Childfree and smug

I remember I heard Robert Winston, who comes across as a wise man, say "it's a blessing having children and equally it's a blessing not having them" Anyway, would just reiterate what others have said, none of anyone else's business really and certainly wouldn't make a judgement about personal choices.

PECS

Galaxy I was quite OK to deal.with baby / toddler sh*t but I am not OK to deal with adult dog sh*t. My decision is made

Yes I agree with that! I never had a problem with nappy changing mine, or friends or grandchildren. One of my sons was going to leave their puppy with us over Christmas when they went away, but changed their plans, I was kind of simultaneously disappointed and relieved. We were both "........eeew got to pick up the shit and walks no matter what the weather is doing", even encompassed in a plastic doggy bag still not a task I relish. One of the many reasons I'm more of a cat person.

I don't think it's unusual to think long and hard about all the implications of getting an animal as we get older, I think possibly we become more aware with hindsight of commitment and the sacrifice that sometimes involves, maybe I speak for myself I don't think those feelings were always at the fore when I was a lot younger.

Galaxy I was quite OK to deal.with baby / toddler sh*t but I am not OK to deal with adult dog sh*t. My decision is made

I am a bit worried that I seem to be putting more thought into whether I should get a dog than I did to getting pregnant. Perhaps that's just age.

Each to their own , for their own personal reasons . Pets or no pets , no children , only one child or a houseful. Nobody else’s business, people live their lives in their own way. Many reasons why people are without children , often personal choice or something they dearly wish for!

I do sometimes find it sad and ironic that so many children are neglected or dragged up by useless or inadequate parents, while on being the other hand so many people who would be wonderful and loving parents have been denied the opportunity.

Dickens I do agree that parenthood is taken on too lightly by some.
It is a bloody difficult thing to successfully navigate raising children..it costs money, energy, time & for many our bodies too! It is a huge commitment and I have met far too many children whose parents were ill prepared for the role.

Equally dog ownership is a commitment & far toomany dog owners are ill prepared for that role too!

I am unable to have a pet because of severe asthma. My DH and I would have loved to have a dog to join our family.
When I am out walking people tell me I should get a dog to walk with.
I just wish people would think before asking why you don't have a child. Most upsetting if you can't or in my case a dog. Not nearly as bad but still reminds of what I am missing.

I think supervet Noel Fitzpatrick refers to all his patients' owners as 'mummy and daddy' too.

My DD has a beloved dog and they call themselves it’s ‘pawents’. I indulge her as she met her partner later in life and found it impossible to conceive. My DiL who has 2 children is not so understanding of this which can make life difficult.
Live and let live I say.

volver

You seem to be suggesting OP that if you can love a dog or cat you can love a child so why not have one?

Speaking for myself, because I like time on my own, I like having disposable income, I like not having to think of someone else first all the time, I like being with adults and I like cute animals. Screaming children and lifelong commitment, not so much.

Maybe I'm just being smug.

No, you are not being 'smug'. You are being honest.

Personally - although I am a mother - I can wholeheartedly relate to your reasons for being child-free. Parenthood is not for everyone, so why should those who choose not to have children be made to feel guilty?

The smugness is, IMO, when those who are child-free bang on about how they're saving the planet for the future - and subsidising other people's children.... forgetting that when they were being raised as children they, too, were being 'subsidised'.

And animals are a completely different species to children! It doesn't correlate that because you can love one - you can also love the other.

As for the "immense satisfaction" of bearing a child mentioned in the OP - well, as a mother, that completely passed me by until my son was well past his turbulent teenage years and able to communicate as a fully-formed adult.

Human nature is complex and nothing us cut and dried. The reality of raising children changes the whole dynamic of your life - and those that recognise this and decide not to have them are to be applauded for their critical-thinking ability.

... and frankly, I've heard far too many stories from adults who were patently unwanted as children and whose whole lives have been tainted by that fact. My partner was an 'accident of birth' and it's effects are still apparent in his eighth decade.

