Ask HN: What are the benefits to having children nowadays?
given that, in 2022:
both parents will need to work to fund raising a child, so the mother necessarily has to do 1.5 or 2 full-time jobs
grandparents most likely don't live in the same city so you're reliant on strangers to raise your children
increased risk of autism / ADD / lack of focus because of the internet
the world is already over-populated, and however hard it is for you to compete with your peers, it'll be even harder for your children
etc etc etc (to name but a few)
138 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 210 ms ] threadIt it worth noting, I don't have kids (don't like them, they have no conversation)
It doesn't work out well.
The people in the nursing homes/hospice still are only their to be paid. They don't care about you deep down.
So, things like bedsores are allowed to fester, cancer diagnoses come a bit later than you'd like, loneliness sets it (especially during covid), your diapers aren't changed all that much, you get sent out to the ER even for little things, etc. Your care is, essentially, being chosen by a lawyer and then enacted by a low paid employee who would like a real career where they don't treat old crazy people like babies.
Sure, you can choose a super luxe home to the tune of ~$50k/mo. I had an extended relative that was on a great series of pensions (guaranteed income) and was in a home that was costing ~$25k/mo. They were there for ~15 years. It still didn't go all that well and the family was called in at least twice a week to help out with things. Other people there without family nearby, let alone any at all, didn't fair nearly was well, typically 2-3 years. Then covid hit, and all hell broke loose for everyone.
If you don't have someone watching out for you that really does care for you, you're going to be treated poorly. Especially if you develop any mental problems in your old age.
You don't have to have kiddos, but you do have to have someone out there nearby who really will get out of bed at 3am for the third time this month to come help you when you're blind and demented to physically lift you up and wipe your incontinence off.
But as life slides towards that state, it's amazing how people still find very good reasons to stick around. It's strange to us, but even blind and demented, life is still worth living.
In my little bit on experience, the only thing that makes life not worth living seems to be pain. When we're in a lot of pain, then people tend to opt out of living. But until there is pain, there's still something in life that makes it all worthwhile.
Kids won't always do this. In fact it's possible for kids to be the ones treating you poorly in your old age, and it happens more often than people like to admit.
> You don't have to have kiddos, but you do have to have someone out there nearby who really will get out of bed at 3am for the third time this month to come help you when you're blind and demented to physically lift you up and wipe your incontinence off.
Again, you're making a huge assumption that if you have kids, they will be caring. Maybe you've never seen people whose kids are nasty or simply uncaring, but anybody who has kids is making that gamble.
But if you're the one raising them, you've got a hell of a way to bias that coin flip. Or, to extend the metaphor, mint new coins.
That said, I'll throw in my two cents here because it's as good a place as any. Though I have internal conflict on the whole issue of having children, I have to say that treating them as a means of investment for old age care has two issues - one, it seems kind of like a dick move to them, and two, it's far from guaranteed; they could have their own ideas.
Yes some parents would rather send thier kids to a private school and to be frank, we do, but that is a choice not a requirement.
I don't know any place where the only option for schooling is an expensive private school.
Saying that kids are not financial worth it, then constantly moving the goal posts to create a strawman to justify it is a waste of people's time.
If someone wants to argue that kids with special needs who require private schooling and a fully detached house in Palo Alto are expensive and a stretch to financially justify that is one thing but let's get a clear play field so that the goal posts are not constantly in flux.
Forgoing children is no guarantee of a luxury lifestyle nor grant you a luxury stay during your twilight years.
[bit of an obscure reference there, see "The Safari Park" episode of "The Rise and Fall of Reginald Perrin" http://www.leonardrossiter.com/reginaldperrin/Scripts1.html#... ]
Your perspectives seem incredibly negative and you seem to be super pessimistic about your future & the world's future, so it makes sense for you.
Other people have optimistic perspectives about their own future (making more than enough money in the future, building a social circle and "competing with their peers" ~ not sure what this means & how you're competing with your peers) so it makes sense for them to have children.
Just look on twitter and you'll find loads of 20 year olds making 6 figures out of their college dorms with different kinds of internet products. I saw a thread yesterday from some 19 year old kid who makes $30k a month selling notion templates.
This all is totally possible to do if you're willing to spend 1-2 years learning how to do it. It's even easier to do if you're an engineer (you can rapidly iterate & develop new products)
You have an abundance of FAANG jobs that pay 6 figures and now many of these positions are being offered remotely. You just have to spend 3-4 months learning LeetCode stuff (yes, it's definitely a pain but it 100% beats wasting 2 years on an MBA or something).
Edit:
I'm not talking about everyone in the world. There are definitely billions of people in low-income countries in Africa/Asia who don't have these opportunities unfortunately.
This comment was meant more towards your average HN reader (technical background, living in a rich western nation, etc.) I thought that's who the OP was asking.
I'm not really interested in getting into an argument about whether or not it's possible, since I don't think I'll change your mind and I don't think you'll change mind.
†https://goingdigital.oecd.org/indicator/24
I'm also really really dumb. It's honestly just write a lot of content, make each post 1% better than the last one, and figure out a solid distribution channel.
I've also watched a lot of content on how to grow on other social platforms. Colin and Samir's podcast is amazing for YouTube.
Everyone says the same thing lol. Building an audience online is far more deterministic than people think.
> really smart people who can get a job at faang in less than half a year
Yeah, I didn't mean go from 0 coding knowledge -> Facebook. I meant you're working as a software engineer at a smaller company and want to get a job at FB.
People treat intelligence the same way they do wealth: nobody likes to admit how high they are on the ladder. You say you're dumb despite being obviously intelligent. I've met lots of very wealthy people (multiple houses, fancy vacations, etc) who claim they're not rich. If you're dumb, what do you call people who are significantly less intelligent than you? Is there even a word for such a level of profound lack in mental abilities? I'm glad your business is successful but you are definitely an outlier in terms of identifying and executing on ideas, not nearly the norm.
> Yeah, I didn't mean go from 0 coding knowledge -> Facebook. I meant you're working as a software engineer at a smaller company and want to get a job at FB.
That's also not trivial. Very intelligent people get rejected from FAANG companies all the time. If getting a FAANG job is anywhere near easy for you then that only emphasizes how out of touch you are with regular people, or how much you're intentionally downplaying your own intelligence. In a word, utopian, because the vast majority of people are not remotely capable of getting into a FAANG or starting a 7-figure business
And, apart from that, your
“ I'm less interested in parents trying to rationalize what deep down they know was a bad decision, the perpetual "oh but I'd do it all over again" thing when clearly their life is a lot of worse and they're full of regret.”
is very judgmental.
One can be happy in the midst of hardship, difficulty and pain.
One does not have a child because “it is a benefit”. Unless one just sees life as a costly game.
What books, ideas, authors and thinkers would you tune into to challenge that? For example, would you even consider Steven Pinker's Enlightenment Now to challenge some of those premises?
Society needs a new influx of kids all the time to replace those leaving or those looking after those soon to be leaving, so we have a biological drive to procreate like any other animal. Our use of technology and other knowledge to improve our survival rates has led to an over-population/resource-overuse issue, but that is a different discussion.
Our mental development means that we have other drives which can override the biological signals that tell us to procreate (or lead us to enjoy practise sessions and accidentally do the real thing!), or reduce the risk of unintended procreation, so unlike pretty much all the other life forms on the planet we don't have to.
If you don't want to, don't. Though if you have a partner who wants to, then things get more complicated, perhaps you are (no longer) well suited as partners?
I find that hard to fit into either of what I find your very unpleasant framings of the question:
> What are the benefits to having children nowadays?
> why one should choose to procreate nowadays
p.s. I'm 51. I don't have children - I've never felt the desire to, but figure I will have kids one day if I want to. I've always thought it would be better for kids if their parents felt like they wanted kids!
Why do you find these questions unpleasant? Do you find it unpleasant to analyze the benefits of other life-changing, irrevocable decisions?
Deep down, you don't want children. If you figure out the reason why and cut through your social-programming, then you'll have them.
Otherwise, thanks for playing!
That doesn't make it wrong to ask why others make a different decision. Should seeking empathy not be applauded?
Yes, the question does imply, almost aggressively so, a certain bias, but perhaps it would be better if you were not to discourage the desire to understand by unnecessarily responding in kind.
