Girl Scout Cookies, Transgender Children and Planned Parenthood

The following image made the rounds on the internet and garnished my support and the support of others that promote transgender issues as well as Planned Parenthood. What follows is my letter to the Girl Scouts informing them I ordered double my cookie amount because of this image. A rep from the Girl Scouts responded, so you can see what the official standing of Girl Scouts is on Planned Parenthood. Not really a stance, so much as legal jargon to save their butt. Disappointing, but at least they support transgender children.

The image in question that made the rounds on the internet. I think it was supposed to be a conservative scare tactic, but it had the opposite effect on all the liberals ;)

MY MESSAGE TO GIRL SCOUTS:

Greetings,

... I'm sure you are aware that some conservative people may be boycotting Girl Scouts because of the ties to Planned Parenthood and allowing transgender children to be a part of Girl Scouting.

This jpeg had found its way into my facebook news feed. http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxtj8l6XwY1qdm9vwo1_500.jpg

I wanted to let you know that I purchased DOUBLE my order BECAUSE of these issues AND have shared this information with my friends. It's very important to me that young women are well-informed AND that those with different gender identity are welcomed into a supportive environment. I sincerely hope the information in the jpeg is actually true as it makes me feel proud to support the Girl Scouts.

I also hope that you will continue on the path of providing girls, whatever their orientation, a supportive environment that provides them with the information they need to make good life choices.

Thank you!
-D

THEIR RESPONSE: 

Thank you for your message to Girl Scouts of the USA. We appreciate
your interest and kind words. Girl Scouts is proud to be the premier
leadership organization for girls in the country. Placement of
transgender youth is handled on a case-by-case basis, with the welfare
and best interests of the child and the members of the troop/group in
question a top priority. That said, if the child is recognized by the
family and school/community as a girl and lives culturally as a girl,
then Girl Scouts is an organization that can serve her in a setting that
is both emotionally and physically safe.

Further, the Girl Scout organization, including local Councils, does not
take a position on abortion or birth control, nor do we endorse or
provide funding to organizations such that advocate on these issues.

GSUSA does not provide any financial support to Planned Parenthood, nor
do we have any national collaboration or relationship with that
organization. We believe issues related to health and sexuality are
private matters for girls and their families.

We are aware of several websites, some by current and former Girl Scouts
and volunteers, that take issue with the Girl Scout organization on a
number of topics. We applaud these individuals for pursuing the
principles we teach in Girl Scouting regarding identifying an issue that
they feel passionate about and working to address it. At the same time,
we also disagree with many of the points made on these sites, some of
which we feel are inaccurate. Our positions on many of these issues
haven't changed, and we believe these websites do not accurately reflect
Girl Scouting.

For the sake of clarity, once again, Girl Scouts does not take a
position on abortion or birth control, does not have a relationship with
Planned Parenthood on a national level and does not plan to have one.

Because Girl Scouting is a beloved American institution, our name has
the power to draw attention to topics that might otherwise go unnoticed.
As a leadership organization, we must always respect the right of others
to express their views and we will continue to support girls who care
deeply about an issue and have the courage to stand up and take action,
even if we do not agree with what they say.

Thanks again for support of Girl Scouts.

So there you have it. The image from scared conservatives and an official response from Girl Scouts. :)

Book Review: "Beyond Motherhood: Choosing a Life Without Children" by Jeanne Safer, Ph.D.

Book Review: "Beyond Motherhood: Choosing a Life Without Children" by Jeanne Safer, Ph.D.

Like the last book I reviewed, this book was researched and released in the 1990's.

The first thing I must point out is this... at the very beginning of the book (p 3-4), Safer states that she will refer to the lifestyle as 'childless' because no one can deny they are missing something. This immediately altered my perception of the author's viewpoint. I understand that she is trying to point out that by the very terms of it, choosing one option makes choosing the other impossible, and therefore you 'miss' the experiences that choice would have offered. But, as a person who is happy about my childfree choice, I do NOT feel as if I'm missing out. I realize there are different levels of relating to the concept of missing or not missing on the parenting experience within the 'no children' community. But for the author to determine that I am missing out on something does not fit my experience.

In my mind, I can't miss something I never had. I don't miss being a doctor because I never was a doctor. I don't miss owning a Lamborghini because I never had one. Safer contests that even mothers are missing out on the 'no children' experience (note... I'm apparently refusing to say 'childless' in this entry!) because they gave it up. Yes, a mother can miss the freedom she had when she was without children, but it is not the same for me... I can't miss being a mother because I never had children. I could hypothetically miss the idea of having children, but that would be the idealization of the role, not the actuality of it. Just as a mother could idealize being childfree as sitting around and eating bon bons in the bathtub with no interruptions... actually... that is the childfree experience in a nutshell! ;)  (I'm only partially kidding.)

Okay, so that big glaring problem out of the way... the book was pretty decent. It talked about when and how women decided, how personal history affected the decision, childfree marriages, creating an alternate feminine identity and the childfree legacy after death.

