Do It for the Kids

The other night Emmy and I had a conversation about having kids. No, not together, just about children in general. Specifically, it came up after I showed her pictures of Justin and she confessed to me the unfamiliar desire she had to hold him. I don't remember exactly how it came about, but she referred me the web log of her high school debate coach, Mr. Craig Ortner. His posts are generally well thought out and although a bit cynical, quite intelligent. Give his site a look if you're so inclined, I've added him to my side-bar. Anyway, the entry she referred me to was one he wrote answering why people have children. I thought you might be interested in reading what he had to say, so I've posted his thoughts below, along with the comments that I would've left had the post not been a month old when I first saw it.

cortner's entry on November 22, 2004:

re: Emmy's sympathy for a child.

best quote: "...fix me please." (pun intended?)

Don't worry, it happens to the best of us. It's only natural to feel sympathy for the little things, like any normal person would for a helpless stray kitten or puppy. Especially unfortunate for women who are intellectually anti-child is that their bodies are bio-neuro-chemically fighting their better senses. I remember reading this guy Pondo in the Mac weekly who wrote occasionally about "breeders" which I took initially just to mean straight people, but I now understand much better now that I have friends who are breeding. Such a shame.

And it's not as if I want to toss all babies and children off a bridge, they're just not good on balance other than the bare minimum to preserve the species. Let's ask: why do people have children? To benefit society? I think not. They're not needed for labor in the developed world anymore, so why isn't the birth rate dropping even master? It's the ultimate in narcissism. People want to create miniature versions of themselves to push to succeed in all the ways they failed. It's the utmost power trip. What else could make you feel more powerful than producing another human, over which you have complete control, both physically at first and also then socially. What justifies giving up on your life to attempt to produce another one that might be better? I feel like I ought to think and write more about the Eastern perspective which is more about roles than individuals and seeks to honor one's ancestors, but at the moment I've got nothing, despite reading "Eastern Philosophy for Beginners" in preparation to lead the "Beyond Western Philosophy" perspectives session (which actually went off quite well despite and because of the kinda jerky kid in there).

It's appealingly altruistic in some abstract sense, but still... OK, I don't know if I really whole-heartedly believe all/any of that, but there is a nugget of truth in there somewhere. I guess I don't mind so much if other people have kids, I just don't want them myself. Also, I think it would be nice if I didn't have to teach in the same building with a bunch of little kids, or if they were at least kept in line (literally and figuratively).

I'm reminded of an article in the most recent (to me) NYer (I get it about a week late here) about the crazy market for baby products. I cannot find it online despite frustrated searching, so a citation: "Bringing Up Baby" under an Annals of Retail heading by Caitlin Flanagan, who I want to say wrote this inflammatory piece about the "Nannie Wars" in The Atlantic not long ago. I remember reading lots of response letters and intending to go back and read the piece, but I don't think I ever got around to it. Meh. I'm also reminded of a phrase "the best baby stroller under eight thousand dollars" which was either David Sedaris or more likely Dan Zevin in "The Day I Became Uncool."

Why do people have kids? Before I comment on the crux of your argument, allow me point out some other valid, yet relatively weak, arguments.

Obviously, in millennia past, couples would have children simply to populate the earth. This point is moot now, so I'll move on.

Some may have children in order to benefit monetarily. In centuries past, one was able to sell their children into slavery or marry them off to royalty, giving a healthful kickback to the parents. Obsolete now, the argument could still be made that the free labor provided by children working on the family farm or in the family business is valid justification. And, appalling as it is, our welfare system gives credit to those who continue having children although they don't have money enough to provide for themselves. This argument falls short, however, when one realizes the cost in providing enough for the child so that they reach that 'golden age' when they're able to actually be of aid.

Creepy as it is, some may consciously have children so that they can effectively live forever - genetically anyway - through them. Or, in the very least, 'try' enough times to have a son that will pass on that all-important family name.

Now, as for the argument you seem to support, I do agree with you in that some people may have children in order to live vicariously thorough them, providing for them the things that they were never privy to in hopes that their child's life is better than theirs was. However, the reasoning that people simply have children in order to make themselves feel powerful is dreadfully simplistic. If that were true, wouldn't people simply stick to purchasing pets? I suppose having control over a human life is far more satisfying to these people than training Fido, but I just can't see it as reason enough for someone to go through all the time, money, and effort required to raise a child. Also, if this were true, wouldn't more people simply adopt? Adoption is so rare nowadays that it seems to me that there has to be something deeper.

Humans, as social animals, instinctually have a need to bond with other humans. We are feeling animals and although the bonds we create with friends and lovers are of the utmost importance to us, cannot replicate the bond that is created between a child and parent. The bond one establishes with that child is instant, deep, and lifelong. It's an emotional tie that, I assume, only a parent would be able to describe. I'm going out on a limb here, but I assume that you would agree with me in that the emotional ties you've formed with your students are different than those of your college buddies or your mother, for example. I know the feelings I felt when I first held my newborn nephew were unlike anything I've ever experienced before, and we don't even really have a relationship yet.

So, surely there is a selfishness behind having children, but I think the effects are mutually beneficial. Adults fulfill their need to create unique bonds and children get people who love, care for, and protect them for the rest of their lives. The idea that someone has given up on their adult life in order to create another which is better than thiers is absolutely ridiculous! Rather, they've decided that those bonds are more important to them than their weekly squash match or Seinfeld re-runs. They've chosen to have a child in order to enrich their life, not despite it.

Then again, you've got people that don't bond with anything. We call them serial killers.