• secretlife said on Aug 14, 2006....

  I had children because I wanted to experience the miracle of creating life. I wanted to give my husband this gift as well. It's really that simple. I never thought of having children as being selfish. Quite the contrary I always thought of it as a very self-less thing.

• StupidGenius said on Aug 14, 2006....

  Ok but (I'm still playing devils advocate here, stop with the knives lol) If what you say is true then is it not selfish to have children if you are and your husband are the ones to experience the miracle and you are the one to feel good about providing your husband with a gift when the children will have to endure what the world gives them? Michael

• secretlife said on Aug 14, 2006....

  Ah, but the world gets to experience my miracles! I wield no knives - honest. Children represent potential and possibilites for the entire world and this cannot be a selfish thing.

• StupidGenius said on Aug 14, 2006....

  hmmm I like your thinking secret. But are you right to decide that? and if the child could see a glimpse of the world then would they still want to be born?

• silvio said on Aug 14, 2006....

  Thats a good question SG. Why did I have children, First of all I'am catholic, be fruitfull and multiply. But the real reason for me was to bring another life into this world, and to see if I could really handle it. As far as selfish goes there are people that have children for wrong reasons, and those are many. When I used the word selfish, it's meaning in that format, was to say don't pray for selfish reasons or they will not be answered.My bad if led you astray. Personally now that my kids are grown I can say with all honesty what a giant pain in the ass that was, I 'am glad that blesssing is over for me and my wife. One piece of advice that I will give is this, be kind be fair and do not be afraid to say no and stick to your guns. teach them wisly and you won't regret it. boys or girls it does not matter We have noticed the behavior of our grand children, from one parent to another, (divorce only makes it hard on kids until they understand) I could understand why peolpe don't want kids right away, the world is a tough place, and some people just can't have kids. (adoption is always a choice). Sil. this what every one calls me, besides other things.

• secretlife said on Aug 14, 2006....

  You don't get to decide if you want to be born, SG...that's the deal! :P

• puriz said on Aug 14, 2006....

  I never had any child. But your question started me to think about what a miracle it is, and also that I can be part of that miracle. The question is, what is actually my part in it? You have put the question in such a way that it is my responsibility and no one else. I am the one to blame, if my child after it is conceived has to suffer. I don't agree. I think everyone is responsible himself for all evil he has to suffer. Otherwise the world would be an insane place. And I think it is fully rational. On the other hand, I think that I have to suffer for the cruel act of having a child with the wrong motive or without being able to give it the absolute best. Puriz Keep it up.

• puriz said on Aug 14, 2006....

  What do you mean secret life? English is not my first language. i did not get your point.

• cfamommy said on Aug 14, 2006....

  I have a baby- he's 11 months old. I'm terrified for him, I'll admit that; the world is a scary place. I hope we're raising him right, and I pray that he'll grow up to be a positive influence on the world and on those around him. So no, I'd say it wasn't a selfish move.

• JadeLondon said on Aug 14, 2006....

  My husband and I have had this same argument. In his darker moments, he has said the same thing. But we have had wars, famines, rapes, and murders--as long as there have been human beings to do that sort of thing. It is just the media and technology that have brought it to the forefront--have put sadness and tragedy at our very fingertips. It is not a question of why we reproduce, it should be a question of what would happen if we didn't. Are you so ready to give up on humanity? Sorry, I know you are only playing devil's advocate, but this is a very real argument in our household.

• silvio said on Aug 14, 2006....

  Secret you don't get to decide, because it's not your choice. If your parents decided not to have children you would not be here, Sharing you wonderful insight with us. At the present rate of poulation expansion if we don't do some thing in a hundred years we will over populate the planet. If you think we have problems now, global starvation I think will the biggest problem in the futre. not to mention fresh water. How do you feel about over crowding. Dont get me wrong I love my kids, Besides a 100 years if you wher a child in a big city, you would be working for 25 cents a day if that. With no laws to protect you. We have placed kids so high on a pedalstool, remember this puppys and kids are cute when they are new, have that new baby smell, BUT next the terrable 2's then adolesence, and worst of all THE DREADED teen ager.If you survive all that and your kids turn out ok, Then you can feel good about the job you have done. Sil.

• puriz said on Aug 14, 2006....

  I disagree with Jade London. It is indeed a question of why we reproduce, otherwise we are just beasts and not humans. if you turn it into a question of what would happen if we didnt reproduce, then it is just economy, sociology, familyplanning, and ultimately mistrust in the creation. Creation will go on, no matter what I do. Sorry for being so bold. I may even be wrong. It is just my nature to be bold. What would happen if I were not created bold? I wouldn't say anything, but someone else would. puriz

• puriz said on Aug 14, 2006....

  silvio, if my parents didn't meet, I would not be here, but I would be somewhere else. I am not so stupid that I think that my existence is dependent on them. When I was 10 years old, I asked that question to myself. And the only answer that makes sense is that I exist no matter if my parents ever met or not. Think about it. If I exist now, I must always have existed. I am little tired just now, but this was clear to me before my teens.

• silvio said on Aug 14, 2006....