I think so not to bore you, I'll just include the quotes I liked. A 'best of' section, of sorts (with page numbers). These quotes are from either the author OR one of the interviewees. My notes are in italics:

• "Being different can be immeasurably enriching, but it marks you. There is a price for the unconventional life." p.19
• "Many people gain maturity by becoming parents, but I hope to achieve it by choosing not to. This demands self-reliance; having no one to live through or to do what you could not, forces you to seek meaning within yourself alone. I know everything depends on me. It really does for everybody, but children can permit parents to elude this essential and disturbing awareness temporarily." p. 34
• "True maturity, I discovered, is doing something even though your mother wants you to." p 36 Hahaha! I like that one!
• "I know in a way kids are a celebration of family and life, but if we had them, we'd have to stop doing what we were put on this planet to do." p 58 This was said by one of the husbands. I find it profoundly truthful to my point of view.
• "Despite the fact that motherhood is supposed to be a woman's supreme fulfillment, for them it seemed more of an obstacle to fulfillment." p 76 Completely true for me.
• "an incredible stubborn love of freedom" p 80 Love it and have it and love that I have it!
• "childlessness is both a preference and a means of self-preservation" p 81
• "The voluntarily childless woman finds maternal responsibility almost claustrophobic." p 85 That one is so me!
• "they see their brand of caretaking more as a choice than a handicap." p 85  I believe this came from a section that reiterated that there are many ways to nurture others and that many CL/CF/IOD women (and men) do nurture through relationships or volunteering or some means and they find these opportunities rewarding because it is a choice, not something forced upon them. That and you can set time limits on those things....kids, not so much.
• "My life is not better or worse than that of a woman with children - it's just different" p 92 (Janet Frank)
• "The daughters of talented, discontented women such as these don't just avoid childbearing in reaction to negative examples; they also feel inspired by their mothers." p 111 Because so much emphasis is put into the nature vs nurture theory when a person goes against the norm, there is often times pointing fingers as to how his or her history affected it. It's important to understand that people who choose to have a childfree/IOD life are not doing so ONLY because they had a 'bad childhood' but they could have had the best childhood possible and still chosen to not have kids.
• "She became herself by being different." p 115
• "She must design her destiny for herself and deal with the world's reaction to her nonconformity." p 144
• "Childlessness is un-American; it's like being a traitor to your flag." p 146 I suppose this is probably true in most countries/cultures as they seem to be very natalistc.
• "to do something you really want makes you feel like more, not less." p 149
• "need an unusual degree of self-confidence and self-acceptance." p 152.
• "... so my sense of myself is pretty intact. I don't miss what I don't have; I'm comfortable with who I am." p 155
• "refutes the assumption that mothers have a monopoly on compassion" p 160
• "She acquired something rare and precious as a result: time to reflect on ways of being that most people don't have." p 168  Is it easier for childfree people to find happiness because they aren't constantly pushing their own needs aside? I think so. We are in tune with our needs in the first place well enough to know having kids isn't right for us. Many people can't even look in the mirror, much less take the time to self-improve. 
• "Friends replace family as the lifelines for the majority of the women I met." p 172  This rings very true for me. I have a strong network of friends that support me in ways my family is not capable of doing. We are born into families of people that may not understand us, but we are blessed when we find others with whom to surround ourselves to ensure our happiness.
• "My life is my child." p 182

Other things of note from the book:

• p. 50 - The author found that studies found that those who opted to not have children were typically the firstborn or only child. I don't find this to be true.
• p. 62-64 talks about the experiences of a woman who had people try to GIVE her their children! She was a war correspondent and these people wanted her to (a) have the joy a child brings (b) give their child more opportunity. I found this to be so interesting! (More interesting than the woman who's best friend cut her off because she wouldn't be a surrogate mother for her!! That's just selfish on the part of that woman demanding that of her friend! Yuck!)
• p. 139. Scientists thought that a higher divorce rate among those without children indicated unhappiness but now realize those without children have an easier time deciding to divorce because they don't 'have to stay together for the kids'. Marriages with zero children tend to be more egalitarian, more cohesive and satisfying, longer-lasting and more fulfilling. 
• p 146-147. Childless women are resentful b/c others (mothers) do not support their choice. This is important. In order to create a healthy society in which all people are encouraged to make a conscious choice about the child decision, the result of each individual's decision should be respected. To not do so creates conflict, which I'm sure we've all come up against. 
• p 148 - a highly developed responsibility makes them choose not to have kids.
• p 148 and around there... had some horrific stories of people butting in and telling strangers they should have kids or they're missing out or they will regret it or they are selfish etc. How rude!!
• p 150-151. One person emphasized the idea of mentally (or verbally, if you're brave!) questioning the people who question you. By being steadfastly childfree and happy about it, you make them uncomfortable because you don't reinforce their choice or because they are unhappy with their choice. 
• p 151-152: Even when a person or couple is happy and comfortable with their choice, there is still a sense of exclusion in the community. "need an unusual degree of self-confidence and self-acceptance." p 152.
• One person mentioned seeing an elderly woman admitted to the hospital w/o family or next of kin. The observer was happy to think she'd have a long list of friends to come to her aid in her old age. To me, that's not exactly true/is idealistic for multiple reasons. Hospitals primarily view 'kin' as the only people allowed to visit or make decisions. I personally don't want several of my family members making my medical decisions because we don't agree on some thing. But hospitals don't even let same-sex partners make the decisions sometimes. So what I'm saying is (a) the system of relationship qualification for legal purposes is broken and (b) the idea that your friends will rush to your aid in your old age is probably just as idealistic as the concept that one's own children will care for you.

