Childfree and Parenthood: The False Dichotomy of Happiness

by Zoey @ Good Googs on July 12, 2010

the scrunchy nose says it all

Apparently, parents are unhappy. More unhappy than their non-parent counterparts. In the New York Magazine article by Jennifer Senior ‘All Joy and No Fun – Why Parents Hate Parenting’, Jennifer dives into a wealth of studies which consistently say the same thing, non-parents are happier than parents. This seems counter-intuitive. Everyone keeps expecting the research to say the opposite. And unlike pictures of happy families, children decrease marital happiness. The majority of the studies were American, and while some found the difference in happiness to be statistically insignificant, some definitely found parents to be unhappier and they become increasingly more unhappy the more children they have.

Interestingly, a Scandanavian study did show the opposite. Parents were happier. Perhaps that could be boiled down to increased support services and parental leave options available in Europe. But even more interesting, is that the American studies showed that parental dissatisfaction increased with the more money they had, indicating that it’s not just about being able to afford child-care (or it being subsidised by the government).

And perhaps the disconnect is in the measurement of happiness vs reward. Because studies that specifically assessed parental vs non-parental feelings of reward and meaning consistently showed parents had a greater sense of reward. So the question becomes, what do you value more – moment-to-moment happiness or a retrospective sense of reward? But is this sense of reward simply looking back with rose-coloured glasses? And do those absolute moments of ecstatic joy as a parent really outweigh the frustration?

So there you have it. My very imperfect summary of a detailed article. There are of course, problems within the research itself – it doesn’t account for those who choose to be childfree vs those who have not been able to have children for whatever reason. And it doesn’t account for parents who chose to be parents rather than those who became parents without conciously choosing it. A recent study, detailed in this article, highlights that were it is a concious choice the marital relationship is likely to improve, rather than worsen.

But what I found really fascinating about the debate that erupted was the chasm that divided parents from non-parents (particularly those who are child-free by choice). You can dive into the colourful commentary here and here. At it’s most reductive, it had parents accusing non-parents of being intrinsically selfish, unable to experience true love or fulfillment and somehow not fulfilling their duty and the childfree accusing parents of being uncivilised breeders, lacking fulfillment in their own lives, truly unhappy but unable to admit that they’d made a mistake and one parent was even told ‘spare me the poetry and go change that diaper’.

Really?! Just because someone is happy with their choice, doesn’t mean everyone else has to make the same choice to validate your happiness. If a parent is happy, it doesn’t automatically mean all non-parents are unhappy (and vice versa). While the research spoke to generalities and averages, individual choices, are just that. Individual.

I think the childfree should be commended for taking the decision to have children or not have children seriously. It is the biggest commitment anyone is ever likely to make and one of the most life changing. Not everyone has the desire to be a parent. And why subject children to such ambivalence? And as for the dehumanisation of parents by some – I find that pretty abhorrent. Depicting parents as ‘breeders’, ‘rats’ and servants does not make anyone morally superior.

The way I see it – it’s not surprising that parents and non-parents have such a hard time understanding one another. As a parent you can never go back, once your child (or children) are born you cannot imagine a world without them, and nor would you even want to. And as a non-parent you will never really know what parenthood would be like. I’m sorry, you just can’t. And I’m sure there are so many things that the childfree love and relish about their life – the spontaneity, the freedom, uninterrupted sleep, careers independent of interruptions and the ability to finish a cup of coffee without reheating it in the microwave.

But parenthood isn’t about chores, or colic, or tantrums, or crying, or changing nappies or laundry – although that’s all part of it. You can’t talk about parenthood without the poetry. Because as a parent you can be exhausted, frustrated and complaining about your kids and still love them (and your life) with a fierceness that sometimes scares you. Parenting changes your world in a way that you previously wouldn’t have even had the capacity to understand. And all of those negatives are minuscule by comparison to a new word or a belly laugh or a cuddle.

To be frank, my decision to be a parent was a giant leap of faith. I believed I wanted to be a mother. But I was scared to hold babies and toddlers kind of creeped me out (because I could never understand what they were saying). I thought I would most likely struggle to be at home with a baby and would yearn to go back to work. There were so many things that I wanted to do – study, write, travel. And I was sure I would miss going out with my friends. But I knew that I could still do all of those things, they would just be delayed. So I leapt into the abyss of parenthood.

In life, anything that’s worth a damn is challenging and involves sacrifice of some kind. But I was surprised after Riley was born how easy it came. I was exhausted, but I didn’t care – I would still stay up to watch her sleep. And I was even more surprised that I was even more fulfilled being home with my baby than I was at work. Of course it wasn’t always easy. Sometimes it’s extraordinarily challenging and frustrating and sometimes I even feel like a screaming room might come in handy. But all that hangs in the shadow of those many transcendent moments that fill my day with joy.

