Sorry, Wrong Num-Num
I love my boyfriend. We've been together two years. Recently, however, we've been experiencing conflict over the issue of children. He wants kids; I don't. I've always felt strongly about this, and he said he was fine with this when we started dating. But he's been bringing up the subject of kids a lot lately (I suspect because he's thinking about popping the question). The discussions have grown fraught -- to the point where he was in tears at the end of an argument. I eventually said I could be open to kids because I love him and don't want to lose him. But can this be healthy for us long-term?
--Conflicted
Though many things in life come with the opportunity to push the "back" button, once you have a kid, you have a kid. You can't just drop 'em off at the fire station if they turn out to be precociously criminal -- already hot-wiring cars at age 7.
Deciding whether to have kids is a very recent state of affairs, coinciding with the development and availability of reliable birth control (starting in the late 1950s with the Lippes Loop IUD). For most of human history, unless a woman spent her fertile years all alone on one of those New Yorker cartoon desert islands, there was a good chance she'd have not just a child but the beginnings of a litter.
There's a widespread (and mistaken!) assumption that a woman who gives birth will immediately and unconditionally bond with her baby, explains anthropologist and primatologist Sarah Hrdy. Probably because of this, many people seem to believe the only thing stopping any woman from wanting a child is having yet to bring one into existence.
In fact, neither humans nor other mammals "automatically nurture each baby born," Hrdy observes. Clinical psychologist Idun Roseth and her colleagues, reviewing research on mother-infant bonding issues, report: "Most mothers find that feelings of affection come within a week from birth. However, some mothers are still struggling with this after many months. ... A small percentage may even have hostile feelings towards their infant."
In other words, the public has an overly rosy, sentimental -- and scientifically incorrect -- view of what's often referred to as the "maternal instinct." There is no such thing -- and the term "instinct" is the problem. The actual scientific definition of an instinct is an innate behavior ("factory-installed" -- present at birth rather than learned afterward) that members of a species perform automatically. An example is a baby's crying -- alerting everybody in earshot, "YO! I HAVE UNMET NEEDS!" (Nobody has to send their baby to crying school. It automatically wails its little head off when it's wet, scared, cold, or wants a sip o' nippy.)
In contrast with automatic instinctual behavior, there's behavior that's learned as well as behavior that is only sometimes triggered in some members of a species. Accordingly, the misnamed "maternal instinct" would be better termed a maternal impulse or motivation.
The impulse to nurture one's infant is just one motivation that may arise in a woman. Hrdy has long emphasized that ambivalence and even rejection of an infant are other impulses a new mother may feel. (Unfortunately, the myth of instantly falling in love with one's infant is so pervasive and strong that women who don't experience this tend to feel there's something wrong with them.) In reality, "maternal commitment" tends to emerge "piecemeal," Hrdy explains, and is "chronically sensitive to external cues."
By "external cues," she means a woman's current context -- such as whether she's unable to adequately feed and protect her infant. War, famine, postpartum depression, or even a new partner who doesn't want another man's child are contexts that may even trigger infanticide: a horrifying maternal impulse but a maternal impulse just the same. Thankfully, this impulse is relatively rare in our society, and many women (and men!) report "falling in love" with a child they never planned to have.
Maybe...possibly...you'd become one of those "in-love" women and be wildly happy you'd had children. However, in your email, you repeatedly made it clear that you don't want kids. You are only considering it because you love this man and don't want to lose him -- which is quite different from wanting children.
You might ask friends who are parents to an infant and other young kids to let you spend a long weekend with them. Admittedly, this isn't the same as parenting your own kids, but it might give you a sense of whether you're actually up for the job -- or whether you're like me. Personally, though I have great respect for devoted, loving parents, if I were in charge of a thing that screams like it's being eaten alive by a zombie, it would take about 20 minutes before there was grain alcohol in my coffee -- and in someone's sippy cup.
For pages and pages of "science-help" from me, buy my latest book, "Unf*ckology: A Field Guide to Living with Guts and Confidence." It lays out the PROCESS of transforming to live w/confidence.
the fact that parents are the leading killers and abusers of children, and always have been, demonstrates the fact that killing offspring is as 'normal' as it gets. Animals kill, eat, or abandon young when times are hard. (See Sunk Cost Effect). The fact that foster care ad CPS exist proves parents, esp mothers, are often a child's worst enemy. infanticide has been common and accepted throughout history. And at a time when 8 billion Carcinoma Sapiens are destroying the ecosystem we and all other species rely on shows that WE HATE OUR CHILDREN. Children must NEVER be seen as an entitlement to support. Remember, The Village didn't care about YOUR child UNLESS you were a member in good standing.
Elizabeth Frantes at December 26, 2021 7:37 PM
If the LW sticks to her guns and ends up losing the boyfriend over this issue (the best outcome for all concerned, IMO) she should have no trouble finding a guy who doesn't want kids either, and is delighted to find a woman like her. Fifty years ago that guy could have been me.
Rex Little at December 27, 2021 5:12 AM
"There's a widespread (and mistaken!) assumption that a woman who gives birth will immediately and unconditionally bond with her baby, explains anthropologist and primatologist Sarah Hrdy. Probably because of this, many people seem to believe the only thing stopping any woman from WANTING a child is having yet to bring one into existence."
____________________________________
And that is likely why the whole idea of an unwanted pregnancy is STILL not taken seriously, by many. Especially when the couple is already married.
As in: "You're married, so what did you expect? OK, so you two didn't PLAN this pregnancy, but once the baby's here, you'll want it more than anything - and stop that nonsense about not wanting it! You'll change your minds! Just give yourselves time!"
Well...what if that change doesn't happen? There's a reason unhappy parents are supposed to give up the baby for adoption as soon as possible, after all.
Or (from Newsweek, in 2013):
"I was talking to my dad about how I don't want to have kids," says (30-year-old Tiffany Jordan). "At this point, he's resigned himself to the fact that I don't. He's like, 'Tiffany, people don't plan to have children, they just have them.' Which is funny, because now people do plan and decide."
(I have to say, in this century, it's hard for me to imagine anyone, of any generation, saying what Jordan's father said. At the very least, people like that should be smart enough to acknowledge that even WANTING children is simply not enough reason to have them; if you can't provide financial stability, plus unpolluted surroundings and a safe neighborhood, yes, you DO have to postpone having children - and maybe even forfeit parenthood altogether.)
Also, FWIW, in 1984, Ann Landers claimed that "the vast majority of (child-averse husbands) in this world are crazy about the baby they didn't want, once it arrives." Back THEN, at least, she may have been right - if only because married men were under a bit more pressure, by other men, to have children, so it was easier for even a reluctant man to take pride in doing so - or to brainwash himself into loving fatherhood. Nowadays, however, men, at least, are more likely to be taken seriously by society at large, when they say they don't want children.
lenona at January 1, 2022 11:36 AM
Interesting that everyone here comments on whether or not the mother wants/bonds with a child.
The entry of children into the previously childless partnership also has a profound impact on how the male relates to his partner.
The only thing that really resists the male tendency to mate and disappear to go mate with another female, is the desire to stay and protect and provide for the family unit, increasing the odds that his offspring will survive.
No children? Chances are higher that he will leave to find someone else who will willingly provide children.
I think the current trend among women to be independent and self-sufficient just accentuates this basic biological impulse. If you can't or won't produce children, most men are going to lose interest and look for someone who will.
Ladies, do you really think that that man has nothing more than a drive to protect and provide for you, and you alone? In perpetuity? That's probably not the case. That drive works for a while when there is no progeny, but it is fleeting. Without the long-term commitment of parenting, the long-term commitment of partnership is likely to dissipate.
ruralcounsel at January 2, 2022 7:42 AM
There are good reasons for a lifelong partnership other than children; ask any business partners who become good friends.
In theory, yes, men are more likely than women to say: "what's the point of getting married if one doesn't want children?"
But your comment suggests that there are more women who don't want children than men who don't. I doubt that, since the common stereotype is "every woman wants a baby."
How those numbers play out is moot, since no one can be completely sure just what those numbers are.
But assuming that at least half of childfree heterosexual men don't plan to marry, that lack of competition should make it easy enough for the other half to find childfree wives - and somehow, that doesn't seem to be the case. (BOTH sexes complain of how difficult it can be to find a CF spouse.)
lenona at January 3, 2022 12:12 PM
My comment was merely pointing out the biological drivers to mating behavior. Trying to rationalize some modern day attitudes is irrelevant in the big picture. Instinct and evolutionary behaviors almost invariably win out over popular culture in the long run. (The IVF industry is a strong indicator of that many women who thought they didn't want children change their minds, often after their peak fertility years are long gone.)
BTW, your rationalizing the assumption that the proportion of men and women who wish to remain childless is about the same, by citing a "common stereotype" about women makes no sense to me. I really don't see how they are related. I'm well aware not every woman wants a baby and thus the falsity of that stereotype. And it may be false for a large percentage of women. I have no idea.
I'm just saying that the number of men who are agreeable with that over the long haul, is rather small. Most men are okay with that when they are young, or want to get laid. Or think about the costs of raising children. But I have encountered very few men who have their act together who are okay with that as a permanent concession. Evolution tends to weed out that sentiment.
ruralcounsel at January 4, 2022 11:16 AM
Two things:
1. The strength of the IVF industry only indicates the problems many couples have with infertility - and I'm pretty sure the vast majority of the women who use those clinics were under 40 when they started going. In other words, they weren't necessarily waiting "too long" to start a family the old-fashioned way - or changing their minds. Not to mention that sperm quality, globally, has been dropping alarmingly enough for Newsweek to put the story on their front cover a few years ago. So even a woman of 20 may have trouble getting pregnant.
2. All too often, even when the last child is in first grade, a mother will put her kids' "needs" over her husband's genuine needs. This does not bode well for the marriage once the kids have left for good. (Not to mention it makes for spoiled, narcissistic children.)
lenona at January 5, 2022 6:24 AM
"... were under 40 when they started going. In other words, they weren't necessarily waiting "too long" to start a family "
The biologically best time is in a woman's early 20's. Waiting until their 30's and they are really starting to roll the dice. Biology doesn't make allowances for career women. Technology might.
ruralcounsel at January 5, 2022 6:20 PM
Back THEN [1984], . . . married men were under a bit more pressure, by other men, to have children
Huh? I first married in 1972, with the firm, stated intention of never having kids. The only person who ever put pressure on me to relent was my wife, seven years later when she developed baby rabies.
No children? Chances are higher that he will leave to find someone else who will willingly provide children.
She finally asked for a divorce after six years of trying to change my mind. Until then I never even tried to find someone else. I firmly believe that if she'd backed down and made peace with being childless, we'd be coming up on our 50th anniversary.
I have encountered very few men who have their act together who are okay with that as a permanent concession.
How about not as a concession, but their own personal choice? Hard to believe I'm that much of an outlier.
Rex Little at January 10, 2022 5:32 AM
Leave a comment