Research shows that people that have children are unhappier than those without

[Els]

I commented because you expressed what seemed like fear of humans going extinct and being glad that some people were willing to reproduce, which struck me

 

I have no fear of humans going extinct due to lack of reproducing any time in the near future, nor have I said anything to the effect. You are taking one sentence way out of context and way too seriously.

[Els]

really?

 

Nah! Having kids is like the one key thing that should show you how unimportant collecting money and all the other BS they tell you you need on the television or shiny billboards.

 

Food on the table and a roof over your head and you can be blissfully happy and endlessly fulfilled with your family. But the same ain't true for the 40 year old guy living all alone, he's the one that needs resources, shiney cars, designer labels. He's the one that has a gap to fill!

 

I think that there are many ways in which someone's life can have meaning, of which raising children are only one. Isaac Newton, for instance, had no children or wife, but one certainly cannot say his life had no meaning.

 

I don't really understand the purpose of 'taking sides' on this. I wish people could accept that different people just need different things for happiness and meaning. The study is probably just an indicator that unfortunately some people get pressured into doing the wrong thing for them.

[xxoo]

Most of the studies referred to within the article find no difference in happiness between parents and non parents.

 

More interesting may be what DOES affect happiness, because having kids doesn't seem to be a major factor.

[xxoo]

I don't need no fancy scientist with letters after his name to tell me that the happiest folk in life are the ones that don't need a research paper to tell them whether they're happy or not!

 

This is true. No one needs a researcher to tell them if they are happy or not.

 

Still, the researchers could find out what makes the difference between a happy and unhappy parent, or a happy and unhappy non-parent, as happy and unhappy people clearly exist in both groups.

[Shepp]

Still, the researchers could find out what makes the difference between a happy and unhappy parent, or a happy and unhappy non-parent, as happy and unhappy people clearly exist in both groups.

..and always will!

That's just life some folk won't be happy with the choices they make or the hands they are dealt. Some folk are born to see the negatives in their situation. Some folks are pessimists, some will always think the grass is greener, and some will be unlucky.

 

 

But y'know I don't see the purpose in a lot of these kinda studies! I just don't get it. Why people are so concerned about other peoples lives! Need to get on with living their own!

[Rejected Rosebud]

What does it even mean to "be happy"??? If you are experiencing your life to the fullest and challenging yourself and learning from your successes and failures is that happiness, or is being able to lay on the couch eating cookies and watching movies all day with no cares in the world happiness??

[truncated]

Happiness is such a subjective term that studies like these don't really have much meaning.

 

Ask a parent on a day when their child has been a one person wrecking crew, and they may feel unhappy. Ask that same person when their little on is snuggled up on their lap and they are singing them to sleep after having gotten a big hug and a whisper of ' I love you mommy', and they may report that they are very happy.

 

Ask a childless person who is on vacation and able to schedule their time as they see fit if they are happy, they may say they are. Ask that same person if they are happy when things aren't going so well, and they may report being unhappy.

 

 

The only thing that studies like this ever seem to do is to create polarity, with both sides smugly saying " I'm happier than you because I'm just so wonderful while you are not"

[Art_Critic]

Not being a parent and measuring happiness uses and expends zero energy, having and raising a child is one of the hardest things I've ever done as an adult and certainly consumes your time, money and identity.. but all the effort.. and by effort I mean hours and hours a day are spent parenting as well as responsibility don't happen without reward..

 

Being a parent is also the most rewarding and emotionally connected things I have ever done in my life, it has also brought my wife and I closer..

 

Define happiness... when I was single I was happy but lonely, I was also fulfilled, my social life and work life were varied but fulfilling...

Being married and having a child I am happy but not lonely and there is someone to talk to every second of the day.. I'm also very happy and fulfilled.

 

I'm probably one of the luckiest and happiest Dad's there are..my Son is incredible and my Wife is beautiful, sexy and incredible and turns my crank.

 

Since this thread isn't about parenting I won't go into all the cool things that makes my life happy but just finish out by saying that I was happy both in being single and in being married with child and certainly think having kids rates up there...

[autumnnight]

I'll say this. I've about had enough of pompous windbags telling others how many kids they should or shouldn't have.