[FWIW: I also have no intention of procreating, but I understand at least some of the reasons that many take the opposing view]
Because "I don't agree so you point of view is objectively wrong and I don't care to try understand it" is a far worse attitude?
> The value of having children and the value of having empathy are grounded in the same traditional morality
I can't say I agree with that at all. Apart from the superficial (they are both traditional/old ideals) what do you think is their common source?
To say we can't keep one old ideal because we question another seems unhelpfuly dogmatic, unless I'm missing some subtlety, and demonstrably wrong: large parts of society have moved away from some traditional ideals without having to abandon all others.
1. Spend some time with someone who lives with a cat and loves it. Watch them interacting with cats and have them teach you how to communicate with cats, play with them and understand them and be understood by them. Hopefully this will get rid of preconceived notions of what cats are like and teach you, vicariously, the joys of cat companionship.
2. Ask to look after a friend's cat that you are OK with for 2-3 weeks, while they go on holiday etc. Have the cat move in with you for that time period and try to make friends. You will probably have a decent idea then if living with a cat will make your life better or not.
Now, of course, they would also make you aware of the downsides. It is difficult to travel, especially during busy periods like Christmas, as you have to find someone to look after the cat. They make wake you up at night or scratch you at times. Looking after them and playing with them is an additional time commitment. Unfortunately, chances are you will outlive them. But they would also inform you of the benefits (that you would've experienced when living with a cat for 3 weeks) and let you decide if the benefits outweigh the costs for you: cats are funny, furry independent creatures; they warm the soul. Etc. etc.
So why does it not work the same way with children? "Look after a friends' children for 3 weeks while their parents go on holidays, and you will experience the joys and know if they outweigh the negatives" seems to never be mentioned.
What about people who turn down sex when they know the other party can't have kids?
This is as strongly biased as the original question, suggesting that not wanting kids is wrong and something that they should perhaps seek to correct.
I'm pretty definitely secure in the feeling that I don't want my own kids or to raise someone else's. I don't consider others wrong for wanting descendents for whatever reason they do¹, while they sometimes take issue with my lack of desire in the matter. And being male I have it easier: not wanting a family seems more acceptable for us, were some female friends of mine are regularly nagged about it and even sometimes called selfish⁴. The “selfish” insult has always bemused me: we aren't begrudging the taxes that go into services to help parents and educate children, so we are net creators of resource rather than selfishly taking that which someone else might need/want.
----
[1] Though I question some more specifically: those taking on the responsibility² when they are not really ready or well resourced for it³
[2] I'm only considering those who plan parenthood here, or those who knowingly take actions that might result in it, not those who find themselves in that situation because of circumstances beyond their control
[3] Particularly those that already have families they struggle to support and intentionally have more
[4] Amongst other insults.
People who don’t have kids have low regret rates not having them. People who do have them either won’t share their regret having had them, or genuinely enjoy the experience. Do what you think is best for you, and own the decision once made.
Sabine Hossenfelder: Is Elon Musk right in saying that we are too few people? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI1AaZ9OkH8
So that's my "answer": You created a baseless hypothetical. The hypothetical itself is the problem here, not the concept of kids. Nobody can name benefits that outweigh the "costs" here because the costs are complete fiction and designed to be insurmountable.
In this case the OP made a bunch of claims which they cannot support, and then wants people to defend those claims/find counter-benefits to offset them. They've essentially pinned the discussion so that it wastes a bunch of time, and so their preconceived notions cannot be undercut.
If people want to have a good faith discussion about the positive/negatives, then that is certainly possible, but OP poisoned the well, so it is unlikely to be possible here.
Doesn't need to be true. A woman can take a year off or so to breastfeed and recover from the birth, at that point you can send the kid to daycare and split the child care duties. In my house my wife prefers the child care stuff so I pitch in by doing most of the other household chores, but since my daughter was 1 I've changed as many diapers as she has. Really she doesn't have to work, but she didn't like staying home with the kid and the household budget we would have to meet for that to work out.
> grandparents most likely don't live in the same city so you're reliant on strangers to raise your children
This part sucks, I agree.
