That's one of the best articles I've read in ages, thanks!

Actually, I went and read your previous article in Online Opinion and I thought that was great too. Presumably you've now finished the final year of your degree? Good luck with your career, I look forward to reading more of your work in the future.

Dear Judith -

I think some people of our generation are digging a bit deeper than 'what I want to be when I grow up'. A previous article by Amanda Fairweather (29/12/04) certainly suggests so. I prefer to think our generation is focussed on 'how I want the world to be'.

In my argument, I am not out to burden people with mortgage's or unwanted relationships families...but believe people in their 20s deserve to be sold the choice upon which I myself stumbled. That is one of becoming a family, committing to a relationship and perhaps finding there is a lot of meaning in that.

There is an overwhelming amount of resources spent on selling singledom, travel and freedom of independance. Surely, we should question the forces that are selling the single life, when it is well documented that the single life bears the largest disposable income. An income marketers are keen to tap into.

The continued cynicsm towards relationships and family structures is concerning. Family units (of all types - as beautifully articulated in the December Feature) are the basic structure of community. Humanity has grown for thousands of years through the bonds of family that branch into extended family and community.

Families, marriage and responsibility do not have to be the stereotypes that you use to respresent them. They can be as diverse and varied as the sub-cultures we use to seek some meaning for ourselves and this life. As the young families I associate with make them. Most of us still rent, we work part-time, we spend time as communal family groups pursuing the same interests as other 20-somethings: creating music, art and contributing to the world in a positive way.

For our generation of creative people to put all their energy into their own experiences while 'joints are still limber and your liver can hack the pace' is to deny our generation of children that energy and enthusiasm for life. This is especially the case if we all put off having kids until we are cynical and jaded.

There is nothing wrong with pursing a career, or fame, or travel. But, there is something wrong if that is held up as more valuable than having a family or accepting some other form of responsibility in your 20s.

I found the responsbility of being a dad at 23 as exiciting as a rave and more fulfilling than pursing fame in Melbourne's arts scene. That's just me. But, it's an experience I think is worth sharing.

I appreciate your engagement with the debate. It is one that needs to continue.

cheers,

Daniel,

I reread Judith's article just now to be sure I was right here. I think you misread it. She didn't promote any views about anything. The article was a very successful attempt at bringing some humour into sometimes heated and usually serious debate.

I'm not saying any of your points are invalid, because I agree with most of them, your obviously pro choice. I do think they are in the wrong spot. This forum has many articles on this issue which seek to promot a particular opinion. I think opinion critiques belong with them.

"There is an overwhelming amount of resources spent on selling singledom, travel and freedom of independance. Surely, we should question the forces that are selling the single life, when it is well documented that the single life bears the largest disposable income. An income marketers are keen to tap into."

You've got all the right arguments but around the wrong way! The media relentlessly champions children and babies, cheer the women that have them and boo the ones who don't (see most articles on the recent split of Jen&Brad - she is being crucified as selfish because she dare say she would rather a career than baby-drool...and that's not necessarily why they split up at all - it's a morality tale, not reporting!).
As far as having the largest disposable income - that may be true, but for actual consumerism the breeder set win hands down.... just think about how many nappies Junior used in the first year of his/her birth... Plus the income you think of as 'disposeable' for these horrible selfish childfree single people is (partly at least) going to ensure they are not a burden on others in their old age, somehow this is seen as more selfish and less responsible than bringing another human into the world for the same purpose...
On that - how is it more responsible and less selfish to have a child you cannot support and expect my taxes to pay for your lifestyle choice? Yep...logical....

Encouraging people to have children keeps the ol' capitalism ticking over, not to mention an easier population to control (who's got the energy to question the powers that be when daddy is working a 60 hour week and mummy is so mind-numbingly bored that her brain has turned to mush...?). I don't blame people for not accepting being told what they want anymore, considering most of us have had the good sense to leave organised religion - why would we start taking orders from someone else...?

More than anything, I can't believe you fail to recognise any other benchmark of responsibility than doing what people tell you to.
It's very sad for you Daniel, but I have hope for your child.

They say misery loves company - this is what I hear you saying...
"But I've got a mortgage and a trapped stagnant life! You should have to do that too! How DARE you make a better choice than me..."

Dear Newsroo,

I don't deny people the choice to have a family of any shape, or to pursue a single life.

I don't believe I have the arguement the wrong way around. The 'breeder' set might appear to win hands down, but you provide little evidence - what does a baby cost? Well, like all things it can cost the earth or it can cost very little. You cite disposable nappies (cloth is an option), but on the other hand new parents are less likely to be buying iPods, plasma screens and a host of the burgeoning identity linked consumer goods. This is primarily the case becuase family brings a new form of identity that does not rely on consumer goods as forming an identity or linking you to a subculture - you have a kid now, your subculture is defined by that.

