Gaia: Child-Free

Re: Child-Free

http://tashadanner.gaia.com — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:53:02 GMT

I am so glad to have found this group. I am child-free by choice and luckily, so are a lot of my friends, so I never feel pressured or ostrasized for this choice-we, in fact celebrate it!

All of the above are so true. I wish that politicians would speak more of the issue of overpopulation and encourage, not force, people to choose limiting their off-spring! I am so much happier knowing my life is open and free and I can choose any direction, without the limitations that children put on that. I am also happy to know I am not adding to the strain on the earth's resources by adding another human to this overcrowded and overtaxed world!

Thank you,
Tasha

Child-Free

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 01:57:19 GMT

Being child-free is not only good for the entire planet, but it's good for the individual. Child-free couples are known to have happier marriages, and, naturally, they're able, as are single child-free people, to live more fulfilling lives. Most are not born to the job of child-rearing, and few truly have a calling to care-take. The pressures of culture, family, and the desire to conform, plus the incessant media assaults making people feel they "must" breed, cause - along with irresponsible mistake-making - many to have children they either do not truly want or cannot afford to care for. The human overpopulation crisis is continuing to cause the needless suffering and deaths of countless unwanted children all over the world. Still, and sadly, for our planet, and for the millions of suffering chilrdren, people - as technically advanced as we are now - lack the necessary mental equipment to put two and two together on this most vital issue. Still, we act like complete primitives on this, and on other issues, like warfare, like universalism. Sad, isn't it?

Child-Free Logo !

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:00:17 GMT

Re: Vasectomies are the best

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 17:33:21 GMT

I'm sure you are popular too, with girls like me who prefer guys who care enough about the planet to want to be child-free!
Very hip!

Vegan Vegetarian Food for Thought Podcast

Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:01:45 GMT

Anyone who is Vegan, or considering becoming one, is welcome to join The Vegetarian Food for Thought discussion pod which is based on vegan chef and animal rights advocate Colleen Patrick-Goudreau's popular podcast of the same name.

The Vegetarian Food for Thought podcast "offers a unique perspective that leaves listeners feeling supported, motivated, and inspired. Celebrating a way of life that encompasses compassion for everyone, this podcast addresses all aspects of eating a compassionate, healthful, whole foods, plant-based diet and advocates a sustainable food system that supports organic, local, seasonal fare. Each episode addresses commonly asked questions about being vegetarian/vegan, including those regarding animal rights, food, cooking, nutrition, and debunks the myths surrounding these issues."

"Colleen Patrick-Goudreau's Compassionate Cooks website "is dedicated to empowering people to make informed food choices and to debunking myths about vegetarianism and animal rights through cooking classes, podcasts, workshops and lectures, articles and essays, and cooking DVDs."

Vasectomies are the best

http://surfer.gaia.com — Sat, 19 May 2007 16:12:05 GMT

since i got my vasectomy i've been really happy.
no worries.
it was easy and quick and i was back at the job the next day.
only one aspirin did fine.
i won't ever have to worry about getting someone pregnant or doing child support.
if i wanted to i'd adopt and i can support kids by giving to charities.

on staying child-free: herbal contraception

http://bellydot.gaia.com — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 09:35:36 GMT

does anyone have the scoop on herbal contraception? i've been sniffing around the web and have read that neem oil makes an excellent contraceptive, for both men and women. i haven't found any information regarding dosages, availablity, etc. any and all relevant information is welcome with arms wide open. we need all the options we can get.