So, in closing, I liked this book, except for the major glaring bit in the beginning about 'missing out on being a mother'. I enjoyed reading a time capsule of sorts from the childless/childfree/indpendent of dependent army of 20 years ago! :)

Book Review: Reconceiving Women: Separating Motherhood from Female Identity by Mardy S. Ireland

Reconceiving Women: Separating Motherhood from Female Identity

Ireland, Mardy S.

This book was very heavy on theories but I found it to be quite satisfying. The author categorized women as 'traditional' (wanted to be mothers but infertile), 'transitional' (women who delayed children by life circumstance) or 'transformative' (women who actively chose to not have children).

I obviously fall into the last category, but this book was a great chance for me to understand other women. The book also focused a LOT on theories and different psychologist and the formation of the conscious and unconscious lives of humans. It touched on Freud and other theorists. This bit got to be quite heavy, but was still informative and interesting.

This book was published in 1993 which is nearly 20 years ago. The author looks at women who were born after World War II as part of our culture's duty to thrive. So there have been changes in the demographic makeup since then, but this doesn't make the book/research irrelevant by any means. It basically reminded that many of these women experienced life during the wave of feminism and it helped to formulate them.

There were many interesting parts to this book having to with gender and personal identification. I appreciated that the book/author focused on the creativity that women are allowed to pursue in their lives that is a valid lifestyle. I view myself as a creative person, so I know that my creativity is my 'child'.

There were SO many good parts to this book, that I find it hard to wrap up without a looooong reivew as previous entries. (The purpose of these reviews should be to give you an opinion on the work, not give you a novel to read before the book!)

Basically, the author posits that by limiting humans to gender roles, we prevent men and women from tapping into their strengths whether a woman be more aggressive and a man more nurturing or what have you. And that the childfree woman is often seen as a threat to both mothers and males, but needs to be welcomed as a valid life choice.

The theory part of the book was sometimes hard to read (and some hard to stomach, especially when Freud and Lacan talk 'lack') but the interesting point mentioned in some of it was 'language' and creating the language necessary for females to be seen outside the realms of motherhood only. That was part of the reason for creating this blog... to give us another method of describing our lives, without referring to something our life does not involve. I am Independent of Dependents, I am Childfree, I am a Creative Person with Purpose.

I do really recommend this book and want to know if anyone else has read it or plans to read it. It's different from many of the other Childfree/Childless books because it is more intellectual and theoretical than any I've read before.

Book Review Time!!! "Two is Enough" and "Complete Without Kids"

Last month I finished reading:

Two Is Enough: A Couple's Guide to Living Childless by Choice

by Laura S. Scott  


I didn't take many notes on it but I do remember is that it was statistically driven off of surveys and essays and interviews. As a single woman, I thought it lacked information about the Childfree Single. One thing I definitely took away was someone's comment about how being CF (or as we like to call it: IOD...Independent of Dependents) allows a person to travel NOW instead of waiting until retirement. That person recalls visiting Greek ruins and being saddened to see elderly people unable to make the climb to the top to see the grandiose ruins they had traveled to see. To me, an ardent traveler, that is really sad! Life is meant to be enjoyed NOW, not put off.

I also remember that the book was more positively driven than not. Often times chosing to be CF/IOD seems like a struggle, constantly having to prove to people that we aren't crazy and that we are making a VALID CHOICE. So it's no wonder sometimes a CF/IOD person can get defensive or angry... if someone is telling you that you don't know what you're doing with your life, just because he or she chose something different. I've gone through the stages and will continue to, depending with whom I'm speaking. Of course, we need to be able to vent our frustrations with ignorant people or bad parents, but at the end of the day, you get more flies with honey.

So, the above book was a good read. It was geared towards CF/IOD (IOD is the agreed-upon, created term my friends and I developed) and also those who are considering the CF choice. I think it's very important that children are seen as a CHOICE. If we continue to promote it as a CHOICE and not 'just what you do', we are encouraging people to be more responsible for their own decisions. (Of course, religion does often get in the way of proactively preventing pregnancies... but that's not the theme of this topic).

________________________________

And tonight was a CRAZY Friday night. I just finished reading: 

Complete Without Kids: An Insider's Guide to Childfree Living by Choice or by Chance

by Ellen L. Walker

 

I did actually take notes on this book (as I will for the other 5 or 6 CF books I have checked out!!! I have a lot of reading to do!)

 

This book didn't sit as favorably with me. The author drew too many conclusions and made assumptions that I found unnecessary. She postulated that so-and-so would have been a good mother had she met someone. She postulated that a Japanese exchange student probably went on to have kids because she probably felt awkward being one of 2 childless females in a room of 50 at a Church retreat. I found these assumptions detracted from my enjoyment of the story. 