At 23 I became a father and personally it has given me more humility and selflessness than I thought I could possibly have. It is a single experience and I know there are countless others.

Statistically, several social economists clearly show that when it comes to accruing wealth and creating an asset foundation for the future - couples and families win hands down. It is linked to the possibility for combined assets, duel incomes, but also spending less on consumption.

You are correct that our consumer society has not left children and parents alone. I have met families spending tens of thousands of dollars on renovations all rvolving around the new room for the baby.

Our problem in this debate appears we are all at an impass - wanting to proclaim some lifestyle that everyone should pursue. This is pointless. No one can make a better choice than anyone else about their life path. It is a personal decision made for an individual person. And, I do think your 'misery loves company' remark borders on insulting when you know nothing about my family life and make some gross assumptions.

My family rent in a rural town. I work 3 days a week and share the childcare responsibilties with my wife, who is studying. We choose not to use childcare - because of cost, access and issues we have about quality of care. We use cloth nappies. And, almost 100% of our children's clothes are hand-me-downs.

I don't believe Jen needs to be crucified - or any other women or men who make the decision not to have children. What I fear is that young people are not seeing parenthood as even a choice. It is an option I wish to promote. It may not be for you or countless others - but people in their twenties rarely consider parenthood as a possible path.

My experience, and the few friends my age who also have children strongly believe it is an option that is as worthwhile as staying single.

I wanted to respond to Judith because her article was written in response to an article I wrote from SMH on 27 December.

I have also written extensively about the need for a new approach to the sterotypes of parenting that are used as arguements against having children. Portraying family life as a conservative, patriarchal and depressing scenario. Family is as diverse as any other aspect of our culture, and simply claiming it ties women to the kitchen is a worn out and incorrect cliche.

I am not doing what other people tell me to do. I am pursuing a life that is commited to family that has grounded me in community in a way I had previously not experienced. In fact, most people questioned why my partner and I were going to have a baby and not an abortion as we were so young when we decided to have children.

I apprecaite your engagement, but would prefer you stuck with the argument, rather than reverting to personal attacks on someone's life of which you know very little.

cheers,

Daniel I would like to appologise for being so filled with vitriol - I didn't mean to attack you as an individual.

It's just a touchy issue when as a childfree woman, I rarely see having children presented as a 'decision' so much as an inevitability. Remember - about 50% of children are unintended! Nice decision making skills......

Now that I understand what you are saying I can only conclude that you don't realise what a minority you are to actively enjoy parenting, most parents are disinterested at best (particularly fathers). Family life has been portrayed as conservative, patriarchal and depressing because for the bulk of people doing it - it is.
If enjoying parenting is a minority response, don't you think it should follow that parents should be a minority group...? Saying that raising kids isn't much fun isn't putting a negative spin on things, it's letting people know what they are in for! I don't see that 'tricking' people (particularly those in their 20's) into thinking they are necessarily going to be happy with kids will change the fact that most aren't. And there's a difference between 'enjoying' and 'enduring', as my mother did.

Remember in relation to this that we have almost 30% of women in this country who will never reproduce and a hell of a lot of fathers who couldn't tell you their childrens middle names.

Don't you think it's better to be honest about parenting before the fact than to rose-tint it and end up with a whole lot of people whining that "It's so HAAAARRRD to be a parent!" ; ) The main problem with it all is that there is no getting rid of the child once it's born, so when people find it's not all it's cracked up to be (it really ISN'T different when it's your own...!), unfortunately they can't return the baby. Better to err on the side of caution than the side of abandoned, abused and neglected children.

The other thing is that I originally came to this site because of your article in the SMH.... I have only NOW understood what you meant as the article reads like you are scornful of people not choosing a traditional life, more or less saying that without the ol' ball and chain you are not responsible or a grown up. In part I was not in a good frame of mind to begin as i seriously doubt the opposite viewpoint (ie: if I were to write an article which seemed to be saying all parents are clueless, or that parenting is a poor choice) would get printed...even in between the want ads and the retractions.

The way I see it, the world is geared toward encouraging children ($3000/child breeder bonus coming out of my taxes for a start!) without actually considering whether that is the best choice, or whether it would add to the quality of life of the parents. I would really like to see more parents who enjoy it - that's why we have to recognise that the de-mystification, not the demonisation of traditional family life is responsible for people shying away.
I don't care how many subcultures there are, a baby still cries, it still shits itself whether you're soaking it up with cloth or plastic nappies, it still is time consuming and inconvenient, it still destroys a woman's body. These are things which don't change no matter how society portays parenting and these are the things people are rejecting.

You can't be upset about people making an informed choice.