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://622622.gaia.com — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 22:11:11 GMT

i speak only from experience. i believe some of what i read anywhere and little of what hear everywhere. if i wasn't there i'm not sure it actually happened. from my perspective, we're all responsible for ourselves and what we believe in is part of our karma.

i was adopted at infancy by my mother and father and from 7 on raised by my single mother. my brother adopted a few years older than me could not handle this world, and the fact that his bio mom was a coke addict, and he too disappeared into the drug abyss. none of this shit is easy. even the unconditional love of mom. that's difficult too. however, my reality is that 38 years ago, a very special young girl adopted two american refugees and did the best she could. these facts have been re-occuring issues all throughout my life, and yet here i am following the same path illuminated by moms compassion.

i said it before and i'll say it again. the statistics of who is here or anywhere from how and why is meaningless to me. i believe in peaceful diect action and since i personally don't feel the need to father more children, i've chosen to be brother to the world and adopt. i transcend "be fruitful and multiply" every moment of my life to a place where exisiting suffering is reduced. humble as it may be, this is my approach.

i honor those who have chosen similar paths and have had similar experiences. i know many. for better or worse, in our inter-connected environment, i thank you all, as one that survived the transitions. at the same time i won't disparage anyone else's life choices. from a sufers eye, this is wave selection. again for better or worse.

i believe in oceans message. i've lived it. it's a path that chose me and i send her energy everyday when i pray. i feel these are life enriching values.

i hope i have not offended anyone with my views, they are mine.

aloha,
vince

Oprah Show on Happiness Lists Child-Rearing at the Bottom

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:36:07 GMT

Oprah Show on Happiness Lists Child-Rearing at the Bottom

This week, in a study on happiness showcased on Oprah, child-rearing was listed way down with house-cleaning on a list of what makes people happy.
If you've ever watched a mother or better - followed her through a single day with first an infant, then a baby, then a toddler, then at the drive to school and to dance lessons era, then the pre-teen age, and then, at the dastardly teen times, then you'll know that parenting is not fun - far from it - it's a very difficult and on-going chore than most people are simply not up to performing consistently, patiently, and economically.

This is great news for kids who are growing up now, so that they can take a look before they plunge into the breeding frenzy, "mindless fecundity-(Margaret Mead, my personal heroine), and lonely, poverty-ridden single-parenting that most who have kids end up in.

Adopting rather than birth-parenting is far more noble and will save our planet, along with our activism to create widespread popularity for being child-free and for birth control all over the world!

Meanwhile, more funds need to be alloted to make sure that the kids still languishing in our own orphanages and in the welfare system and fostering get better educations, and most of all - emotional counseling - and that we all consider them our own children - they are, after all, wards of our states in America, and should be viewed as all our kids.

Not many are qualified to parent, and too few actually will adopt the special needs kids but we can all lobby for their benefit, so keep it in mind when you call your representatives and call and inquire about platforms before you cast your votes - it helps to voice your concerns!

Oprah Show on Happiness Lists Child-Rearing at the Bottom

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:35:02 GMT

Why Choose to Be Child-Free In Order to Save Children's Lives

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:35:10 GMT

This is from another thread here, and since someone had obviously not read all the posts I'm highlighting this for all to easily see why having one child in a developed nation is so much more oppressive to the planet than a child in a less-developed nation is:

We need to MORE responsible than the third world

Happi Ness said Jan 26, 4:03 PM:

A woman on the upper east side of New York or in Malibu ... has a child. That child will have between eight hundred and a thousand times more negative impact on the environment of the Earth than a child born to a woman in Bangledesh. Where do we preach birth control? Bangledesh. (Terrance McKenna).

In the days to come we need to be compassionate to all with understanding. We also need to be aware of the facts at hand.

More than understanding and intention: we need action- from all of us, that includes you and me. I'm up for the challenge.

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:19:20 GMT

I just had to remove two postings that were off the subjects by two people who had viciously attacked the Child-Free position and been crude as well as rude.
People who are of certain religious and /or ethnic backgrounds have real problems with people who decide to be Child-Free, and as long as they are polite they are tolerated.

Back to the subject - It's great for us Child-Free people that even on Oprah yesterday on a study about happiness, child-rearing came in at the bottom of things that make people happy - meaning what we've known all along - child-rearing is a drudgery that most people are simply not either interested in doing well or even unfit to do by temperament or by the way they choose to live their lives.
As we've been saying all along - parents are heroes - I mean the ones who consciously choose, prepare, and commit to doing the very best job of completely giving their entire lives over to parenting, that is - since that's the only way to do it as well as the life of any child deserves - and few of us are cut out to do this type of on-going service to someone we've never even met and with whom we might have personality clashes at best.
Following one's heart means that some, like one of my own siblings, always dreamed of parenting and grew up to do a great job with the child who was part of a life-long goal, even without a stable marriage to help along the way.