I'll now refer to my notes and provide page numbers where possible. Excerpts or ideas from the book will be in italics and my notes will be in plain text.


p. 48 'Suzanne' expresses sadness when she sees families portrayed in movies as being happy and having intimate connections. The idea of missing out eats at her.  - Of course the movies are going to portray things as perfection! Movies set unrealistic expectations for the audience. That's why you have to take everything with a grain of salt. And I'm saying this as someone who is involved in the film industry! Unless the story has to do with a dysfunctional family, you won't see that as part of the storyline. Or, the film shows happy happy happy to set up the meltdown and the return to happy happy. It's just like when I watch a romantic comedy, I know it's outside the realm of normal. 


p. 52-53 Having it all: career and mothering leaves a woman stressed and not present -  This I agree with and find important to mention. We lost our own war with feminism. We felt the need to prove we CAN do it all, work AND be mothers. But to what end? Mothers who have guilt and aren't able to be everywhere at once? Spreading themselves so thin between career and parenting that they lose themselves? TANGENT: On a photo of an Italian female government representative Licia Ronzulli who brought her baby to the voting session... I saw SO many mothers responding to it with pride about how women can do it all. One woman wrote "I'm a mother before I'm a woman". I was flabbergasted. You couldn't be a mother without being a woman first, biologically speaking alone. And you shouldn't be losing your identity into your children's lives. Luckily I saw a commenter write that it (bringing one's infant to work) was feminism fail. For more info on this situation....go here. Basically, as a mother, you are held to the impossible standard of having to prove that you are superwoman. And if you don't happen to measure up, you are in for a world of guilt.


p 66-67 "Having Fun and the Fear of Losing Youthfulness" - I don't like this section of the book. It's too short and I feel it misses the point and misconstrues the issue. It seems like the author is saying that CF people avoid maturing and are just all about fun AND that they have a fear of growing older. I don't know if this was meant to be implied, but that's how I read it. TO ME, I find that many parents have children because of the (subconscious) FEAR of how to fill the next 60+ years ahead of them. It can be daunting to think of all the open roads before me, but I'm grateful and excited, especially because I have several Childfree/Independent of Dependent friends to join me. The author seemed to imply that CF/IOD people are free from responsibility or care and don't need to grow up. This is a falsehood. Having children doesn't make someone mature or responsible. It can be a motivator for someone to become that way, but not everyone NEEDS to pop out a kid to realize they should get their life in order. I'm sure the author did not mean to imply that we shirk responsibility, but that it might appear we do.


Three Categories as developed by the author: Childfree by Happenstance, Childfree by Choice or Childfree by Circumstance - I'm a little fuzzy on the difference between Happenstance and Circumstance. To me, they represent the same thing, but the author seems to imply that Happenstance means a person just never ended up with a partner during their fertile years and that Circumstance is for people that wanted to have kids but were infertile. I don't know if the distinction is as I've surmised or that it's clear enough. In Laura Scott's Two Is Enough there was a category for those who ended up CF because of their partner's strong choice and their ability to be okay with not having kids. I just found Walker's categorization to be a bit fuzzy.


p 68 Selfishness - Some childfree people are happy to admit they are selfish, but I have a hard time doing so. I think all humans are selfish and it is a survival instinct. Parents are not selfless for having children... it's just the group they protect is bigger, so they are selfish for a larger group of their DNA. It's the same as if I'm out with friends and there is an open table at a bar... I'm looking out for the good of my group and will try to get that table for us and let others fend for themselves. My group is where my loyalties lie. And we all know that people have selfish reasons for procreating: wanting someone to care for them in old age (RIGHT!), wanting to have the experience of being a parent, etc. I think less focus needs to be put on selfishness/selflessness because it doesn't seem relevant to me. Just because I don't have a small family group to care for doesn't mean that I don't extend good will by other means, such as volunteering or caring for my nephews. I don't like the idea of selfishness even though some people are happy to lay claim to it.
       Ah, now I see my notes more clearly... I wrote that the author didn't cover the selfishness topic well enough because she didn't mention how it can be selfish to have children for the wrong reasons and that the section basically only said CF people didn't feel guilty for having so much free time. 


p 71 Sometimes the differences become isolating and we can be left out by mothers/parents because we seem to be dis-trustworthy and we have to makes steps to show we "accept kids" - This makes me bristle. I understand the author is saying we need to have a little give and be ambassadors for the Childfree community. I selectively do this with people I care for that have children so that they know I'm not hateful of their kids. I'm very vocal about my choice to be IOD and it can be offputting to mothers. But, yes I make it a point through my actions to show them I can be around their child and not shrivel into a pile of ash. But I won't go too much out of my way. I did go to a friend's party for her 1 year old boy and it was at a Children's Museum. My mom and I even took the birthday boy around for a bit but he was hungry and I couldn't help him. He just wanted his mama! So I relinquished the crying birthday boy. But he was cute in his little vest and hiking boots! See?! I went to the party and spent time with the little one because I WANTED to, not because I felt it was my duty. I care for the little guy and his parents are wonderful, so of course I want to be there for them and celebrate. My choice to stay an aunt doesn't mean I don't want to celebrate and spend time with kids! In fact, I really like having kids around because I like to teach them it's okay to be goofy and just enjoy life! I do this with my nephews and I've done this with all the kids I've nannied or as a camp counselor. It's my way of spreading silliness and joy. Letting kids be kids and take their joyful attitude into adulthood with them. Life is meant to be enjoyed and that's something I like to promote. Something I'm ABLE to promote because I'm not focused on my own children, but can be there for others. So, I guess, the author has a point, but it still threw me off. It made it seem like 'we' have to make the parents feel comfortable and they don't have to make us feel okay. But it is give and take. Each CF/IOD person feels differently about how much they want to be included with parents and kids, and it's up to them to indicate it. Okay... moving on... ;O)

-I agree with the author's section about how our time is OUR time. The evenings and weekends are our leisure time, not filled with the children's activities or catering to what the kids need. That's one of the benefits to my IOD Choice... I can fill up my time in ways that make me feel like a happy and fulfilled person, without being distracted by the needs of children. That can be a BIG struggle for parents, but as a CF/IOD person, I'm very happy with this benefit. This doesn't make me feel selfish, but motivated. I have many projects that I chose to do with my time. Writing this blog is one of them. IT WORKS FOR ME. Everyone should be free to make this choice.


- I like the inclusion of the section on Singles, since the previous book didn't touch well enough on it for me. IF I ever choose to look for a partner (my projects are my loves right now), I would only date another CF/IOD-minded person. I don't have a desire to be a stepmother. As much as I realize that there are children out there that need love and fostering, my decision to be childfree includes children biological or not. The idea is that my life isn't leading towards mothering, no matter where the kid comes from. So, I have to be content to contribute by volunteering. It's much easier on the wallet and less time-consuming ;)


p. 119 - Healthy lifestyles and kids as a motivator to stay healthy - I find that to be a bit misleading. I'm sure there are unhealthy people who don't have kids. The author even mentions one. But she also mentions that because of more free time, Childfree adults are able to use that time to do activities such as healthy cooking and fun exercises like skiing or running. The author also mentioned a study that showed parents consume more fats, saturated fats and sweets and salty snacks that Childfree people. The idea of providing a healthful diet for children is a big scary thing for me. I have a hard enough time making sure I eat enough of the right foods during the day. I'm not up for the task. I can understand how parents can go for the easiest route... when I have my nephews for the weekend.... well, it's not all healthy food. I DO always have fruits and veggies for them. Their parents live on an organic farm, so I know a concerted effort is being made to raise these kids on real food. And that's a big deal!
     I agree with the person on page 121 who says that personality is the driving factor to a person's healthy or unhealthy lifestyle, rather than whether or not they have children. I think kids can act as a motivator sometimes, but I also agree with the fact that parents are more susceptible to disease, not only from contact with their children, but because being a parent can be stressful, leaving parents with less time to sleep and recharge their body. I enjoy the fact that I can respond to my body's needs and get extra sleep when I need it. (I sleep a LOT... it's just how my body is!) Actually yesterday I was able to stay home from work and I thought about the fact that I wouldn't necessarily have been able to recuperate (including my 3 hour nap) if I had a child to care for. Being a parent is a 24/7 job and I'm happy I work in a different field! ;)


p 126-7 - EXPENSIVE! - "Families that make $70,000 a year or more will spend $260,520 to raise a child from birth through age 17, and this doesn't include college tuition, which can add up to $150,000 more for a four-year education. - OUCH! Well, I know I'm not in that tax bracket AT ALL. I work three jobs and would be lucky if it totaled to 30K. So, no, having a child is not financially an option for me. BUT, what IS an option for me, is to save money for my retirement and save money for my travels. In fact, $5 is going into my travel savings fund for writing this blog post. Because I have my goals and my priorities, I'm able to attain what I want. Some people DO want to spend obs and gobs of money on rearing children. Good for them and best of luck to them. But I hope they'd be just as willing to wish me well on MY goals. Often times, people try to place importance on the idea of raising a family and any other use of one's time is seen as frivolous. I disagree. I think it's more important to identify what makes YOU happiest and how you can attain it. Living up to someone else's standards will NOT make you happy. 


p 130 - The author mentions one interviewee said parents are often reluctant to travel for business while Childfree people are able to do so and might look forward to it. - I saw this in action. I happened to have taken off a month from work so I could travel for a GREAT flight deal, visit friends and family in six cities (not something parents can do!) and while I was sitting in an airport, biding my time, I couldn't but hear a frustrated mother on the phone berating her kids or husband for not remembering a dentist appointment and calling the dentist to reschedule. From the airport. A mother's work is never done. Mothers are important people. But sometimes I feel they LIKE it! How many of you have mothers that can be described as 'martyrs'? I know my mother gripes about how much she has to do for us, even now. But sometimes, if they relinquished a bit more control and ASKED for things to be done... well, maybe their children and husband might step up to the plate! I know that's a bit utopian, but if a woman never asks for help and only gripes about not getting any help... it's not really a healthy environment for anyone.


Another idea mentioned by the author is having kids means you may likely have to work a job you don't like because the children have financial needs that can only be met by a steady income. - This is a frightening reality. We don't know which way the river flows. Look at the economic downturn of the past recent years. How many parents lost jobs? You can bet most of them had to take jobs beneath their pay level just to keep food on the table. I can't imagine how stressful that must be. See above, where having kids is EXPENSIVE! As a single person, if I hit bad times, I can move into a home with others. You can't really do that if you have a large family. Well, many immigrants do it, but that's a different story. But working an unpleasant job is one of those 'sacrifices' parents make for their kids. It's something for people to consider when looking at their options. You don't HAVE to choose to sacrifice things you want because society tells you it's how you mature and it's the next step. You can look at your life and what you want to do with it. So if you choose children or no children, you know you are being true to yourself. 


p 130-131 The workplace oftentimes punishes those who don't have children with more chances to leave work (sick kids), more money (single moms), no discounts on health insurance as compared to those with kids, etc.) - There are a number of reasons that parents seems to have advantages over people like myself. The main difference is that in my department, most are salaried people, while 5 of us are hourly. So right there, there are a number of differences that aren't quite fair. I won't go into it because it's specific to my situation. I do know that it generally isn't balanced treatment and changes need to be made. Just because I don't have to run off to pick up a kid from school doesn't mean I wouldn't like to leave early as often as the others who still get paid. 


p 132 Tax breaks. - Grrrr. I don't understand why tax breaks occur. Why are people being rewarded for having kids when it's because of the increase of the population that more services are needed? Why don't I get a tax break for NOT having kids? My taxes pay for public education, but I don't have any kids that benefit from it. (My nephews are homeschooled.) I think there should either be more options across the board (I volunteer a LOT) or there shouldn't be any tax breaks. It just seems like a lop-sided, goofy, unfair system.


p. 137 The author wondered at the idea that since many childfree people will end up in retirement homes, we'll still be surrounded by the elderly who will talk about their children and grandchildren and will NEVER escape. The author hoped that by the time she retired, there would be a childfree retirement home! - HA! Yes!


p. 142 - The author talked about the need for growth in terminology. 'Childless' is used by some people who wanted but couldn't have children and they, and parents with children, may take offense to 'Childfree' while those who like that term are proud of their choice. - This situation was part of the inspiration for the title of this blog. I wanted to be able to refer to my lifestyle that doesn't contain children without referring to children. I'm not a 'non-BMW owner'. Independent of Dependents or IOD seems to be a tax term to refer to our chosen lifestyle. I like it and I hope it catches on. For three reasons, 1)CF also stands for Cystic Fibrosis 2) IOD sounds like IUD which is a method of birth control. 3) My friends and I can lay claim to it! ;)


p. 146 - I REALLY liked the paragraphs on 'purpose'. To me, that's a very important theme. My life is IOD because that's how I feel I will best attain my purpose in life. To me, it's all about encouraging people to research this decision, the most impacting decision on their life, and to make a well-informed, heartfelt decision that is true to that particular person. 


p. 149 - Having children doesn't make for a happier marriage. In fact studies show that happiness in marriage goes down with the arrival of the first child and increases when the children are gone. - I know it sounds like we are making that up to promote a baby-free agenda, but get the book and check it out for yourself! To me, it makes sense. Having kids isn't easy and adds A LOT of stress into a couple's life. It changes everything for them. Sometimes it works out well and sometimes not so much. You can't depend on an outside thing to make you happy. 


p 151. - The author suggested nation-wide people abstain from sex for a week and see how it affects the population. - I really hope this was said in jest. Even I, as a non-parent, am well aware that many parents often go for more than a week without sex. So there goes that idea!

So... in conclusion to this very long book review on "Complete Without Kids", even though I took issue with the way the information was presented (based on a few interviews with unnecessary conclusions/assumptions), and even though I disagreed with things that were presented, I can tell from my own report that it does actually present the Childfree Life as something to be considered. The author would present her life and show how it would be different if children were involved. And for some people that would be welcome. It's just a matter of REALLY examining the choices thoroughly. 
         As presented in this book, half of all pregnancies (in the U.S.?) are accidental. We as a society need to give our youth more information on how to stay safe and be well-informed and MAKE A DECISION. As technology and life options continue to progress and expand, so too do the messages we send to our youth, the emphasis our society puts on life choices and how to make them.

     As always, I want to send out a reminder those parents that may read this (if you have, your kids must be busy ;) ).... Those of use who are Childless, Childfree, or Independent of Dependents, just want you to know, we are living our lives the way we want to. We chose what's best for us in our individual lives. It makes us happy. And we wish the same happiness and fulfillment for you in your lives. So please, don't freak out the next time we say "No, I don't have kids". I'm sure we can still find something to talk about! ;)

PEACE

TV Review: How I Met Your Mother "Symphony of Illumination"

All the things you get to do when you're not pregnant.

Tonight, "How I Met Your Mother," a sitcom that has spent six seasons building up the identity of the mother of Ted Mosby's children finally stepped away from focusing on Ted and got into the mind of one of the female characters for a change. And for once, the show that is so focused on settling down and having kids as the aim of life showed the child-free side in a realistic and even a little touching way.

If you haven't seen the show, the woman pictured above is Robin Scherbatsky, a TV journalist, who has always been vocal about the fact that she doesn't want kids. As Mosby's first serious love-interest in the show, the kids or no-kids issue was a deal breaker. Robin wanted to continue chasing her dream of being a journalist, traveling, and remaining free and independent.

So tonight's episode threw her a loop. Robin learned that she might be pregnant, and pregnant by none other than the show's lovable lothario Barney (Neil Patrick Harris- seriously, I am trying to make sure any non-HIMYM viewers follow me here!)

Barney takes this in a very uncharacteristically positive way, and goes from "commitment is something you tell girls you want so you can sleep with them" to "yay, we're going to have a baby" in a span of 10 seconds. And he tries to take Robin with him, dragging her to baby stores to convince her that having offspring would be fun.

Thankfully, the show brought Robin back to her principles. While baby-shopping with their pregnant friend Lily, Robin and Barney are confronted by all the terrors of pregnancy and child-rearing- tired parents, out-of-control kids, nipples cracking from breast-feeding- you get the idea. And when a doctor confirms that Robin is not pregnant, she and Barney do a happy dance of relief and joy.

But then the doctor brings on some more news: Robin isn't pregnant because Robin can't get pregnant. This suddenly puts a down note on what was otherwise a great episode on how not every accidental pregnancy is a joy. Instead of taking this news with relief that she won't have to worry about scares like this in the future, Robin becomes disheartened. She talks about how she wanted to be able to have the option later if she chose; suddenly she is stricken with regret over something she never wanted to begin with.

I know many CF people who would identify with Robin in this episode. They don't want children for many reasons, but they've never wanted to take away the option. It's an argument many child-free people run into in their lives. "Won't you change your mind?"

And truthfully, some CFers do. But they've thought very seriously about the challenges of having children and have taken the time to decide that is was right for them. The infertility news doesn't spur Robin to have IVF and get pregnant at any cost, but she mourns the loss of being able to change her mind.

But ultimately, she remembers why she chose not to have children- because it was not what she wanted out of life.

In the end, the episode wraps with Ted telling his future children about all the wonderful things their "Aunt Robin" accomplished- traveling, famous TV journalist, even a bullfighter- but most importantly "kids, there was one thing Aunt Robin never was: lonely."

The Child-free Family: Yes, We Have Families.

That time of year is upon us. Collectively known as "the holiday season" in the next six weeks we will be bombarded by Christmas ads, turkey dinners, travel, decorations, etc. that of course all come back to the family as the central part of the celebration.

(Sorry, Hanukkah, I know you're a big family-centric holiday too. Unfortunately, you don't get nearly the ad revenue that Christmas does.)

Every commercial, every film, every billboard shows big family gatherings, putting particular emphasis on toys for the kids, the kids' table at Thanksgiving- in other words the presence of children seem to be the definition of family. Don't have them? That means you won't have a true Thanksgiving or Christmas this year.

That's the argument that many of my more reproductive-minded acquaintances make. The common definition of a "normal family" is that of the nuclear family unit- two parents and children. The holidays and their advertised tradition of such a family makes the reproductive-minded turn to the child-free and say so pityingly, "You must be so lonely over the holidays- no family and all."

Newsflash: the child-free have families! We have large families!

I, for example, come from a large family. I have multiple siblings, some of whom have married, and a multitude of aunts, uncles, cousins, cousins' spouses, cousins' kids, second cousins, cousins-once-removed, great-aunts, grandparents, godparents and a few more friends of the family that are included in every family holiday and special occasion. I used to note how many new relatives I met at every one of my father's Thanksgivings. There was always a new second cousin, third cousin, father's cousin's second wife's father. As I write my family is currently planning how to get 15 to 17 of us into a cabin for Christmas, ages ranging from 2 to 96.

The assumption that family means having children is harmful not just to the child-free community but to an entire extended family. By not having children we actually have more time to spend with the family unit we were born into. We have our parents, our aunts, uncles, grandparents (for those lucky enough to still have their grandparents), and our siblings whom we spend the holidays with.

"But don't you want kids of your own to play Santa with? Don't you want to see them open Christmas presents, play tug-o-war with the wishbone at Thanksgiving?"

NO. You know how much stress parents have to deal with over the holidays? Cook a fantastic Thanksgiving feast with picky-eating children, or with children underfoot in the kitchen. Buying all the toys and gifts they want? EXPENSIVE.

And, despite popular belief, we do have children in our families. We have nieces, nephews, godchildren, and cousins' offspring aplenty to get the kid festivities of Christmas if we choose. (Note: we don't have to try and put them to bed on New Year's Eve so we can ring in the new year! Happy New Year to us! hahahaha!)

And that's just family that's blood. Our families also include our friends, neighbors- people whom we bring into our lives who are not our blood but who still become our family.

Being child-free (and for some of us unmarried, but more on that topic another time) we don't have to split holidays with spouses' families if we don't choose, just so people can see our children. Feel like saying "screw Christmas, we're going skiing in Switzerland this year"? We can, because we don't have kids whom are relying upon us to provide all the trimmings of the traditional holiday.

The child-free person's holidays are far from lonely, but in fact are free to devote as much time to a wider family than those who see the nuclear family as the only true family.

Duggars: Clown Car vs. Ruckers: Fostering Heroes

By now, we have all heard that the Duggars are expecting Child #20. Personally, this sickens me. I will admit I am not a fan of organized religion, especially when it includes mistakenly justifying the overpopulation of the Earth. (We are over 7 billion people for anyone who's counting.) I've tried to ignore this family and their show and what they stand for (using religion as an excuse to shirk 'family planning' based on technology... or at least using a freaking condom once in a while) but if you are interested in this frighteningly abnormal family, check out the link above. Also check out this article that claims that Michelle Duggar is technically a feminist because she made a life choice that makes her happy. Oh and this book that supposedly tells you that you are mistaken if you think having kids is expensive, cuz it's not and having kids is LOADS of fun. For those of you not following the link, the book is called "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think" by Bryan Caplan. The 'great' thing about this book (that I have NOT read) is that it openly lists the reasons as being SELFISH. At least, they admit it. But unfortunately they act as if it's a good thing to be 'selfish' and disregard your perceptions about using finances as a valid reason to abstain from (more) children.

Here's the thing. I don't personally want children but my wish is that more people educate themselves about this CHOICE that will have THE biggest effect on their lives more so than anything else they will ever do. Having kids is the one thing that you cannot 'undo'. You can get a divorce, you can change jobs, you can move cities but you cannot un-have children. 

Maybe the Duggars are good people. Even though I don't agree with their religion and their reasoning for having children, they are providing a safe, loving home for their oodles of kids. (Although the kids can't possibly get the amount of parental attention they would like... especially since child-rearing duties are passed on to the other kids.) The kids are growing up with a set of morals (the religious background scares me - I can almost guarantee that an atheist never uses 'natural family planning') and they seem to be happy, positive people. Even though I don't agree with their religion or lifestyle, I can't help thinking what if the Duggars would have adopted 20 children? Now, it's possible that no adoption agency would place more kids in their crowded home but if the Duggars really have so much love to give, why couldn't they have cared for some of the other children on this Earth? They believe that children are a gift from God but their actions seem to say that it's only your genetic children. And this seems to be the mainstream attitude. And this really, really makes me sad. 

Even though I don't want to spend my life in a caretaker role to children, I applaud those that open their hearts and homes to children who really need parents. I'm talking about those people who foster or adopt children that are not biologically their own. People like the Ruckers who have fostered over 45 children within 7 years. <----- Video available at the link. Another, shorter video available below.

I know the fostering system isn't perfect and there are abusive people who take advantage of the fostering system because of the stipend BUT people like this couple make my heart swell. People who are able to do this make me feel so much better about the world and so thankful for these loving, wonderful people.

But then I remember how much people are drawn to starting their 'own' family. When we don't stop and question the norms, we don't always reach our highest potential. Many times people do the 'marriage and kids' thing because it is just what people do. I always encourage people to really get in tune with what makes them happy, whether it's children or not, to really understand and explore what it is they want.

In my life, I understand the responsibilities and lifestyle changes that accompany having children. When I listen to myself and understand my calling and where my life is leading me, I can tell that having children isn't for me. And I can't change that, as much as I can't change the fact that I'm not called to be a doctor. Were my life's motivation to change drastically (not likely), I hope that I would have the strength to foster children. I don't have the urge to birth children and I honestly don't like the baby years. I like kids who are more dependent (i.e. potty trained!) so the leap to being a foster parent would make sense, were it to be what I want. But, it's not. And I can't change that. But it doesn't stop me from wanting so badly for children in foster care to find the loving homes they deserve.

Wanting a childfree life for myself does not mean I want children to suffer. It helps me see the world from a different viewpoint. I see thousands of children in every nation that suffer from lack of a loving home environment in which to grow into strong, happy people who can do great things. I can't imagine what it must be like to grow up feeling inadequate because their biological parents were unable to care for them (hence needing to promote more options and education on contraception!). I can't imagine what these children must feel and it breaks my heart. I was born into a two parent home and had all of my needs met so I can easily follow my dreams and make something of myself. But these children in foster care, despite any of the problems they may carry around with them, are no 'worse' than any children a couple may biologically have. There are no guarantees in life. People are inclined to have their own children because a) it happens b) they want to see what their kids would look like c) they want a fairy tale family. So do these kids.

If anyone happens to be reading this blog, anyone who actually isn't childfree, PLEASE ask yourself if you have room in your heart and in your home to reconsider fostering children. Wait, watch the videos below. THEN ask yourself.

The following video is from March 2010, but I'm sure the numbers are still as unsettling.

This next video is from Jan 2010 about a family who did adopt and foster and you can hear the journalist tearing up as he finishes the story.

You might tear up as you watch these kids talk about getting adopted when you see the smiles on their faces.....

Okay, last tearjerker video. From the same series as the one above.

SO... If you live a life in which you want to be a parent, PLEASE open your mind and your heart to the idea of fostering and/or adopting. How much different would our world be if we encouraged people to not only be more responsible for their own reproductive power but to see their own possible power when it comes to the impact on one's community?

If it takes a village to raise a child, why aren't the villagers more concerned? I'm an Auntie for life but I still do my part in the village! What are you being called to do?


Addendum: (11/11/11 at 7:45 am) To clarify, I'm not saying that I look down upon those that have their own birth children but I highly encourage those who wish to add more children to their family really consider adoption and/or fostering as options in their lives.