Having Children Can Be Just As Selfish As Not Having Children

Sometimes we do not realize just how engrained social norms can be and how much they influence our lives. They can range from tipping at a restaurant as a social nicety to "you need a four-year college degree to succeed." Even in a country as diverse as the United States, we can still find societal norms or expectations. I came across another norm when I was reading an article from Rabbi Aharon Feldman on why homosexuality is problematic in Judaism, a view with which I strongly disagree. His argument is that homosexual relations are problematic because they are inherently "self-centered" because the way to be "other-centered" is to copulate and raise children. Apparently, this Rabbi is unaware that there are straight couples that opt not to have children, same-sex couples can have children through in-vitro fertilization, surrogacy, or this not-so-new thing called adoption. Same-sex couples can even parent as well as straight couples. Imagine that! But I digress.

In Rabbi Feldman's article emerges a larger theme and societal norm that has developed: the ultimate form of selflessness is having a child. In other words, if you decide not to have a child, you are deemed selfish. This view is neither unique to Rabbi Feldman nor the Jewish world. The Pope has gone on record saying not having children is selfish, as did Japanese political chief Toshihiro Nakai. At first glance, it might make sense to consider childrearing the "ultimate selfless act." After all, once a child is born, it becomes the parents' responsibility until the child becomes an adult. As a parent, your schedule no longer is strictly your own, but is shaped by the child's needs. And yes, putting that much time and effort into raising another human being is a lot of responsibility. The fact that the time and effort spent on childrearing could have been spent on more hours at the office, enjoying life with friends, or on self-care is why having children is considered so selfless and altruistic. I don't doubt that there are parents who have altruistic motives for having children. Nevertheless, what I am going to argue today is a) having children is not an inherently selfless act, b) there are multiple selfish reasons to have children, and c) there are selfless reasons for not having children.

Selfish Reasons to Have Children
For parents who unconditionally love their children and would do anything for them, I would be willing to take an educated guess that you are hard-pressed to find any selfish reason for having children. Worry not! I have generated a list for you.

1. Keeping up with the Joneses and/or because someone expects you to have children. The desire to conform is a strong one, and raising children is no exception. In spite of there being a respectable minority of childless individuals throughout history, raising children has been the norm, not the exception. Having a child is seen as a milestone in life, a sign that you have your life in order. Some decide to have children because it is expected from their family, friends, co-workers, or religious community. I'm sure we could think of parents who put pressure on their children to give them grandchildren or co-religionists who tell people that "G-d wants you to have children." We should not underestimate the power of wanting to fit into a community or giving into familial or peer pressure.    
2. Propagating your genes. There are those who think so highly of themselves that they feel the need to make sure that a piece of them is carried through the generations. Alternatively, there are those who are so worried about their mortality that this is the only way to be remembered post mortem. 
3. Giving your life purpose. While definitions vary, societies generally define purpose as the pursuit of something beyond yourself. As soon as that child is born, the child gives a parent something to pursue: childrearing. It is an intensive activity that provides goals and a sense of accomplishment. At the same time, it should not be a reason to have a child. Purpose is something that is ultimately developed internally, and you should not depend on a child (or any person, for that matter) to provide that. 
4. Living vicariously through your children. This is a more extreme version of the previous reason. Some parents were not able to pursue the career or lifestyle that they wanted, for whatever reason. There are some parents who view the child as a second chance to have that dream realized, even if it is accomplished indirectly. We have all met that parent who is so invested in their child's future to compensate for a past failure or shortcoming.  
5. Someone to be there to look after the parent in old age. As you get older, you are more likely to have your friends pass away. This is the reality of mortality, and as such, loneliness becomes more prevalent as we get older. With children in the picture, they can better help take care of the parent. This, of course, assumes that the parent lives near the child. It also assumes that the parent and child are on good terms or that the child does not end up dumping the parent in a retirement home. 
6. To have someone unconditionally love you. Not everyone has the luxury of growing up with loving and supportive parents. Some of us get parents who reject us or do not love us at all. The same could be said for someone who had a series of unloving romantic relationships or is currently in a loveless marriage. Any of these factors could contribute to wanting to bring someone in the world for the primary reason of having that child unconditionally love the parent. 
7. To keep a marriage together. Believe it or not, there are some who are in the middle of a failing relationship and think a child will make it all better. At first glance, it might seem like a solution because it increases the commitment and provides a common goal. However, if the relationship already has issues, a child will likely mask the issue instead of solve it.

Examining Selfishness
Let's forget for a moment that deeming something selfish is as arbitrary as it is subjective. For some, having two children could be selfish because you didn't have at least three. But I don't want to digress into that direction. I would like to ask how it is selfish to choose not to have children. When people use the term "selfish," it means putting your needs above others', usually at the expense or detriment of others (Webster's Dictionary). When talking about people voluntarily choosing not to have children, that is not the case because the children we're talking about are non-existent. It cannot definitionally be selfish if the children are not currently alive. Making a choice based on one's needs, desires, capabilities, and limitations is not selfishness: it's self-awareness.

Even if it were selfish, so what? If childless individuals want to enjoy life without the constraints or trade-offs inherent with childrearing, that is their choice. Some people do not want to have children because it is expensive. It could be that the expenses associated with childhood could mean the difference between being comfortable and living from paycheck to paycheck and not knowing if you can feed your child or put a roof over the child's head.

Others might not want to have to deal with the headache of raising a child. If that's the case, you should be happy they are not having children because it'd be a safe bet that they would force their unhappiness unto that child. More to the point, maybe we should view it as "I have assessed my needs, capabilities and limitations, and what I concluded is that it would be better emotionally for both me and the child if I didn't procreate." There is no perfect family environment, but at the same time, there is a minimum amount of security and psychological balance the child needs in order to thrive. Parenthood does not automatically make a person better or more selfless, nor does it guarantee a happy child, which is all the more true if the parent does not want to be a parent. There are more than plenty of people who were abused, hurt, abandoned, isolated, rejected, or broken by a parent when they were a child that can attest to that reality. By not having children, maybe that individual is saying "I don't want to burden myself or that child with my emotional baggage" or "I know that I cannot give the love and attention that a child deserves, and because of that, I don't want children."

Plus, let's also remember that having a child is not the only form of being selfless or altruistic. Childless couples can still have positive influences on children (e.g., friends' children, nephews and nieces) or society. Also, there are other ways to be in other-centered relationships, whether that is with a spouse/partner, family, friends, co-workers, or community members, or even spending free time volunteering or conducting charity work. Another reason people might choose not to have children is because they already have a lot on their plate, as this paragraph illustrates.

There are parents out there who have children for selfish reasons, and childless individuals who do not have children for selfless reasons. People also make choices that have a combination of selfish and selfless reasoning. It's not "either or." Not having children is not a moral failing. There are a variety of people in this world. Some are straight and some are gay. Some people like Mexican food and others like Chinese food. There are those who like a long walk on the beach and others who would rather stay indoors. What I am getting at is that people have a wide array of preferences, wants, desires, and interests. Not everyone wants to have a child or was meant to have a child. What we should do is acknowledge the stigma that exists against childless individuals. We have to remember that people who voluntarily choose to not have children are asserting their free will and autonomy. Choosing not to have children does not make an individual incomplete or inferior. It just makes childless individuals different, and as such, childless individuals should not be treated differently for that personal choice they made.