snotty brats in the aisles, towing along their cowed/(a)pathetic/resentful "parents".
I'm sorry but I'm glad you're here too homeo!
I got four and want more.
and I am still yer pal!
Ha! Good point.
No offense, but do you expect children to behave perfectly, all of the time? Especially with bad examples?
How can we expect that of children when even adults don't know how to comport themselves properly half the time? (Paris Hilton, Vince Neil are two that come to mind immediately for me). Heck, my husband sees people come into his restaurant that don't behave half as well as our children, and these people are adults! :0)
I really feel that it's up to God and not me (or us). So, if it happens, I will accept it with an open heart and know that it's His decision.
you should not be judged.
even folks married who don't have kids should not be scorned.
but, it's the reason some of them give or nay, celebrate for eschewing spawning that draws ire.
like this gal's career obsession or the lefty platitudes or the "we need the time for each other stuff"
self obsession in their case and well and good they don;t have children,
but sadly, the folks who should be having the most here in the west are those having the least and in the longterm...this will turn the "first world" on it's head.
Judging from the crickets, it appears quite difficult to refute your spot-on comment. :-)
Well...you sure have legions of ready "squires" around here dear.
It's not my term, so don't shoot the messenger. You may look it up.
You need a handmaiden Kevin!
I would disagree.
But, you don't know love of a child until you have a child.
relax....she is not a mean freeper.
"personal" could have meant fertility issues Sink...as opposed to ideological.
Don't get mad at me....I am a master procreater.
Me too, we should form a club. Nah, we're all already here...lol
Since the children in our family are either home-schooled or in private schools, I find it hard to imagine how childless taxpayers are helping rear our next generation. We pay double, to keep the government schools open to babysit and to pay for our children's education.
You're not paying for mine...and neither am I through my substantial property taxes either that go for crap PC public schools btw. They go private like anyone in Southern urban areas who can afford it.
But thanks for the thought.
Wish we could itemize where out tax dollars go...lol
I believe there are animals that are much more worthy of my love and affection than some humans.
I do not intrinisically value the life of a human just because they look like me, but value them because they are life. That doesn't mean I would treat them like animals.
But the obverse is also not true...while I value animals because they live, I do not intrinsically value them just because they are life. I believe there are animals that were put here for me to eat and sole my shoes with. Some were also put here to give me love, and vice versa.
Giving a choice between saving an anonymous human and my favorite cat or dog, I will have to choose the human. Just the way it is.
Giving a choice between saving Osama Bin Laden or Jeffrey Dahlmer and my favorite cat or dog, there is no contest. The paw is going to be in my hand.
Bottom line, I think there are some people who aren't worth the effort it takes to spit on 'em. And I think there are some animals I would run into a burning house to save. But the rules are never fast and true.
Actually, I did address that at one point. I believe I said that property taxes to support public schools is unfair. (Especially when you either don't have children, or send them to a private school you are paying for yourself.)
Other than that, I don't believe you two or anyone else is helping to "subsidize" raising my children. Besides, most of mine aren't in school yet, and the one who is attends a Catholic school. No voucher for that, by the way.
We pay for our own health insurance, and don't take a dime for assistance from ANYONE. Perhaps if more folks did so, you wouldn't have to make arguments like that to defend your choices.
FWIW, if you don't want kids, fine. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, per se. But try not to bash people who do have kids (or the kids themselves) when doing so. Generalizations are dangerous in a discussion like this. Married folks with kids shouldn't bash those who choose not to ahve kids, and vice versa. Maybe then things would be a bit more civilized. We can make our points without being rude. I have slipped up on that, but after seeing the way this thread has gone, I am going to try a heckuva a lot harder not to.
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.