[casey.lives]

children take you away from being overly preoccupied with yourself.. and they bring back play to your life. how can a parent not be happy??!! The internet is one big lie

[kilgore]

children take you away from being overly preoccupied with yourself.. and they bring back play to your life. how can a parent not be happy??!! The internet is one big lie

 

Yes that is true but only if you want to be a parent

[lollipopspot]

I'll say this. I've about had enough of pompous windbags telling others how many kids they should or shouldn't have.

 

I don't think general opinions tend to influence how many children someone else has. I very often see people - especially conservatives - commenting about having to pay for children with taxpayer money if the parents are nearly destitute yet keep producing children. But I don't think that has particularly kept people from producing children.

 

I'm not so worried about public support - although poverty often goes hand in hand with other things that are very bad for children - but I myself do appreciate it when people care enough about the environment and the present and future children who will inhabit the earth to think about how population size will impact it and them. That seems most compassionate to me to consider that when planning families. But I also don't think most people are overly influenced by concern for the environment and children who aren't their own when they have children. Nuclear families tend to be insular and clannish, and thinking about the planet is something different (even if their own children have to inhabit it - the future seems far off).

Edited September 6, 2015 by lollipopspot

[joseb]

I think it is super important that people only have kids if they REALLY want them, not because they feel pressured to have them.

 

This.

 

Make your decision and own it.

 

No need to go trawling for proof that you are "right".

 

What is important is that you do what is right for you.

[Lady2163]

This reminds me of the old lawyer/courtroom joke:

 

Lawyer: Answer yes or no, Mr. Doe. Did you stop beating your wife last night?

 

There's no good answer to that question and I think even with the anonymity of the Internet, few people would admit to being happier if the hadn't had children.

 

I've been surrounded by single mothers for many years. Some have remarried, only to divorce again. All of them have ex-husbands who are 4-6 days a month dads. They have their children every other weekend. One woman essentially bankrupted her ex forcing him to sign away parental rights. Her kids are now grown, but unhappy young adults. They spent their childhood listening to their mother say repeatedly, "I just need a break from these kids."

 

With divorce rates high and single parents prevalent, I think you will get a lot of unhappy results. They may love their kids, but probably planned on a two parent household when the children were conceived and born.

 

I never had my own kids. I've had foster kids and been involved with boyfriends kids, and I genuinely enjoyed them and cared about them.

 

But I am deliriously happy without kids in my life. I have zero regrets that I never had any of my own. My life is fulfilled by friendships and the warm relationship I have with my mother.

 

I am super, uber responsible in my work and home life. Yet, I am still in touch with my inner child. I'm a child of the 70s and 80s, I love a good video game!

Edited September 6, 2015 by Lady2163

[Got it]

There are multiple studies on happiness and child rearing and the impact on couples as well as the impact on the marriage itself. I would advise reading more than the one article if one is interested in this topic.

 

Obviously a very complex topic and ultimately there is no one real conclusion from all the studies as they contradict each other. It does come down to the individuals, the communication of the couple, the happiness of the marriage, and other factors.

 

All very interesting but not quite as clear cut as stated in the OP post.

[Imported]

I think research shows that people that search the internet looking for studies to rationalize the path they think they're stuck on as being "better" are probably not happy with life.

[Revolver]

It just seems these days a lot of kids are simply a product of short term casual flings.

[autumnnight]

I don't think general opinions tend to influence how many children someone else has. I very often see people - especially conservatives - commenting about having to pay for children with taxpayer money if the parents are nearly destitute yet keep producing children. But I don't think that has particularly kept people from producing children.

 

I'm not so worried about public support - although poverty often goes hand in hand with other things that are very bad for children - but I myself do appreciate it when people care enough about the environment and the present and future children who will inhabit the earth to think about how population size will impact it and them. That seems most compassionate to me to consider that when planning families. But I also don't think most people are overly influenced by concern for the environment and children who aren't their own when they have children. Nuclear families tend to be insular and clannish, and thinking about the planet is something different (even if their own children have to inhabit it - the future seems far off).

 

 

This is what I mean. It is wordy and smooth sounding, but it is still condescension, superiority, and disdain wrapped in a lot of words.

[autumnnight]

I think research shows that people that search the internet looking for studies to rationalize the path they think they're stuck on as being "better" are probably not happy with life.

 

 

Bazinga and a big amen.

[thefooloftheyear]

Im generally a cranky and ornery person, except for when I am with my kid...She is everything to me , brings me great joy and pride, and I love the hell out of her...

 

They do bring happiness and I don't know any parent that would say otherwise..

 

As far as the environmental impact that some have brought up....well, isn't it ironic that most childless people are always surrounded by a menagerie of animals??....I guess they don't have a carbon footprint???....

 

TFY

[hotpotato]

I dont think not have kids is bad.

 

I can't have any biological kids, aaand I'll be fine. A lot of parents don't like their kids. A lot of people have kids for selfish reasons, not out of love.

I saw my mom struggle as a single parent, and I'd never want that.

[joseb]

As far as the environmental impact that some have brought up....well, isn't it ironic that most childless people are always surrounded by a menagerie of animals??....I guess they don't have a carbon footprint???....

 

TFY

 

Regarding the carbon footprint, even if someone without kids did everything possible to Maximise their footprint, it would still dwarf that of someone having kids due to the ongoing effects of future generations.

 

Think of someone in the 12th century, probably tiny footprint himself, but the cumulative one from all the generations is massive.

[lollipopspot]

This is what I mean. It is wordy and smooth sounding, but it is still condescension, superiority, and disdain wrapped in a lot of words.

 

Hey lady, you go on the attack when someone expresses an opinion you don't agree with, and I responded as carefully as I could to your passive aggressiveness.

 

I think it's compassionate to care about the environment that current and future kids will have to inhabit. I don't think it's compassionate to them to dismiss that. Caring about the environment and stating a simple truth about overpopulation seems to rile you up.

 

well, isn't it ironic that most childless people are always surrounded by a menagerie of animals??....I guess they don't have a carbon footprint???....

 

Unless someone is breeding animals, which I hope not and I would be critical of for different reasons, most childless people I know rescue animals when they choose to have them. The animals already exist. And they get them spayed and neutered so as to not produce more. That would be akin to adopting human children.

 

I don't see any irony there. But the carbon footprint of a cat is obviously vastly less than that of a human regardless.

 

I'm certainly not saying that no one should have children. But I am saying that we should look at the impact of population (that is, if we actually care about the future of the children that we're bringing onto the planet).

[truncated]

Hey lady, you go on the attack when someone expresses an opinion you don't agree with, and I responded as carefully as I could to your passive aggressiveness.

 

I think it's compassionate to care about the environment that current and future kids will have to inhabit. I don't think it's compassionate to them to dismiss that. Caring about the environment and stating a simple truth about overpopulation seems to rile you up.

 

 

 

Unless someone is breeding animals, which I hope not and I would be critical of for different reasons, most childless people I know rescue animals when they choose to have them. The animals already exist. And they get them spayed and neutered so as to not produce more. That would be akin to adopting human children.

 

I don't see any irony there. But the carbon footprint of a cat is obviously vastly less than that of a human regardless.

 

I'm certainly not saying that no one should have children. But I am saying that we should look at the impact of population (that is, if we actually care about the future of the children that we're bringing onto the planet).

 

I see where you are coming from, but this really sounds like a case where the saying 'before removing the mote form thy neighbor's eye, attend to the beam in thine own".

 

Everyone impacts the environment, some more than others. There are childless people out there who drive huge vehicles, own a lot of gas powered "toys " like motorcycles, off road vehicles, etc., take multiple trips by plane a year, own huge amounts of electronic equipment, overwaters thei lawn of their "Mcmansion" , buys a lot of designer shoes and outfits, etc., etc., etc.

 

Their carbon footprint is larger than someone who may have children but owns a small car, uses solar and wind to generate their electricity, is careful about their food choices and knows where their food comes form, buys locally produced goods, and doesn't fly many times a year.

 

It's hard to generalize, but there is a smugness sometimes in some people ( not saying you) who go on about their 'low carbon footprint" while happily scarfing down their Tim's and getting into their SUV.

 

What ever way you look at it, today's kids will be the stewards to tomorrow's world, and with any luck, some of them may be able to find solutions to the problems caused by the previous generations.

[Robert]

****Moderators Note****

 

Let's keep the posts topical and not insulting, the topic if you need help is in the first post of this thread and cannot expand to the carbon footprint of animals or humans as that is off topic, thanks