  Bold is good. what is really wrong is being PC correct. Any one with good writing skills can say anything about any subject. we call that spin, you see it all the time in the news, the paper, and even here on the internet. We need more bold, humaity will continue until it's demise just like all tha so called great civilaztions before us, if they were so great how come they are all gone. This is why we need people to be more bold. Less we become like ancient Greece. And you know what happened to them. Sil

• ayinkurie said on Aug 14, 2006....

  It is not selfish. But not having any that is selfish. Having baby is natural thing. It happens naturally. Can you stop the sperm gets into the egg. Forget about IUD or Condom. Can't you? No you can't. If you can try to catch the egg. But, not to have one is selfish. you are thinking of your own self. You are thinking of your life, money and carreer. But you tend to forget that every child has his own destiny. From the moment they are created, God has written his/her path and life.

• silvio said on Aug 14, 2006....

  Puriz you would not be you , you would be some one else. not the person you are today. With out them you would not be here or put this way with out the donation of 2 people you would not be any where. we are here no matter what or where we came from. I don't believe in reincarnation one soul one life, so make the best of it. I'am tired to I will seeya later. Sil.

• the_infernal_optimist said on Aug 14, 2006....

  I think that you have to realize that not everyone sees the world as a dark and dangerous place. I don't think that children are auto-inheriting a world of doom. :-p I think that allowing someone else to experience the pleasures of life is a selfless thing (and you can fight any parent on that; getting up several times a night for fourteen months - and counting - is not a selfish thing, trust me! :-D). It's a choice everyone has to make for him/herself. If I bring a life into this world, it is so that s/he can love and be loved, and although this next part is not my motivation, he or she might make the world a better place for future generations, such that a discussion like this might not even hold water hundreds of years from now - because the world might be such a great place. :) Think of that.

• Expendable said on Aug 14, 2006....

  People can have selfish reasons to have a baby but for most it's not a selfish act. It is something necessary and even wired into us by God or evolution or whatever you believe.

• steelwater said on Aug 14, 2006....

  my opinion is, NOW, the world is a scary place for children to be in, it is selfish to just have them but you are not even sure you can provide a safe place for them to be in...when they grow up, they would just be wondering why they were born in the first place...if you are a parent would you like to answer that question when the time comes? i dont honestly believe that the world is getting better... yes the world is such a great place, if you can 'afford' it. the world has since become a very material world that you can't even enjoy nature without paying for it. and its sad to say the children are always the ones who will suffer...

• Susmaryosep said on Aug 14, 2006....

  If we realise that Oil is going to touch 300 a barrel{and rising} the next time US ventures on another war searching for WMD, or another Katrina strikes the oil producing regions, if we know that all forests in the World will disappear through indiscriminate logging for profit by the middle of this century, if we know that most continents will have insufficient clean/potable water by the end of this century, if most of the 'wild meat' will be hunted or fished to extinction by 2019, will you want to have grandchildren who will most likely have to scavenge for food, kill the neighbours for water......... Think about it.

• JadeLondon said on Aug 14, 2006....

  Puriz--you misconstrue my meaning. How you are bringing family planning and creationism into what I said, I do not know. All I am saying is that this may be a suck ass world right now, but should we give up on the notion of being parents? Hell, no! I happen to love my children, that is such a given to me that I didn't feel the need to bring it up. What I am saying, that unless we are so hopeless as a species, why should we not reproduce? Not that we shouldn't at all. We should!

• realmenluvporn said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Ok, my buddy Stupid is playing Devil's advocate, so I'm gonna' play DEVIL. :-D First, I do kinda' agree that the real motives for having children, for the most part, are the parent's (I daresay the MOTHER'S) and they are purely selfish. Having said that, it's also instinctual to a certain degree. At least the desire to fulfill the sexual urge is instinctual, I'm still not convinced it's really about making babies. I'm sorry to break it to you folks, but the Earth is already overpopulated! We cannot sustain our present level of growth. So having children is not just selfish, it's suicidal on a Global scale! And I disagree with SecretLife, I believe we do choose both to be born and the circumstances into which we are born. But I also believe in reincarnation, so you might not want to pay me any mind. ;-) As far as denying a child their destiny, how arrogant to think one person could have so much power over another! Sorry, that one really misses the mark for me. To quote a fictional character, "Life finds a way!" My wife and I made a very deliberate decision not to have children for all the reasons mentioned above. We could not, in good conscience, subject another human being to the horrors that lie in wait for the next generation. Plus, I'm such an immature asshole, it's hard enough just taking care of myself, let alone a little version of me! ;-) But here's the twist in your knickers... Stupid, how would you expect this question to be answered differently if you asked a group of Gay and Lesbian folks? Having children is not necessarily such a default issue for the non-heterosexual! Q

• Expendable said on Aug 15, 2006....

  It's when the world is at its worse you need children.

• Susmaryosep said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Expendable, Why? as food? Sorry for being brutal.

• quidnunc said on Aug 15, 2006....

  having children is not a selfish act... it is a selfless act. you devote your life to raise another human being who will himself or herself be a positive contribution to the world... it is self-effacing for one to spend time rearing and raising a responsible, sensitive, and intelligent person -- someone who will one day help keep the love and hope alive all over the world.

• chaime said on Aug 15, 2006....

  no.. as some of the comments mentioned it is actually a selfless act. Why? First, for a mother, everytime she delivers a kid, she puts her life on the line. Second, you get to be responsible for this other person's life. you will be the one to take care of this [i]child[/i], what he will eat, where he will live, and you will be the one to provide for all the needs of this little person, physical, mental, emotional and everything else that will come to your mind. So how can that be a selfish act? To give part of yourself.. time, energy, effort, emotion, even money Yes, this world is bent on self destructing.. but! there are still so many things good in this world. Wouldn't it be more selfish to deprive our children the chance to experience what is good in this world?

• StupidGenius said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Ahhh I love the smell of debate in the morning lol ;) Some good replies here, are we as a population responsible then for making sure that our children inherit a planet that is that it should be. What contribution do you feel you are making to the world by bringing children into it? Don't you feel that it is in many ways over populated already and that we have a responsibility to not create more problems than are currently being dealt with i.e.; Starvation etc. This has turned out to be a hot topic lol.

• silvio said on Aug 15, 2006....

  The contibution is the continuation of our species, Haven't you noticed all of the new houses that are going up. Houses so close to each other you can hear your neighbors talking. through the walls. Besides other things, ( I think I'am gona hurl.). We need more space. Sil

• Susmaryosep said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Ya, we need more space, that's why we are destroying forests and arable land.... and creating 'natural' disasters Mother Nature never dreamt up..... floods in China, Bangladesh, New orleans, forest fires in Spain, Portugal. Australia is Currently debating whether to drink "purified" sewage water.

• Vavna said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Susmaryosep: Australia is just debating. Singapore already is drinking it. I used to think I didn't want a kid. I used to give myself all those excuses. But I've found a soulmate, and by some power, he's making me want his kid. He's not even forcing me, we just talk about it. There's just chemical changes inside of me and it's very organic. We'll be married soon, and we'd have a kid. And the kid would be fine because we're both capable people. We'll adopt a second one. That's the plan anyway. And yes, there's horrible stuff out there. But we need people in the future to sort out those horrible stuff too. I believe things will take care of themselves. I believe in hope. We will have sustainable living and manage ourselves better as a human race. I know I sound utopian. But that is what I believe.

• secretlife said on Aug 15, 2006....

  StupidGenius is still stirring the pot! He can't get enough of this.... The smell of debate in the morning? LOL...I'll give ya a debate!

• madstorm said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Ever seen the human population demographic curve? Only 300 years ago, a nanosecond in the earths total existence, the worlds population was minute in comparison with today, infant mortality was atrocious and your partner would have been a stinking, black toothed skeleton clad in filthy rags. Women would have had no choice as to whether they had children or not. Humans are so proud of their so called intelligence but it took us hundreds of thousands of years to realise it might be a good idea to have a wash now and again. Combine this startlingly simple innovation with the Agricultural and Industrial revolution and the human population has exploded eating through the planet like a plague of locust. In answering the question "Is having children a selfish act?" you are all cushioned by the luxury of modern life. What IS selfish is the fact that 10's of thousands of children starve to death or die of polluted water and disease EVERY year while we bathe our children in luxury. This is obscene. Say what you want. None of you love your children.

• StupidGenius said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Yor right secret life, im just stiring the pot. Playing devils advocate but I enjoy it because it is interesting how people responde. I have made it clear that these are not my personal views so I hope you are all aware of that. Michael :)

• kdarticles said on Aug 15, 2006....

  I have 3 children as of right now, and 2 of them came to our family despite my husband's and my efforts. I love them dearly and wouldn't change a thing. We used birth control and still became pregnant. So it seems to me that God is in charge of that. Yes I do accept my role in it as well. But who am I to decide whether or not my children are going to have a crappy life? I can't see the future. I know there are horrible things in this world that I wish weren't here, but that is only one side of the picture. I want my kids to grow up and experience laughter, joy, and happiness. To feel what it's like to be loved by family, friends, and hopefully a "soulmate". To enjoy all of the 5 senses, sight, hearing, touch, smell, taste. I guess all the poetic things about life. I know their life won't be perfect as much as I'd like it to be. But can you really know joy unless you've known sorrow? And I ask any of you if you had the choice, already knowing what you know about your own life, would you choose to never be born? Was living through any hardships in your life worth the experience of love, joy, and so on? I know in my life I have seen a lot of horrible things and heard of so many more. I have felt terrible physical pain, heart break, guilt and all those sad and depressing feelings, yet I would re-live all of it for just one day of happiness. Like my wedding day, or the day one of my children were born, or the day I spent laughing with friends and family. I know this sounds cheesy, but it's the truth. For me "life" has been worth it. Who am I to decide if someone else's life will be worth it or not. I do not feel selfish for having children. I give them all that I have to give and when I have nothing left, I give more...

• A380 said on Aug 15, 2006....

  i am trying real hard to convince my wife to have at least a child for us. anyway, i think life is not all that bad. there are many ways to seek simple joy in life, amidst wars/ violence/ greed. no doubt many are born in wrong corners of the world but they should be able to find their moments of bliss and happiness no matter what. afterall, happiness is but an occasional episode in the general drama of life, whether you are rich or poor, healthy or sick, life is full of highs and lows. that are precisely why life is worth living. reproducing ourselves is a duty for humanity... just my thoughts to share.

• realmenluvporn said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Ok, I have to ask... What about non-heterosexuals? Are you telling me there are no "friends of the family" reading this thread? Q

• silvio said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Hi SG. I kind of figured that you are England. I could tell I to lived in land once that was part of the British Empire. As a youngster my Dad moved us to Australia. I'am an American but I do understand English way of thinking. Yes you do stir the pot thats a good thing, it's good to see people respond in format where they don't have to be affraid. Keep up the good work mate. Silvio

• Susmaryosep said on Aug 15, 2006....

  Australia is in the 'growth' phase, unlike England, which is atrophying, starting at the 'core'

• StupidGenius said on Aug 16, 2006....

  Thanks silvio. How generouse you are with your words.

• StupidGenius said on Aug 16, 2006....

  [b]Confess to all your sins soulcasters[/b] you will feel better, [b]promise[/b] ||{1}||

• matcom10 said on Aug 25, 2006....

  I think that having kids is selfish. The only main reasons people take on the responsiblity of having kids are ones that benefit them. They're the ones deciding to bring the kid into the world but they don't have to live with the pain the kid feels. Look how many people are extremely unhappy, it seems to me that if there is any chance that your child could grow up to be unhappy why would you take the chance.
  

• Effuse said on Aug 27, 2006....

  There is another side to this story... think of all the children in the world today who are all ready in need of a good home. There are so many children in foster care, group homes and orphanages waiting day after day, month after month, year after year for a loving, caring home. Many of these children will never know the joys of having a family or a loved one to call their "own."
  Sure there will always be the case worker and residential staff, but the turnover rate in the field is high. Even the best caseworkers and staff seek new positions from time to time - leaving the children to create new bonds with new staff, once again. Why do these children develop issues with trust, love and belonging?
  The majority of the population has become so obsessed with making babies, being grandparents, aunts, uncles and so on that it has essentially dismissed the pre-existing, family-less children. Talk about turing your head the other way!
  These children are all ready here, all ready in need of and wanting families. They are children of all ages, including babies. If there are all ready children and babies available and in need, then how is having a child of your own unselfish- especially given the circumstances and conditions our world is in today? I believe it makes more sense to adopt, foster, mentor and care for those who are all ready here, wanting to become part of our world, our society, our love, our lives.
  
  Animals are spayed and neutered because there are so many out there in need of loving homes. Why are people any different? I am sure kids don't enjoy living at the "pound" anymore than the dogs and cats.
  

• StrangeOne said on Aug 29, 2006....

  I think it IS selfish, indeed. I don't have any yet; I kind of want to, but I realize perfectly well that my reasons are selfish. It is selfish because the world is overpopulated enough as it is; what makes you (not you SG but you whoever is reading this) so special that the world cannot do without your extra offspring?
  
  IMHO the only truly unselfish act in this case is to adopt unwanted children who already exist, and give them a good home and upbringing, instead of adding new people to the overcrowded world. The only *possible* exception is if one lives in a relatively wealthy country with a negative birthrate... for the sake of preserving that culture for future generations, perhaps it could be acceptable. But even then, it is still a form of cultural selfishness even if it's not personal selfishness...
  
  (And, just to add another possible-flame-inducing comment to this discussion, I think *in principle* what China is doing to restrict their birthrate is wise. Even though the actual practices and unintended consequences, i.e. female infanticide, are not good at all.)
  

• Supermom said on Sep 15, 2006....

  Both my babies were Trojan babies, but I'm glad they're here, I think having children is a give and take, I get the Joy of seeing them smile, watching them grow, and the world may benefit from my babies, they could end world hunger, end wars...who knows, but on the flip side my children receive all the love I have to offer, and the love of my family and the chance to experience life! and I must say, if you're in a committed relationship you can not have Trojan babies without REAL love between you, those condoms are strong! LOL.
  

• likwidsolutions said on Mar 31, 2007....

  Up to this point in my life, I have decided not to have children. I feel that having children is a selfish act in many aspects. I don't want to sound like I am begging for pity or anything, but I really haven't had the best life, and I have suffered depression greatly. I have never been fully content with my life, and I cannot imagine ever being fully content, even if I had everything in the world, because it's my nature and perhaps human nature to always want something you don't have. I try to find joy in life, and I do, but the sadness outweighs happiness in many areas of life. I honestly feel that life is ultimately meaningless and that I don't have the right to subject someone to life, just as I do not have the right to take someone's life. And don't think I am a suicidal individual just because I can't find meaning in my life, because just because I believe life is ultimately meaningless doesn't mean I don't believe I don't wish to experience life. Some people have children in hopes that it will give their life more meaning, and that to me is a more selfish act than the reasons that I stated for myself, because you're forcing a being into life that could eventual prove disastrous, without consent, just to give one's self more meaning.

• buckrogers said on Jun 26, 2007....

  Having kids is a natural, biological extension of yourself. You didn't have any control over the gleam in your daddy's eye, nor of the the acceptance of your mother's ovum to make you.  What were you feeling or thinking while developing in your mother's womb?  These are natural biological and spiritual processes...  so are your children...and your grandchildren.  Children don't come, necessarily, through choice.  Hopefully they can come by love, but they can also come through violence or lust...and that depends on your consciousness during conception.  Sex is either overly condemned or lauded in our society, and obviously ill timed to receive the maximin economic benefits.  Sex has to be, otherwise none of us would be here.         