And that’s me. That’s what makes me happy. And my happiness doesn’t take away from anyone else’s, regardless of their choices.

Say It With Facebook

  • http://www.anjwritesabout.com Anj (@anjwrites)

    I want to bookmark this piece for each time I start to feel down about my parenting skills! What a beautiful conclusion and one that makes me recognize that everything is not so black & white that statistics can give us a full picture (thank god for that)!
    You are spot on when you say that is isn’t just about the crying & nappies, but those transcendent moments that come unexpectedly and gloriously. For me those moments prove that whilst parenthood isn’t for the fainthearted, it is also one of the most amazing things you could do – for yourself and your child(ren)!! :)

  • http://www.goodgoog.com/?fcsite=15264543862287796030&fcprofile=13027185617605341381 Cat

    Awesome summary of some fascinating research. Like Anj, I agree that you have made an excellent summary and I’m coming back to this article again. You’re totally right in that happiness is about the journey so yes, when I’m in the midst of a week’s worth of sleep deprivation thanks to the toddler’s illness I’m certainly less happy than my friends without kids. BUT is my life richer and ultimately more fulfilled thanks to the amzing perspective that I now have thanks to being a Mama, hell yeah! I detest that finger pointing that seems to happen with parents/non-parents/working/non-working parents. That makes me less happy for sure. Surely we should all respect each other’s decisions and just leave it at that. Different strokes and all that. :)

  • http://linlori.com Lin

    This was a great piece! I’m definitely bookmarking it as well. That’s a wonderful way to sum it all up, and really puts into words everything I want to say about being a parent to my childfree friends, but could never find the eloquency to say myself. Usually I get fairly upset at their short-sighted assumptions about my life as a parent. There are crazy days, there are days I’d love to tear my hair out or at least lock the bathroom door so I can pee in peace, but I wouldn’t change a thing, because the reward is greater.

  • http://eatingfor3.wordpress.com Soozi

    This looks like a really good summary of an interesting report. Speaking as someone who never had much urge to become a parent, but now find myself pregnant with twins, I couldn’t be more excited about what’s ahead of me. I’m already finding myself feeling totally different about my career, for instance. And although they’re not born yet, I definitely feel happier when I think about my future – I just hope the reality stacks up…!

  • sasha

    As someone who is not a parent, I have one major point of contention. I was a parent and went backwards. I had a child extremely young, tried to raise him for 2 years but had to admit I was emotionally incapable and financially unstable – two things that hinder a parent useless. I gave him up for adoption when he was 2 1/2 years old.

    So yes, I have been a parent. I have known the joy parents speak of and my choice 16 years later to not have another child. The highs, in my life, do not out weigh what I still want to accomplish in my life. In my 20′s and 30′s, putting my life on hold for another 18 years, is a choice I have not been willing to make.

    While I’m glad that you’re trying to understand what it means to be child-free, by choice or by medical situation, I still think you’re way off the mark. Why should the child-less or -free be forced to understand more when there’s little to no understanding by parents as to what it means to be on the other side of the fence? It’s not glitz and glamour. It’s not just more expendable cash. There’s the very real hormones that come at a certain age (for both men and women) that have to be reasoned out. And you want to talk about marital issues? Sure, the couple can begin as equally agreed on a child-free lifestyle, but more often than not, one person in the relationship changed their mind. A spouse can’t just leave when there’s a medical issue, as far as guilt is concerned. But when it’s simply a choice, well, more marriages and relationships will end over choosing not to have children then choosing to have them.

    I love my friends’ children. I am “auntie” to all them. But no matter how much parents postulate, you will not understand making the life-long decision not to be a parent, not truly. And rarely do they try. On the other side, the child-free aren’t baby hating jerks. It can be argued that we value children just as much and seriously ponder the world, the life we would be bringing them in to.

    • http://goodgoog.com Zoey @ Good Goog

      Thank-you for your thoughtful comment. You raise some interesting points. While I agree that as a non-parent I can’t possibly appreciate the challenges and difficulties associated with a life-long decision to be child-free by choice, let alone how difficult it must have been for you to give up your child for adoption.

      But on the other hand, the point of the post was not to say that the child-free are jerks and should make more of an effort to understand parents. It was more about how parents and the child-free alike feel the need to describe their choice as the morally superior one. And that individual choices are just that, individual and have nothing to do with the choices of others. But the whole chasm between the child-free and parents is just compounded by the whole rather juvenile attitude of ‘they don’t understand me, so why should I understand them?’