> increased risk of autism / ADD / lack of focus because of the internet
You choose what your children get to do in their free time. It's really easy to sit them down with a tablet and walk away, but nobody is forcing you to do it. There is an old saying, "You can be friends with your children when they are 14 or when they are 40, not both."
> the world is already over-populated, and however hard it is for you to compete with your peers, it'll be even harder for your children
It isn't overpopulated with people like your children will grow up to be. Children in the west benefit from public health measures and educational opportunities that will potentially enable them to be net contributors to solutions for overpopulation. The world can't be overpopulated with geniuses, with enough of them we can make new worlds.
Yes but given that unintelligent people are multiplying themselves at a much faster rate than intelligent people, do you really think your one or two intelligent children will have much of an impact on the world? It's wishful thinking.
A friend recently taught me:
If you raise your children you can spoil your grandchildren. If you spoil your children you will raise your grandchildren.
- Family time is enjoyable, certainly helps cut down social media addiction and replace it with something meaningful (unless your perspective is that you'll die anyway so nothign is meaningful, but then you have other issues).
- Having kids forces me to push myself to be better, control my emotions, be a role model that inspires my kids. Without kids, I would find it harder to have such a clear drive to consistently be the best of myself every day.
- Kids are not independent. A priority that tops everything else shifts your perspective from you being at the center of your world to something else. That something else is fragile, needs care. That helps bring focus, consistency and growth to everyday life.
- Helping someone discover new things brings me joy. I can do that almost every week with my kids and I love it.
Does that make it a good choice in terms of cost/benefits? Depends who you are and how you see your life I guess?
Edit: reading another comment - the list about is indeed a descriptions of the symptoms of what it takes to bring joy and happiness to a new counsciousness in this world. I like the perspective of that other comment and wanted to highlight it too.
Except that it's factually the opposite: numbers of children per family are declining, and that's especially the case in places with strong social safety nets because descendants are no longer the best form of old age insurance.
Humanity is becoming even more consistently k-strategist.
One could argue that it doesn’t make any sense to have children. It is more work, costs more money, and can cause more stress at times.
But people still do it. People still say it is worth it.
I for one never thought I would have children, but I cannot imagine my life without them.
Well I can’t give you any reason why you should have children, but my life isn’t in any way worse for having a child, and while I certainly have regrets in life, my son isn’t one of them. Ymmv.
Your partner may want it, your parents may want it, no circumstances change the biological need to procreate.
Also, people do it during war, during draught, during ice age and on falling planes. You doomers aren't living in the end times. This isn't even close.
I'd like to hear more about this one.
I’m not sure this is true. Most modern economies in the world have a declining birth rate.
My perspective on children has changed recently. We need more people and in the world to solve the problems that we’ve created. We don’t know if life exists outside of the earth and I want living things to thrive, and for that to be the case, I think we need more people.
unhinged degrowth ideology
+ Being a parent is fun. Kids are super funny. Teaching them stuff is a treat, and seeing their interests emerge is a wonderful feeling. Assuming you love your spouse, you get to see this chimera of the best parts of you and your partner walking around in the world.
+ Kids are also familial and social glue. Even if you live a ways from parents, it's an easy excuse to stay in touch, a place to plan trips. One of the crazy things that as your kids grow they look and sound like different relatives. It's a cool experience.
+ Selfishly, it's nice knowing you'll have some influence on the world, no matter how small, after you pass.
I'm know some childless billionaires and honestly I wouldn't trade the decade-long headstart I've had with my daughter and her brother for all their worldly fun. Everything people say about parenting being the best thing you'll ever do is right – and they're underselling it.
FWIW, I understand the cynicism. You seem like someone who has suffered through tough times. I hope you find peace.
Fuck Cancer.
...or maybe... there is something beyond a life of self-indulgence after all? Maybe the sacrifice in time - which is the largest sacrifice, all that money-talk is secondary in my opinion - is worth the gains? You might have to skip a few festivals and you might not always have the latest iGadget but you will not miss these because you have far more interesting and challenging prospects, namely the raising of the next generation.
Honesty goes the furthest, whether in asking or in answering questions.
It is totally possible to have a fulfilling life without children. My wife and I (both in our mid-30s) do it! Volunteering, exploring the world, good times with friends, tinkering, planting, side projects...