• lidstrom82 said on Jul 17, 2007....

  Initially thinking, it would appear whether it is selfish or selfless to have children is a decision that ultimately depends upon the parents. Some are meant to marry, some are meant to stay single. Of those that marry, some decide to have kids, some decide not to, and some are surprised with them anyways.
  
  Not every parent is capable of being a good mother/father. If they are not willing to instruct the child to deal with the world, and just want kids to enjoy them or "that's just what you do when you get married", that teeters toward the selfish side.
  
  Homosexual marriages/partnerships have two consenting adults that could find a sperm donor or adopt. In my opinion, that's not the ideal environment for a child to grow in, but it's better than aborting that child as a fetus or leaving it parentless.
  
  At some point, would-be parents need to be the ones to better the world that we find cruel. We've inherited this Earth from previous generations, and we have to take that responsibility seriously. If we don't, future generations will live in a world that was not well cared for before they arrived. And worse, their parents who did little to bring more love and less hatred into the world unwittingly passed on that laziness to the children.
  
  If we just work and live for ourselves with no effort to improve the world, that is selfish of us and selfish in terms of children. But if we make an effort to better the world - and be good role models to our kids in the process - then we can know our child will be raised well, and hopefully they will not consider themselves prey to a hurting world, but instead see themselves as the instruments of change.
  

• StupidGenius said on Jul 17, 2007....

  I agree lidstom, good point. Thought this post had been forgotten about.
   
  SG

• kruuyai said on Jul 18, 2007....

  I agree with what most of what lidstrom said.  Someone above said that it's selfish NOT to have kids.  I've had to contend with that ignorant attitude all my life.  I've known since I was 16 that I didn't want to have kids (and now I'm in my late 40's).  I can't tell you how many times I've heard people tell me I'm selfish for not wanting to have kids.  Some of my reasons are selfish...  sure... what's wrong with that?  I don't know anybody who leads a completely selfless life.  Other reasons are that I just don't have a natural maternal instinct.  I can't even understand why anyone would want to have kids.  And having been born to a mother who, I presume, had a similar lack of maternal instinct and just had kids because it was the thing to do, I know what a cruel thing it is to bring a child into the world and raise it without love or affection, or worse yet, in an atmosphere of abuse and degradation.  I don't know that I would be as bad as my own parents, but I don't know that I wouldn't.  And I certainly didn't care to pass that legacy on to another generation as my sisters did, and as some of their children have.  I think it's selfish to have children for the wrong reasons.... because it's what's expected, to prove your masculinity or feminity, to produce heirs, whatever.  The only valid reason to have children is to love them, and that in itself is not an entirely selfless act, but it's certainly more noble.  Sorry, I don't buy that crap that anyone consciously decides to have children for the betterment of mankind.  Just imagine the conversation on the wedding night....
  
  "Dear, should we use a condom?"
  
  "No, dear.... we must think of the future of the race... what if the child that we would have conceived on this night were to grow up and change the destiny of mankind?  How could we ever live with ourselves?"
  

• lidstrom82 said on Jul 18, 2007....

  Whoa now, what's with the "crap" about having children for the betterment of humankind? That's either a way too cynical response, or it's hard for you to imagine that we could hope for our children to offer something positive to the world. 'Cause that's all I'm sayin. I think you took that idea straight to the extreme, because that wedding night conversation is pretty unrealistic.
  
  But kruuyai, that sucks about knowing what it's like not to have loving, supportive parents...and to have a mother that didn't seem to know the first thing about how to raise you. Abusive parents always run the risk of passing on those tendencies to their children when they become adults. But often, people know what their parents do and why it's wrong, and they decide not to be like their parents. That is a wise decision on your part, whether you had children or not.
  
  My point is, just as bad parents can leave a legacy of bad parenting and poor lessons that are passed on from generation to generation, there is a hopefulness on the other end, that GOOD lessons and loving parenting can produce healthy generations of family that can set a positive example for those around them. That is how the world can be improved - by taking care of the most significant  human relationships in our lives - that of family.
  
  
  

• kruuyai said on Jul 18, 2007....

  lid:  "I think you took that idea straight to the extreme, because that wedding night conversation is pretty unrealistic."'   It was meant to be unrealistic... as in, tongue in cheek. 
  
  I agree that bringing children into the world should be left to those who are capable and willing to raise them with the love and support that they need.  However, if a person doesn't feel that they have that capability or desire, then the decision not to have a child is the responsible one.  People who can't or won't give a child the nurturing it needs to live a reasonably happy and healthy life but still bring a child into the world anyway, are acting selfishly and irresponsibly.  So, it's not a simple question of , "Is it selfish to bring or not bring a child into the world."  It depends entirely on the people and the motivation.
  
  "the most significant  human relationships in our lives - that of family."  I'm wondering how you  are intending the word 'significant' to be interpreted.  If you mean those that have the most power to shape our lives because of their control over our early years, then yes, family could be considered the most significant human relationships in our lives, but if you're talking about who are the people who are most important to us throughout our lives, then I would have to take exception to this generalization.  My family represents the least significant of the human relationships in my adult life... unless, of course, you count the legacy of dysfunction and all the joy that brings with it.
  

• lidstrom82 said on Jul 18, 2007....

  I hear you kruuyai, tongue in cheek is good. It's just hard to identify sometimes without voice inflection or hearing it face to face.
  
  We agree in principle about the responsibility of a would-be parent to make the right decision whether having kids is a selfish or selfless decision in their case.
  
  And about family, yes, it was speaking about the influence of family in our formative years. Close friendships often become more influential as we grow, and spouses take higher precedence over one's parents.
  
  I think the possible division in our views came from your strong reaction to having a child for the betterment of the world. That's not only being selfless to have a child to raise in the first place, which means the parents must set aside some of their own desires to be responsible for a new life - but it's also selfless to instruct a child that will bless others around him/her.
  

• one_wired_kitty said on Aug 04, 2007....

  Having children is NOT selfish. Choosing not to have children is NOT selfish. What I do find selfish, however, is bringing children into this world for all the wrong reasons (which vary from person to person).

• lidstrom82 said on Aug 06, 2007....

  Very well said.

• fightagainstego said on Sep 17, 2007....

  I think that whether or not having children is selfish depends upon who is having them. For example, for those in tribal societies or rural areas, survival rests upon how many children they have--their children are their workers, essentially. In fully "civilized" countries (excepting farmers and other working families who have businesses to run), having children is either selfish or careless. For those people who want to experience the "miracle" of sperm meeting egg and creating life, it's selfish because having kids is a desire borne out of ego. People who want to be parents really want to be god. Having children becomes careless when people who are not suited to be parents have unprotected sex and get pregnant without a thought to the future of the child and what is best for them. Many of these unfortunate souls end up being abused or abandoned. Until adults start thinking more carefully about WHY they want children (is it simply because it's "the thing to do," like getting a cell phone), the suffering of unwanted and abused children will continue. Sad, sad, sad.....

• iguessnotnot said on May 26, 2008....

  Before reading this, please understand that I am an optimist and a realist.
  
  Effuse makes a very valid point that the already existing orphans and parent-less young ones must be taken care of first. The very fact that a couple would rather breed one of their own before assisting such orphans is selfish without argument. The second valid point that has been presented already is that the world is already over-populated. With our dwindling resources, us as the human population cannot afford to reproduce any more humans other than those who would have the very best of chances to return their life's contributions back to society for the betterment of this world. This would not only mean breeding potentially well-educated, well-mannered, environmentally responsible, empathetic individuals, but would require on our part as already existing humans, to change our mentality and begin drafting and enforcing stricter laws to offset the very selfish and destructive nature of human beings. We would need to prevent our future successors from developing into the humans whom we cannot afford to have exist. Only the healthiest of sperm and eggs should be used to develop any future beings. We need to control genetics. lol.
  
  Of course, I am kidding with this post.
  
  Ideally, a Utopian society would be great, or would it be? Humans have a well documented history of taking enjoyment through the expense of other humans and this will continue to happen so long as we exist. Human life is really not that great if there isn't another human life suffering. It is just the nature of competitiveness that is built into our genetics. We live in a sick world with a sick history, and the Earth's situation at hand is dire. I can only suggest educating one's self in all aspects of human life (sciences, art, history, philosophy, all of it) until one realizes this. Of course this discussion could go on and on and would easily branch / transition into too many other discussions.

• lidstrom82 said on May 27, 2008....

  What really needs to be taught to humanity on a global scale is compassion. Unfortunately, even though most of the U.S. (including those impoverished) are wealthier than the rest of the world, we have many distractions that keep us from what really matters. How many times has work come before our family? Our friends? How many times have we caught ourselves keeping up with the Joneses, car for car, home for home, maybe even kid for kid?
  
  With an attitude of me-first, compassion is at a premium. I've been to foreign nations and seen young people poorer than almost all kids I've seen in America, and they are happier than the youth of the world's only current superpower. Having money and the most toys do not make us happy; but why do we keep striving for bigger and better? We can call it corruption, we can call it human imperfection, and I call it sin.
  
  I really don't think the "haves" of the world (much of the western world, in particular) have much incentive caring for the "have-nots", particularly orphaned children, when we're really occupied with ourselves. I know it is difficult to adopt children, and the foster care system isn't that great from what I hear, but we need to grasp the simple fact that working to care for others will be inconvenient in some way. We have to be willing to inconvenience ourselves in order to bring happiness and hope to people who have little.
  
  The question is, are we willing to put down, or give up, our toys in order to do so?

• Nate1 said on May 30, 2008....

  I hope I'm not repeating myself, but I don't see my most recent post (at least not yet).  Here it is.
  
  
  I'll disagree with the idea we are overpopulated. There has been enough food grown in each of the last several years to feed every man, woman, and child. The reason there is still starvation in this world may have more to do with distribution and/or haves vs have-nots. I would encourage reading over World Hunger: 12 Myths. The same food system that wasn't distributing food to everyone when it was written (not that long ago) exists today. In addition, we are at over 6 billion today, some projections say the world could feed up to 30 or 40 billion. Claiming hunger happening today is due to overpopulation is jumping the gun. Environment-I support the idea that Global Warming and many other ecological problems/disasters are man-made. However, this doesn't directly mean the number of humans results in higher pollution. I believe the growth rate on China's pollution/emissions went up the fastest as its population control policy was active & in place and the Chinese birthrate declined (showing this policy had a degree of success in its direct goal-lowering the number of children born). If pollution could be stopped by limiting the growth rate of human populations then China wouldn't be projected to become the most polluting nation n the world. What is changing in China is both its development and consumption levels (Chinese are now starting to buy SUVs-previously a frequently used symbol of waste in the USA, but not just here anymore). Humans are different from all other creatures in that we has created a powerful, complex, and world spanning economic system. And right now that system has been rewarding pollution and ecological damage. If that isn't dealt with/changed then any other discussion involving saving the environment could be rendered moot. And, in case you think that I'm somehow ignoring the "real" problem, I would like to point out that while China's "1 child" policy has been in place that it has been building new coal power plants at the rate of 1 per week. If someone has children I wouldn't call it selfish. If someone doesn't try to slow down/stop (or even embraces) the economic promotion of ecological damage then I may call the person selfish and wasteful. And one last point to consider. The reason we in the already low birthrate and developed wealthy world waste and pollute so much (the most in the world) is because we control, own, or influence more resources and the manner of their use than any other group in the world. Global Warming is mainly due to the rich of the world, not the mobs of poor (who are sometimes-but not always-the main focus of efforts to lower population growth).
  

• nutella83 said on Jun 10, 2008....

  On Nate1's comment:
  
  Chinas' increase in pollution is due to the demand of products of other countries (mainly the US). China's citizens don't consume all of the manufactured products in China that contribute to their pollution.
  
  Therefore, the relationship between a declining population and increase in pollution is misinterpreted.
  

• nutella83 said on Jun 10, 2008....

  In regards to the main discussion. I believe that it is natural to reproduce. It is programed in us by evolution, BUT  we have a brain too!
  We do have the responsability to use it and not act based on our instinct.
  As intelligent, civilized human beings, we should think: what is the logical reason to produce a new life when there are already parent-less babies all over the world? I can only think of two reasons: ignorance or ego.
  *Unless someone comes up with something else I didn't think of (which I welcome)
  
  If you think of the argument of helping humanity by raising your child in a good way, that does not justify your own genes over adoption. The child will have the same education, regardless of genes.
  
  Although I do believe it is a selfish act (having your own vs adopting), I do not believe it is necessarily evil. We are all selfish, its natural.
  
  
  

• lidstrom82 said on Jun 10, 2008....

  Hey nutella, Thanks for your thoughtful comments and remarks on this. I got a notice from SC about more comments on this post and thought I'd drop in.
  
  In light of the plight of parentless children, we can't forget the responsibility of the actual parents themselves. It's not just a problem in far-flung countries - over 70% of American black children are born to single mothers, and I read that stat from a piece from 1998! So no, it is not automatically selfish to choose having your own child just because someone else didn't stick around.
  
  Nutella, be careful about reducing the miracle of childbirth to the motivations of ignorance or ego. As well, if one considers Creationism, God created some to stay single and fulfill purposes in their lives in one way, and created others to marry and bear children to fulfill purposes in another way. Not everyone is "supposed" to be married, let alone have children. But consider this: having children can be obeying a direction of God to married people - not a rigid demand, but something that is exciting to expectant parents.
  
  In that light, it is not justifying your own genes over adopting another; rather, it is bringing new life into the world in hopes that the child will bring life to those around them - aka, being raised well. With all the talk about human selfishness and how crappy the world is, I'm surprised more people don't want to raise children that will grow to do something about that. I'm not talking about raising soldiers for "goodness" or "for Jesus" or for "jihad"...or for anything. I'm talking about raising children that aren't spoiled rotten, are grateful for what they have, and are compassionate. Be honest, guys - I'd say there's more people in SC that do not demonstrate those things enough.
  
  To wrap up my feelings on it, I'd say that bearing children is a blessing from God that is not only NOT a necessary evil (I agree on you with that, nutella), but that it's a mountaintop experience of life that bears responsibility. It's human selfishness that makes it less (parents leaving the picture, broken relationships and broken marriages, flawed childhoods of people who grow to become flawed parents, and so on). Wouldn't any of us want to raise children that would actually make the world better? In that regard, parenthood is not only NOT selfish, but it's boldly altruistic.

• nutella83 said on Jun 10, 2008....

  Thanks for your reply lidstrom!!
   In regards to the single parents you mentioned, of course, sticking with your already conceived child is not selfish!!
  I'm also not questioning if everybody should have kids, I agree that there are different "callings" in life.
  I also agree that choosing to raise a family with good hopes is good for humanity and as you said, boldly altruistic.
  What you say: "having children can be obeying a direction of God [it] is exciting to expectant parents,  bringing new life into the world in hopes that the child will bring life to those around them,  [it's] a mountaintop experience that bears responsability" is in favor of having a family (which I agree) but it all also applies to adoption.
  
  My thoughts are not whether to have children or not, but once you decide to have a family (and are not pregnant yet) should you chose to care for an already existing "new" life or create a new one of your own? Is it "more noble" to choose to adopt? If so, why don't we all? What is the logical reason to choose your own rather than an already existing one?
  
  Do we feel we are at loss if we don't reproduce with our own genes? Why? (Is that ego or human instinct?) What may be a plausible argument is that "picking up" for other people's mistakes is not the solution to the problem of parent-less children. But, until that mistake is being corrected, how can we create new life knowing that so many children are alone and hoping for a caring home?

• lidstrom82 said on Jun 10, 2008....

  Those are good points, nutella. I haven't looked at the issue that way before...many americans probably never think of it at all, and I think that's part of the issue - America, on the whole, doesn't spend a ton of time realizing that it is better off than 98% of the world in terms of wealth and resources - even the poorest american is richer than most of the world.
  
  I think a lot of people are oblivious to such things because we're so focused on ourselves and on material things. And I think one indicator of that are the orphans of the world.
  
  Since I'm operating from a Christian perspective, I consider that Jesus Christ called everyone to love God, and to love each other as ourselves. I believe that includes fulfilling needs for people who are left wanting. One thing I try to grasp is that the Bible refers to God as "a father to the fatherless." That an unseen God is not only all-powerful, but is LOVING, and wishes to fill the parts of our lives that are left wanting from human selfishness and imperfection, is something that's hard to grasp.
  
  But I think of it this way: even if every adult in the world, with the means to adopt or take in a needy child, ended up doing so, we'd still have issues - not every adult wealthy enough to raise a child SHOULD. It's a maturity and selfishness issue. I believe some people are called by God to take in such children - but that all others must love each other - in other words, love the children by sending money and letters and support through a trusted organization that will bring love and hope to children we cannot reach by a short car ride.
  
  Not everyone is called to be parents, but everyone IS called to fill each other's gaps and needs - not just in a parental role, but in a compassionate one. So in the end, I'd say that some things people can fix, some things only God can fix. And I think that the most compassionate people in the world can make a difference in those fatherless children not just by adopting, but in supporting and providing in different ways. Become a youth leader at a church, school, or the Y. Lead a scout troop or start a volunteer group from scratch. Organize the local kids to rake leaves or visit the elderly. Or just invite them to your home to play sports or swim in your pool. It is easy? No way. But the hardest things are often the most rewarding.

• Nate1 said on Jun 11, 2008....

  Yes and no with regard to China making things for us. Yes China is exporting to the USA and would feel a major impact if this stopped, but the plan is for China to sell to itself. Selling to the USA is a way to build on the training/knowledge we already have and build up a pool of wealth so that domestic purchasers later become the main source of consumption (instead of the USA). And this is a point to consider as the number of Chinese purchasing goods similar to those bought and sold in the US is very much on the rise. If the argument is that Chinese pollution rose simply because it has undertaken manufacturing for the US (and others) then there should be a drop in the amount of pollution those other nations produce (as they aren't, according to this thought, doing as much of their own manufacturing anymore). But pollution from the USA hasn't been dropping, it has been growing. The reason China is overtaking us in the list of top polluters is because the rate at which pollution is increasing is simply much higher in China than the USA, but both are still polluting more than they were 5 years ago. Also if you want to further examples of pollution growth not being related to population growth look at western Europe. Some nations are shrinking in population even as their pollution outputs rise (though at a much slower rate as they are trying to be more environmentally aware and may even stop that trend-if and when this happens I give credit to their efforts succeeding, not population shrinkage as that hasn't caused pollution to fall at this time). If someone wants his/her own genes and to adopt then why not. Neither is directly causing pollution and good parents do deserve credit for not being selfish. Sometimes it is harder to adopt than one would think anyway. Yes there are children out there in need of parents, but there are also people who pay hundreds or thousands of dollars in attempts to adopt.

• lidstrom82 said on Jun 11, 2008....

  I think the best parents go into parenthood with a working understanding that it will take a massive amount of responsibility and sacrifice on their part to make a child succeed in today's world. To undertake that with the goal of producing an individual  that has a positive effect in people's lives throughout their lifetime is a noble thing.
  
  I wonder how many parents decided to have children because it was the thing to do after awhile...maybe their friends were getting married and starting families and they decided to go along with it. Maybe it was a maternal instinct kicking in or a biological clock ticking loudly. Anybody got some insight on this - reasons people have kids other than to bless the world or anything else mentioned in this paragraph?
  

• geepster said on Aug 10, 2008....

  I do have children. I believe that many people reading the comment about it being "selfish" are interpreting that as an evil word. I believe that having children planned is a selfish thing, although in a very loving way. And for the people that believe it is "self-less", I disagree. Although, I do believe that after having your child, the act of raising a human does become a "self-less" act.

• lidstrom82 said on Aug 10, 2008....

  Well think of it this way, everyone...we often wonder if today's world is safe for our future children...and yet it's easy to think it's unrealistic to have kids with a purpose to have them make the world a little bit better?
  
  In other words, we're skittish about the problem (having kids for wrong reasons, of being selfish by bringing kids into a harsh world), but we don't agree to be part of the solution (by raising morally upstanding children). All I gotta say is...huh?? Unless we become part of the solution, we'll bear children into a dark world indeed.
  

Comment on "Is Having Children A Selfish Act"

Currently tagged	children parenting Child reproduction selfish choice choice and selfishness end of the world overpopulation corrupt societies It is Corrupt Societies children Nate1 I must have been crazy choicem selfishness (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment