Plan B Forum

One of the two great fears of the 1970s was the population bomb. Now that most of the 1st world and a large swathe of the 3rd has ZPG, or less, people get worked up about that instead.

Changing a real threat for an imaginary one is progress, I guess.


yrs,
rubato

Once upon a time children were a necessary - to help with the farm, the family business, etc. They didn't cost $250k to raise from infancy to majority, because expectations were lower.

Now, having children comes with massive costs and much greater sacrifices, because good parents are expected to lavish them in every possible way.

Some of us would rather not go down that road - thank heavens for safe, reliable birth control and a changing culture that is beginning to acknowledge that childbearing and childrearing is not a required aspect of the female experience.

Now, having children comes with massive costs and much greater sacrifices, because good parents are expected to lavish them in every possible way.

Lavish? That $250,000 won't go very far after feeding. clothing, providing shelter, etc. and educating them; unless you think that giving them a good education is somehow "lavishing" children". Sure, children are expensive and parents are called upon to make sacrifices for them, but it's usually for things they need, not the trivial. Indeed, once children began to be seen as something more than just extra free labor for the family farm or business, parents (at least the good ones) have worked hard to provide their children with what they need to succeed, not to lavish them with luxuries.

No way in hell does it cost @ $14,000/yr. to feed and clothe a child. Public schools are free (or lower cost at University level); I went to them right up through graduate school and ended up getting accepted to 7 of the top 10 law schools, so they can't be all that bad.

The $250k figure (which is actually $241,080 for 2014, according to CNN Money) doesn't include private schooling K-12 or college costs, FYI.

I suppose if you calculated in the additional housing cost of that extra bedroom, you might explain some of that @ $14k/yr./child - but the fact is that many, many blue collar and low income folks, including single moms, raise children on a hell of a lot less than the figure that is commonly referenced as the middle-income cost to raise a child.

(Some of those low income children of single moms even grow up to be President of the United States of America - like Bill Clinton, or Barack Obama - so giving children the very best of everything isn't necessary to see them succeed in life.)

When I was growing up way back in the 70s/80s, we got some presents on our birthday and at Christmas, but not hundreds and hundreds of dollars worth of presents, like many parents feel they are expected to provide these days - with the additional expectation of every new gadget, video game, iTunes download, extensive wardrobes, etc. on an ongoing basis, so your kids can keep up with the Joneses' kids. The pressures to take the kids to Disneyland, have them involved in every kind of lesson, sport, etc. just weren't there in those days - and neither were parents expected to find their entire self-worth and happiness via the process of parenting their children, which much of today's parenting literature and parenting attitudes seem to suggest.

The world didn't revolve around children in that regard until very recently, and I for one don't think all of the changes of the past few decades in this regard are for the better. Sure, it's good that we don't have quite the rigid attitudes toward children that were common in the earlier part of the 20th century - but some of today's attitudes are equally damaging. Our kids (I say 'our' from the perspective that because we all invest in children, whether we have them or not, we all have a stake in their well-being) are to a significant degree overindulged and lacking in moral compass and work ethic - this is an issue that's been discussed here many times via various news stories that evidence the crisis with our youth.

I have nothing against people having children, but in my work I've seen lots of them who aren't doing a very good job of raising them, and in my own life I've seen a lot of parents who aren't very happy even if they seem to be trying very hard to do a good job. I generally keep my mouth shut because it's such a touchy subject with parents - but many of my friends, family, etc. with kids have bitched ad nauseam about the difficulties involved in raising their kids, and most seem a whole lot more stressed out than fulfilled. My child-free friends and I often discuss that the whole 'my kids are my life' mantra that is so prevalent on Facebook seems to be an example of moms and dads trying to convince themselves that all the bullshit and sacrifice and kids who say "I hate you" on a regular basis is really worth it.

I know, I know - I'll never know the greatest joy and accomplishment in life because I don't have a child - what utter judgmental bullshit. The folks I know who chose not to have children, or wanted to but couldn't, experience a range of emotion about that state of being - just as people who have children do.

Obviously from the rates of child neglect, abuse, infanticide in our country, not everybody who has children considers it 'the greatest joy and accomplishment in life'. Maybe, just maybe, if the choice not to have children were more socially acceptable, we'd have less child neglect, abuse and infanticide.

Recent research on the issue of whether children bring happiness to parents is mixed, but one thing that stands out is that fathers express more joy at having children than do mothers, at every age (i.e., age of parent, age of child) - and given the persistent inequity of household and childcare workload in American marriages, this is not surprising. Assuming the same is true in Welsh marriages, it explains why Welsh women are waiting longer to have children, if they have them at all. Children also create great strains in marriages, strains that all too often lead to divorce, which exacerbates the costs - not only financial - of having them.

Dual income, no kids marriages are generally (statistically) happier relationships.

There are over 7 billion of us on this little rock, with population expected to exceed 10 billion by 2050. Let's celebrate the selfish jerks who don't want kids! Let's encourage them to wallow in their weekend lie-ins, their decadent vacations, after-work activities, material indulgences, spoiled pets and freedom from the money pit and emotional vampirism that is child-rearing. It's really, really okay if some people don't want kids.

I'm pretty sure $14,000 (1167/month) per year to raise a child is hardly "lavish." I know what my friends who do have more extravagant lives spend on their children, and its a lot more than that. If you break it down by the very basic elements, based on average numbers available by googling, that cost looks right on target:

- housing: additional cost for an extra bedroom in an average neighborhood (3 BR house = $350K, where a 2-bedroom might be $300K), Mortgage (borrowing 80%) = 1500/month v. 1200/month None of these figures include the additional cost of seeking a home in an area with "better" schools where prices are usually even higher +300 housing

Additional property taxes on a 3BR = 5000/year v. (2BR) 4200/year = + 67 housing (and I'm not counting the proportion of property taxes that go to school funding since everyone pays them)

- food: obviously this changes over time. If a family of four spends $200/week on groceries, its reasonable to assume $50/week on kids = +200 food

- childcare - after school care = 50/day per child (full time child care is a lot more expensive, and so is care for infants) = +200 daycare

- clothing = assuming Old Navy type prices, a modest school appropriate wardrobe and shoes, boots, coats, gloves, hats, one "nice" outfit, parents easily spend 1200/year on clothing = +100 clothing

- fees for public school - nothing is free, not even public education - assume one instrument and playing one sport annually (30/month rental, 30/month sports fees), takes bus = 500/year (40/month), oh and most Pre-K Public school programs are no longer free = +100 school fees

- modest trips and entertainment = +50/month

- increased utility costs for additional person using water and electricity = +50/month

That's hardly a fully inclusive list, and I'm at +1067/month without blinking an eye.

You forgot medical. That's 50 to 100 a month just for insurance assuming you have a decent "family plan" to start. And that doesn't include copays, medicine, hospital visits.......

And your childcare costs are way low but I think you may be spreading out the cost along 18 years. But that still doesn't account for summers. Especially since it's no longer acceptable to leave children unattended even for a minute until they're 14 years old anymore

They are just so sticky. Why are they so sticky? Then they get dirt stuck to the sticky. Then they scream and carry on when you hose them off.

I agree Guin and Crackpot, and then add in some enrichment activities/tutoring and you'll get another $100 plus amount.

If we look at the $14,000 as an average, some will spend less and some more. I recall my younger daughter was dyslexic and the reading specialists in the school weren't a lot of help (they had a lot of kids and treated each one the same way). We eventually engaged a private reading tutor for a year (at a cost of well over $40,000 in the late 90s) and it worked; she just graduated from college and is looking to enter the workforce. Certainly not everyone can afford that, but part of being a parent is having to take on expenses like that when you can. If she didn't have that opportunity, I imagine her life would be quite different. But not all extra expenditures are spent on lavishing them with worthless things.

I know, I know - I'll never know the greatest joy and accomplishment in life because I don't have a child - what utter judgmental bullshit. The folks I know who chose not to have children, or wanted to but couldn't, experience a range of emotion about that state of being - just as people who have children do.

From my experiences with infertility and adoption, I have found that most people who choose not to have children have made the right choice (if only because they give it more thought as the unconventional choice). I wish more people would look at taking on the "yoke" of parenthood in the same way, but sadly I know a lot of people who have had families because of pressure from relatives or society in general and are miserable as parents. Not everyone is cut out to be a parent, and I think people have to be honest with themselves when considering it.

There are lots of people who are 'cut out' to be parents, but just don't want to do it. While I mentioned that I believe more acceptance for the child-free choice would reduce the frequency of child neglect, abuse, etc. - I didn't mean to assert that I believed all people who don't have kids by choice would fall into the bad parent category.

Many of the folks I know personally who haven't had children by choice are actually school teachers, who are fantastic with kids, love kids . . . but just want to do other things with their free time and money than raise kids.

I'm a much adored auntie myself, who loves kids and is loved by them - I have excellent parenting skills developed via years and years of extensive babysitting and step-mothering. I just don't want to have one of my own - not because I'm not 'cut out' to be a parent, but because I don't choose to be a parent. Reproduction is simply not the end-all, be all of a woman's life.

I'm the first to say that a child would be better being aborted than having me as a father. The problem is that too many people are having kids who should not be.

BSG--maybe "cut out to be parents" is a bad choice of phrase, but I do think you should only become a parent if you want to be a parent and are willing to make the choices and sacrifices necessary to be one. If you are not, then you should not be one.

There are many people in children's lives other than parents, and they are needed as well. People who choose not to become parents may well fill these roles superbly. Many who choose not to become parents may also have the means and skills to be great parents had they chosen otherwise, but most I have known have made their choice after much reflection and sole searching. I personally think it would be wonderful if people who choose to become parents went through that same period of discernment, but I think a lot don't--and they are often unhappy in (and sometimes unsuited for) being a parent.

I agree, Big RR. I think a lot of folks become parents because it's the 'natural progression' expected by family members - get married, have kids. In reading on child-free forums, it's sad to see the pressure that is put on some folks to have kids even when they've clearly expressed a desire not to have them.

And yes, it seems like many parents hadn't thought about the extent of cost & commitment required to parent well. It seems like many are starry eyed about cute babies and the attention and approval that initially come with announcing a pregnancy. Then the sleep deprivation associated with feedings, colic, etc. sets in and the bloom is off the rose.

I have great admiration for the job done by good parents - but I also think the contributions made by non-parents who nevertheless participate in the raising & educating of other people's kids are very important, and it makes me sad when I see conversations where those folks' opinions are dismissed with 'you don't know, you don't have kids' type comments. We've all been kids and had some form of parenting to which we were subjected so I think we all have reasonable opinions to share.

Not suggesting that's your attitude, just commenting that it's something I frequently see, and it's very frustrating because folks without children get no pass on paying taxes related to public schools, children's social services, etc. - but their voices are often ignored in school board meetings, etc. which lends to the societal attitude that they are unequal to those who reproduce.

Not suggesting that's your attitude, just commenting that it's something I frequently see, and it's very frustrating because folks without children get no pass on paying taxes related to public schools, children's social services, etc. - but their voices are often ignored in school board meetings, etc. which lends to the societal attitude that they are unequal to those who reproduce.

I've noticed that myself, and it's pretty ridiculous.

TPFKA@W wrote:They are just so sticky. Why are they so sticky? Then they get dirt stuck to the sticky. Then they scream and carry on when you hose them off.

Yeah, I don't get it, either.

Sue--you related to Bull Connor? He liked shooting fire hoses at kids too.