      As this blog is a personal one, I did talk about my choices as a parent and how that’s not always understood by people who have made different choices. But my intention was not to have this put out there as better or superior to other life choices.

      And while I respect your life choice, I do think that by describing the choice to have a child as putting your life on hold for the next 18 years is pretty inflammatory. I certainly don’t think that I’ve stopped living my life because I have a two year old. But that’s probably just the difference between the two of us – that’s how you would feel if you had a child but it’s definitely not how I feel.

  • http://www.theveggiemama.com Veggie Mama

    Honey – you are not off the mark. That was a very balanced argument (for want of a better word) you put forward. I didn’t feel you were one-sided or omissive at all. What I felt is that you are one hell of a phenomenal writer.

  • http://www.shedreamsbig.com The Girl

    I’m twenty-three at the end of this month and while I am constantly asked when I am going to have children {I do love children and cannot wait to take that step in the FUTURE!}, I cannot imagine me having children right now. But if I fell pregnant by that small chance, no way would I love that bubba any less {in fact you’d probably see me attempt a cartwheel or two, being a mum is something I cannot wait to be.}

    Selfish? Sure, I want to finish my degree. I want to work for a little while. I want to enjoy the time just the boyfriend and me.

    I fill the void in other ways and look after a gorgeous eleven-month old.

    One thing that really frustrates me {about Mamamia and other parenting based blogs where these debates erupt – I usually don’t comment} is that there is no compassion between women. When there should be!

    Stopping now..

    Sorry Zoey, this topic seems to get me frustrated {a little}..

    “Now let’s all have a big bowl of strawberry icecream”

    • http://goodgoog.com Zoey @ Good Goog

      I don’t think that there is anything even remotely selfish about choosing not to have children, or choosing to wait. In fact, just the opposite. I think that I was in a much better position emotionally because I had Riley when I was about to turn 30. I don’t really think I would have been ready for the lifestyle change before then.

      I agree – it’s incredible how hateful some of those debates get.

      Now about that ice cream . . .

    • http://www.anjwritesabout.com Anj (@anjwrites)

      I agree – there should be more appreciation for others’ choices rather than defensive posturing about who is more fulfilled. And I think Zoey’s post spoke to that exactly.

      I also know why you don’t comment on the other sites (I hold my tongue as well, so perhaps that is what many of us “live & let live” types are doing…leaving the inflammatory commenting to others?) as it can be hard to show your reasoning for yourself whilst not seeming to pass judgment on other people who’ve made different decisions.

      As for strawberry ice cream…yes, please, I’d love some :)

  • http://www.unlikelymama.net Amber

    I’ve been on both sides, hence the name of my blog. I waited, what would normally be considered, a fairly long time before ever even considering having a baby. While yes, ultimately I jumped the fence and became a parent…I can sympathies with CF and they way they’re talked to by people who think the only way to be whole is to have a child. Hell…I think most of us with “just one” feel some of the same pressure to have another. Ya know, because we’re oh so selfish for possibly thinking that an only child is A-Ok.

    Anyway…I do think I’m happier now than I was before. Maybe if I had a career I was aching to get back to…or a career period..things would be different. My life was kinda sorta pointless. Sure, I did what was expected of me, but there was no drive, no goals, no meaning.

    Now, I’m not saying that one should have “breed” just to find meaning, but it did give me some. Could I imagine my life single and childless? Maybe, but it doesn’t look all that fulfilled. I can only assume that I would be back fluttering between apartments, jobs, and men…that was my norm. Even if Alexa doesn’t keep me in the same place, at least she keeps me grounded.

    Long comment short, count me as one who thinks that life long rewards are more important than moment to moment happiness, because I’ve never known what that overall feeling of happiness is, but I sure as hell now know what an amazing experience being a mother can be :-)

    • http://goodgoog.com Zoey @ Good Goog

      I think there would be plenty of things I would be doing if we hadn’t had Riley but all of it pales in comparison to having her. And by comparison, everything else seems relatively hollow because she fills every aspect of my life now – I even feel a lot closer to Josh now that we’re parents as well as partners.

  • Sandra

    I thank you for something that was well-written and, for once, showed an empathy and respect for the childfree. However, like Sasha, I disagree with the insinuation that parents have some special type of insight that the childfree do not have.

    “And as a non-parent you will never really know what parenthood would be like. I’m sorry, you just can’t. ”

    I agree that parents have known both childlessness AND parenthood the childfree have only known non-parenthood. That is not in dispute. However everybody’s lives are different. A parent’s childless pre-parenthood experience is their own. It is not the same as that of a childfree person. Even parents do not share a common experience of parenthood and I have seen the horrible divisiveness among parents these days who are under pressure to compete with one another. I have friends who are parents and I have heard stories of the cattiness and nastiness among mothers in particular. It is as if these women have not grown up since high-school.

    I did not avoid parenthood with the sole intention of pi**sing off parents and my choice to be childfree does not diminish the choice to be a parent. I suspect that some people — parents or not — seek affirmation in their life choices. Those who make different choices to their own undermine that affirmation and that is why perhaps some people get defensive or, more often, offensive.

    The moral high-horsing occurs on both sides: parents claiming to be making future taxpaying doctors and lawyers who will be bottom wipers of the senile and aged childless; childfree who claim that they are saving our over-populated planet. People make these choices for their own reasons, not for altruistic ones.

    I do not support the name-calling but you can understand why the childfree are defensive. We are often called monsters and child-haters which is not only unfair but ironic given that, statistically, a child is more likely to be abused, starved, neglected, beaten, raped or murdered by their own parent. I am not saying all parents are child-abusers but sadly, and the stats bear it out, most child-abusers are parents.

    There should be more people like you who are more accepting of people’s life-choices. Having children — or not — is not compulsory.

    • Michael

      Sandra, I agree with most of what you say, but find your final statistic (specifically your usage of it) kind of silly. No kidding that most child-abuse is done by parents (the people who children are around constantly). Similarly, women are found to be abusers more often than men, and people under 40 comprise of a much higher percentage of the abusers than those who are older. These statistics may ‘bear out’ that child-abusers are most often parents, but all that says is that parents are around children more often than non-parents. Similarly, women are abusers more often than men (because they more often the primary caretaker). Younger people are more often abusers (because hitting a five year old is probably easier than hitting a 30 year old who has a wife and kids and lives two states away). This doesn’t explain any irony or unfairness in parents or non-parents calling the other anything. The reason why both sides are defensive is that there are extremists on both sides (unlike yourself and the author) who either really do hate children (for example, there are those that are childfree who just call parents by their name and then there are those that call them “breeders”). On the flip side there are parents who call people who choose not to have kids by their name and those who call them “selfish child-haters”. It would be ironic or unfair if all childfree folks were (by some strange means) forced to watch children as often as parents are (without supervision for long periods of time) and were committing abuse at a much lower rate.

  • http://thenewperfect.com/blog Hollee Temple

    Wow, there is so much to this. My feelings have evolved as I have relaxed into motherhood — I have become much happier and less stressed, but this has been the result of several factors. First, kids get easier! Really. At least mine have. And much more fun. I love snuggling babies, but I enjoy having talks about literature and music a lot more. I love watching my boys play baseball; seeing my son pitch his first game was a thrill.

    My husband and I were recently talking about these happiness studies and all I can say is that I cannot imagine that I would feel happier if I didn’t have kids. We waited some time to have ours, and after working the ratrace for a few years, we had a lot of things, but it felt sort of empty (for us). Adding the kids to the mix was difficult — no doubt. But now my family is my greatest source of joy.

  • http://parentingcontroversy.com Cecilia @ Parenting Controversy

    Sasha, I respect your choice not to have children, but it saddens me that you view motherhood as a roadblock to accomplishment.

    In addition to the fact that motherhood is a worthy accomplishment within itself, living your life as a parent can sometimes inspire/drive you to achieve a set of accomplishments that you never had any desire to achieve before becoming a mother.

    When I fell pregnant, I had just started my Journalism degree and had big dreams of becoming a TV news reporter. Instead I finished my degree part-time and ended up becoming a freelance journalist. Unlike you, I didn’t see having a baby as forcing me to put my life on hold for 18 years, I just followed the new and equally as rewarding path that unfolded in my life.

    Sometimes where we *think* we want to go doesn’t turn out to be where we ultimately end up. Sometimes we end up in an even better place. :)

  • http://Goodgoog Ming vazquez

    More power to all with this decision. If you love being a parent, good for you. I have chosen the child free life and have been so for 30 years and i absolutely love it. I am around children in big bros and sisters and relish coming home to quiet. Everybody has a decision and nobody is the final authority. If you enjoy what you have decided, then good.

  • Sandra

    “It would be ironic or unfair if all childfree folks were (by some strange means) forced to watch children as often as parents are (without supervision for long periods of time) and were committing abuse at a much lower rate.”

    Micheal, my comment is far from silly. Your refutation rests on an assumption that parents are more likely to be abusers simply through opportunity and exposure.