Many people who choose to parent - or, by default have become parents through an accidental pregnancy, are, possibly like the ones who were rude on this thread, bitter about others who have chosen not to have kids.
Misery does love company, and envy must play a part in some of the anger that this subject provokes in some people.
Our sympathy for them aside, we hope that those who think first about their life choices will, if they choose to parent someday, become conscious parents and will own their decisions to be happy about whatever child comes into her or his life.

Meanwhile, back to the thread - more and more people are choosing to be child-free, and the fact that even celebrities are choosing to adopt instead of bearing is a great thing!

Let's all give our support and respect to those who adopt and to those who choose to be child-free, as well as to those who have become parents and are doing a great job of it!

After all, giving up so much in life is a real feat, and is not for everyone, so let's all give our own parents a "thank you!" just for putting up with us and not leaving us behind! (if they have, that is - otherwise, let's find it in our hearts to forgive them - after all, they might really have wanted a better life for us.)

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 03:28:36 GMT

OK, Anthony, your arguments bolster your own concerns, and yet they make no sense to me.

You enjoy citing things and patronizing me, along with antagonizing everything I say to speak up for the helpless victims.

There are experts who can speak of the logistics of the whole enterprise and I'll list some authors and books in the next few days.

You enjoy taking the skeptical view that purports to be realistic and yet is negative in the extreme.

I am advocating something new in the long and tragic story of humanity - being child-free and/or adopting.

In learning to educate people to find better ways to live we will improve life for everyone on the planet as we understand that only a very few are truly drawn to parenting, and that the needs people hope to fill by procreating are much better met by other pursuits.

Even on Oprah today, an investigation into happiness listed, as I'd mentioned earlier, that child-rearing is very low on the list of things that make most people happy - right down there with house-cleaning.

It seems you might have a gender bias or some other reason for wanting women to breed.
The old keeping them barefoot and pregnant mandate has truly kept women out of the world arenas - until now.
Still, females haven't quite grasped that now we can enjoy the same freedoms that men have always had, and can feel good about ourselves while doing so.
For now, so many biases still prevail as traditions wear slowly away forcing women into servile and home-making, child-rearing roles, that we're still struggling to assert the fact that we are enough in and by ourselves, or with a romantic partner, and that three is a crowd.

I wrote above about religions - I never said they were "opposed" to adoption - I wrote that they often only see it as a last resort - and none of them has come out yet in favor of adoption over breeding - and that is what would morally and realistically, let alone by compassion - be the right thing for them to promote, and too often they issue imperatives that promote procreating as some sort of divine mission.
The world has long outgrown - literally - being able to bear so many humans and is groaning in death-throes over our sheer numbers, let alone our waste products.
It's time for a new model to promote that will give individuals true freedom and will heal the planet at the same time we save infants and children by adopting.
That's what I want to popularize.

It's great that you've brought out the prejudices that cling to our choices still today, and I appreciate your postings for that reason - you argue from the viewpoint of the old biases we need to grow past.

Re-read your own postings and see how I concluded that you are racist on this issue - we were speaking of children being born and you advocate not adopting, saying that races would die out or be merged rather than remaining separate, essentially.
Since it's no longer used in our society, and yet it's the only way to make sense of this discussion, race must be mentioned. Ethnicity and cultures mean something else entirely, and yet we're mainly confined to the more polite terms when discussing these sensitive issues.
The cultural thing I answered too - put the artifacts into museums and protect our heritages that way as we progress.
I love all races and all cultures, and find the idea of adopting from other socieites wonderful.
It's noble to bring underprivilaged kids to a world where they can prosper, and very cruel to have children while others are starving who could be adopted.

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://AnthonyODonnell.gaia.com — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:25:51 GMT

Where did I miss the bit about which religions were opposed to adoption? How is it racist to prefer one culture over another? I'd rather live under a government that supported the principles of modern Delhi than those of the Jim Crow South, wouldn't you? I don't favor one race winning over another, but I do favor some cultures over others. Specifically I favor liberal democracy over various kinds of despotism and collectivism. If you're OK with those, then I have nothing to say to you. Oh, and by the way, I'm an immigrant. If we have places in the world where there is very strong prosperity and freedom, that could be jeopardized by a large influx of people from places where the values and education that enable that aren't in place. We happen to be enormously blessed by the time and place we live in. If you think that's automatic and can't be affected by migration patterns, you're living in a fool's paradise. Someone who advocates the cessation of reproduction does so irresponsibly if he or she isn't familiar with the concept of population replacement and the rates of reproduction it requires. Zero population growth is one thing, population decline is another. You're not advocating anything realistic. You haven't accounted for a variety of demographic concerns. You like the idea of "child-free" based on your concern about global overpopulation. Fine. But you're saying that people shouldn't have children because there are children elsewhere who aren't provided for. Well, then, how are we to get them here in sufficient numbers. If you were to say "We should reproduce less and adopt more," that would be reasonable. To say we shouldn't reproduce ignores demographic realities.

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 01:33:58 GMT

I have answered your questions adequately, and yet you have your own agenda.

To further discuss it, here we go -

Your two subjects are these - you want to keep breeding and you want to keep immigrants out.

Your premise is a racist one to begin with.

I do not adhere to the elitist or racist idea that you hold, which is that one culture or another is more worthy.

I'm comfortable with the evolutionary flow of cultures combining by immigration, (however I am concerned about the jobs, the education, and so on as they affect the previous populations and do have solutions to that huge issue in hand and we can address these issues on another thread.)

The thing is this - there are right now ten times too many humans on our planet for it to sustain us comfortably, and the effects are already catastrophic.

I never used the phrase "replacement population" that you keep speaking about - it is your idea and your concern.

Your premise is that since the more developed countries are naturally tending toward zero population growth - that is, people with choices choose most often to have less or no children - and only the lesser developed nations continue to churn out children, that there should be some sort of breeding race to see which ethnic group "wins".

We'd all lose in the end.
We're all losing now.
Human overpopulation is continuing and will until we who can - the more developed nations - step up and assist in educating everyone on the perils of overpopulation, give the people tools to improve their immediate situations, find ways to get birth control into every home and school and church, and all work together on the world's problems.

Some - perhaps you - wish to defend the fact that they've already had children - others - perhaps you - wish to defend their religious or ethnic ideas on procreation.

I'm advocating a realistic, unbiased, unprejudicial approach toward saving the world.

It is revolutionary, yes, and yet it makes perfect sense, for the individual and for the entire world population.

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://AnthonyODonnell.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 17:16:50 GMT

Ocean, It's refreshing to read some of what you say about people neglecting their responsibilities and taking reproduction more seriously. However, you haven't answered either of my questions. While you say we don't need population replacement (we do, even if we aim for a lower overall stable population), you still advocate adopting rather than bearing children. My objection is that this will not work for practical reasons, even if one were to assume that people would do it. Countries who don't maintain replacement levels of reproduction rapidly lose numbers unless they make it up with immigration. The results can be catastrophic. No doubt there are countries that could do with a little population reduction, but that's not the case in the wealthier countries. You have cited religious objections to birth control, but not to adoption.

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:08:30 GMT

First of all, we do not need "population replacement".
We need to stop having children and to take care of the starving millions of unwanted children before even thinking of bearing them.
We need to popularize being Child-Free, and for those yearning to parent, to adopt instead of bearing.

Now, to the second part:
Those who want to parent need to understand this - parenting is a pot-luck situation.
If you even pretend to be fit enough to parent, first understand that nothing is guaranteed.
Any type of personality, any type of disability, any type of problem can emerge from the womb in that infant you have committed your life to having.

To have a kid, you've put your own bodily welfare, your looks, your weight, your security, probably your income, and your relationship if there is on, on the line already.
It is still unsafe as hell to have kids, despite all the ones being born.
You never know if you'll be the one who has problems or if the newborn will.

Then, there are all the other sacrifices, for at least eighteen years - and if you're at all a decent person, for life if you, as one family I personally know, have chosen not to send your autistic child to a "home".

It's outrageous to even think of putting a child you have created, had decided or opted out of deciding about by being drunk in the backseat of a car, or something else, or had not thought it out thoroughly and prepared financially and emotionally and every other way for before allowing yourself to get pregnant - and this applies to males as well.

Why should society be left holding the bag for irresponsible people who do not commit to their offspring?
Why should the children - who are the real recipients of the tragedies in peoples' lives when they do not first prepare and commit to that child, however he or she comes out - why should these innocent victims be made to pay for parents' crimes by enduring orphanages or foster homes?

Our entire system needs to be revamped to address this, and at the same time, we need to be able to adopt more easily abroad to help to save the children everywhere.

And at the same time, educating kids on how to be child-free, on how to get vasectomies and tube-tying, on how to value themselves as individuals and how to be emotionally healthy enough to understand that having a stuffed toy to throw around and lean on is entirely different than having a live doll.

Does the average high schooler know that t is as dangerous for women under their mid-twenties to bear children as it is for those nearing menopause?

Do the average kids know how much money it takes to care for a child? How many hours? How much sacrifice?

Not really.

The media with all its' unreal depictions of rosy scenarios and family groupings that kdis crave who've never had anything close to it stupidly associate breeding with home and hearth, with love - and education needs to be created to cut through the mind-control of the media.

These are just some of the issues we need to address.

The realisitc depication you want to vent about is your own reality. Many others have lovely backgrounds and lives with their adopted children.
You are heroic to have adopted at all, and especially, the special needs teens.

There should be more people like you.

It does take a heroine and/or hero to parent at all, and most are not suited to parenting their own or adopted children.

That is one of the two points I wish to popularize here.
The other is that adopting is preferable to having a child of the body for saving the planet.

And Catholicism and other religions urge people, despite the misery and tragedies involved, the health issues, the risks to life, limb, and happiness, to breed incessantly, sans birth control, even to this day.
That failing, then they advocate adopting.
Their idea is to have a hearthful of new Catholics born every moment.
Fundamentalists everywhere still adhere to the ancient mandates to breed - originally instated in order to out-number a tribe's enemies and to endure, conquer by numbers, etc.

This hideous idea is killing our planet and all quality of life.
We need to address human overpopulation as the very first problem of the world.

Only damming the continuous tide of ever-growing humans will protect our planet and our lives.

This is for Dee - I'm not sure whether you receive money for fostering or adopting children, but you should. You are heroic and deserve the respect of all, and I hope you get it.
Allow us here to honor you and all like you - especially the ones who adopt older, less adoptable children.
I'm sure the rewards far outweight the challenges involved.

I myself have no interest in parenting, which makes me right away unfit as a parent.

Since so many obviously do, I, as a child advocate, choose to speak for the kids instead, and to speak up for them.
I am in the position to assist them much more this way than by persnoally caring for only a few, and I adopt from afar by donating money on a regular basis to help children in need, and by continuing to advocate for them and to popularize being child-free - which helps all the other children by freeing up resources and potential parents for them.

Since every child born in developed nations uses the resources of hundreds of kids born to undeveloped nations, simply opting out of the breeding frenzy helps these kids.

To someone like you who likes to parent, and who feels adequate to the great challenge of raising children, anyone who does not personally parent should bow to you, and I do.

I know it's not easy for you - I can tell by your statements that you are giving a lot, but just as I do not run an industrial plant that pollutes and yet I contest their rights to do so and I use my energy to promote environmental healing, so I, as a former child and as a child advocate, do not need to personally parent in order to be able to assist them in getting their needs met.

It seems we two, as adopting advocates, should be on the same side, doesn't it?

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://AnthonyODonnell.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:27:14 GMT

Two questions: What religions are against adoption? How would you address the practical challenges of population replacement by adoption rather than procreation?

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 01:07:15 GMT

In reference to adoptable children, I was being absolutely truthful and totally realistic. I have THREE adopted children, all adopted from the state as teenagers. There is seriously no way in hell most people could have handled them. My ex-husband couldn't handle them; I parented them BY MYSELF and continue to do so. He was afraid of them and it lead to my divorce. I speak from personal experience. I reviewed the files of many children prior to adopting my boys and they were ALL difficult children. I do not have the time to even start to discuss all the things those boys put me through the first year/year and a half. The only thing that kept them in line was being tougher than them and loving them as much as I do. Luckily I teach martial arts or I would have NEVER got those boys under control. I say all this only because I want you all to understand.

This is real life, not some ideal of what the situation should be like or what happens when someone is adopted as a baby. I have met other people adopted as older children and they have had tough lives, in and out of jail, in and out of bad relationships, until they get it together. You have to understand that these kids were hurt, massively, by disturbed people. Kids don't get into the state welfare system without their cases being extreme. Which means their issues are extreme. Babies are one thing; they are easily molded and can conform to their new surrounding, but there are very few babies up for adoption. Many people do not have the social skills or personal development to handle regular relationships (look at divorce rates) and the kind of boundaries and rules you have to have with highly disturbed kids is very different. It takes a truly different kind of person. Parenting a child from infancy is much easier than trying to cram everything they 'should' have learned or patterned into three or four years on top of the bonding issues.

These kids often don't form strong bonds or attachment with anyone, let alone their adoptive parents, often they don't know how. It is a totally foreign concept and one of the main issues adoptive children have. If a child does not learn to attach early on, it is nearly impossible for them to form attachment later. Luckily, mine have been able to attach, but the attachment is not as much as I would have hoped and I am never called Mom. They have a mother and I am not it...even though I have done more for them than their own 'natural' mother has. Also luckily, I didn't adopt them for kudos or thanks, theirs or anyone elses. I figure you can stand there and complain about how the world is or you can do something about it. I did something about it and I did it for me, too. I did it because I didn't have a reason *not* to. So what is your reason?

Re: 42% of American Women are Child-Free!

http://Oceann.gaia.com — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 23:42:26 GMT

On adopting, yes, I realize it has been made unpopular by some, and that includes religions, who have their own agendas, and that also the safeguards in place within the adoption procedure are there for a sound reason, but look at the foster system too.

Naturally, we need to revamp both systems, and that's one reason we're discussing these issues here.

I think it's cruel and untrue of Dee to have posted such negativities about adoptable children. Several of the most wonderful people I've ever known have been adopted children.

Also, all the negativities you mention about kids also apply to all kids, not merely orphans.
Yes, parenting is not easy. The sane and intelligent people know this, and yet the naive and dreamy people - many of them far too young to even think of successful parenting - use procreation as an unrealisitc idea of how to fix their lives to match those so untrutfully depicted on television or in other media.

Certainly if they used their own backgrounds or neighborhoods as yardsticks to measure their lives with, they'd think twice before considering parenting.

The tragic consequences of these ill-considered matings are children that are cast out onto an over-crowded system filled with flaws.
The children are always the losers here.

I advocate caring more about these innocent kids who've been dropped both by their parents and by our systems.

I advocate adopting rather than having children - as I'd stated before - and this is painfully obvious already - as long as millions of children languish in orphanages or even on the street, starving in most cases, we have no business being so self-indulgent and selfish and egocentric as to even consider having our own children.

Those who need to parent should adopt rather than bear.

Also, rescugin a special needs or a difficult child must be as rewarding a thing as any person can do, and we should all applaud these wonderful people universally and acclaim them as heroes!