An unpopular view I know but too many people over invest in their pet dogs & sometimes cats. ...
The industry around pets now is huge from breeders, dog walkers, vet insurance , pet bed & clothing manufacturers etc etc. My childhood pet dog, Perry, had a collar & lead, he ate scraps and had a bone to chew on. We loved him and took care of him & he lived a good dog life for 14 years. We missed him. He was not pampered or treated in any way as a" almost human". He was a dog.

snowberryZ

I understand why some people don't want children because of the expense.
But I don't understand those people who say they don't want children because they 'tie you down'
They then get a dog or dogs. Which end up Tieing them down.

As I said above. Anyone who thinks that pets tie you down as much as children must have a very odd parenting style.

Petera

JenniferEccles8 On another thread there was a suggestion that to a childless person, maybe their pets were a child substitute. This is potentially a very hurtful thing to say to anyone whether they had chosen not to have a family or if they were unable.

I assume you're referring to my post to Volver which was intended to be ironic and to highlight the issue that you have raised. I also believe, from her reply, that Volver understood this. But she's on this thread and I'll let her speak for herself.

It was obviously ironic as I'm sure most people realised. I replied with an ironic answer too, which clearly Petera "got".

Who cares what people choose to post on their social media? I think it odd when people refer to their pets as "fur babies", but if that is the way they feel then it is nothing to do with me. Is posting pictures of children and/or pets any more annoying than those who insist on posting pictures of their food!

I forget who said it, but I like the quote - “I always feel sorry for people who don’t have pets. They have to make such a fuss of their children.”

JenniferEccles8 On another thread there was a suggestion that to a childless person, maybe their pets were a child substitute. This is potentially a very hurtful thing to say to anyone whether they had chosen not to have a family or if they were unable.

I assume you're referring to my post to Volver which was intended to be ironic and to highlight the issue that you have raised. I also believe, from her reply, that Volver understood this. But she's on this thread and I'll let her speak for herself.

I understand why some people don't want children because of the expense.
But I don't understand those people who say they don't want children because they 'tie you down'
They then get a dog or dogs. Which end up Tieing them down.

I just find this whole pets as fur babies thing ridiculous. I keep seeing dogs and cats in pushchair wearing little clothes and hats. I understand loving animals and treating them well but it's getting silly and the cat poo on my garden gets worse and worse.

Really, it is none of my business if or why people make any choices in their lives. It is also none of my business if someone who is child free doesn't like when I post photos of my kids. They have the opportunity to click the X button to close the window. As do I.

I am an equal opportunity photo poster by the way. Lots of my kids, lots of my pets, some of my husband.

Yes, Callistemon21, had the one child comment loads of times. I finally got fed up with it one day and asked how many miscarriages they thought I should go through before I gave up trying to give my son a brother or sister.

paddyann54

Its easier to let people think its a choice than face the pitying looks and invasive questions when theres an absence of the patter of little feet.I have 10 years between my (surviving) children ,there was a baby who lived 4 days and 6 miscarriages in that time ,no one knew about any of the miscarriages,not even close family.When my baby died I felt I had to manage everyone elses grief instead of trying to get through each day myself so it was much simpler if people thought we just didn't want anymore children

And I agree with paddyann (again!)

As if it's as easy as falling off a log.
And the people who say "Oh, I think it's selfish to have just one child, think of how lonely they must be".

I wouldn't mind having another dog but I definitely don't want another baby at my age.

On another thread there was a suggestion that to a childless person, maybe their pets were a child substitute. This is potentially a very hurtful thing to say to anyone whether they had chosen not to have a family or if they were unable.

An old friend of mine falls into the latter category. She loves cats, has had them all her life and has put up with many ‘child replacement’ ‘jokes’ over the years.
She and her husband would have so loved a family but it just didn’t happen. As she recently pointed out to me, not only has she missed out on having her own babies to love, she is now missing out on the joy of grandchildren.
She’s not self-pitying; she has accepted the situation over the years but it’s obvious the sadness and regret remain, not helped by tactless comments about her animals being her babies.

depends on who you have lost. I loved my dogs more than some of my relations tbh