    There are childfree people who deal with children for long stretches at a time without abusing them as frequently as parents do; they are called teachers, pedeatricians, and child care workers.

    What I should have highlighted is that the child abuse stats make a mockery of the righteous and smug parents who frequently intone that parenthood automatically imbues them with some special moral high ground, an instantenous understanding of love and compassion, selflessness etc.

    I stand by my orginal assertion that it is ironic that the childless are portrayed as **monsters** when so many children are more likely to suffer at the hands of their own parent(s). That the childless may “hate” kids is one thing, but that there are parents who do unspeakable evil things to their own children does not even come close.

  • Michael

    My apologies for using the word “silly”, I wasn’t saying (as you can read, if you reread my comment) that your comment was silly, I specifically said that I agree with what you have said in general (in point of fact, I wasn’t refuting your general statement, the painting of people without children as being ‘monsters’ or really painting them as anything for that decision is ridiculous). That works both ways, stereotyping doesn’t work either way. That being said, while I agree with the conclusion, the statistic is meaningless and isn’t really ironic (even if it did have value in the argument). This is true for several reasons, but the primary one is that the only thing that makes a mockery of a person’s self-righteousness or smugness is their own actions. That doesn’t speak of whether or not their self-righteousness or smugness is or isn’t founded, I would argue that any generalization by parents about non-parents or non-parents about parents is silly. The problem is that you somehow seem to think that by making the same poor argument that your opposition is making it somehow strengthens your argument. Parent is smug and claims all non-parents are evil monsters because some non-parents are vocally anti-children (painting with a wide stereotyping brush), so your response is that parents are evil monsters because some parents abuse their children (painting with a wide sterotyping brush). It’s not ironic, it’s simply the same flawed thought process as the opposition but in the other direction. There are childfree people who deal with children all the time, but rarely by themselves (most teachers, pediatricians
    and child care workers aren’t with the child by themselves, they have other kids and other peers with them while they are watching the children) so they really don’t have an opportunity to abuse the way that parents do, who are more often than not alone with the child for entire days (or more). Again, while I don’t disagree that your opposition is flawed in their thinking, I have to say the same thing about yours. The only assumption I’m making is that most people don’t abuse their children in front of large groups of other children and/or adults. I think that’s a fairly reasonable assumption. Other than that, my refutation isn’t an assumption, in order to prove me wrong I’d need to see statistics that childfree people who are constantly ALONE with children for periods as long (or longer) than parents abuse at dramatically lower rates. Professionals wouldn’t be good examples because they are rarely (if ever) alone with
    children and when they are it’s for short periods of time. Otherwise your statistic has no meaning. The fact that you added pediatrican to the list proves that you don’t seem to care that these people aren’t alone with children for long periods of time (I don’t know any parent who just drops their kid off at the pediatrican and takes off for the day, but somehow you think this is a valid comparison to the opportunity a parent has to abuse a child). Here are some examples:

    1) “Opposition to drunk driving comes mostly from people who are over 16, so it’s ironic that most drunk drivers are over 16″. All the facts in this are true, but don’t really have much meaning. The reason that most drunk drivers are over 16 is because in order to buy alcohol you have to be 21 and in order to legally drive (in most cases) you have to be 16. Your post essentially argues that there have been drunk drivers under 15 so this statistic has meaning.

    2) “Black people are portayed as criminals in the media, it’s ironic that white people commit more crimes in the United States than black people”. It’s true that white people have no right to think of themselves as morally superior to any group of people, but this statement doesn’t actually mean anything because there are 500% (or so) more white people in the United States. Obviously the above statement is true statistically, and it’s wrong that black people are portayed as criminals in the media, but the statistic is not ironic and has no meaning.

    So to sum up, if you want to believe that parents look silly when they make the claim that childfree folks are somehow bad people because they don’t choose to have children, I believe the same thing and agree with you wholeheartedly. If you want to crusade for your position by claiming that it somehow matters that parents have more access and opportunity to abuse children than people who don’t have children you lose my vote of confidence. If an individual smug, self-righteous parent is intoning that being a parent somehow puts them on some moral highground, makes them more understanding of love and compassion, etc, and that childfree folks are horrible monsters and it comes to light that
    THAT individual is abusing or molesting their (or other people’s) child(ren) then it would make a mockery of one thing … that person. If an individual smug, self-righteous parent is intoning that being a parent somehow puts them on some
    moral highground, makes them more understanding of love and compassion, etc, and that childfree folks are horrible monsters they’re wrong because they’re sterotyping and sound like idiots, not because of what other parents do.

Previous post:

Next post: