I marvel at how much attention children still continue to receive in our society. It is the twenty-first century, where climate change is more than just a distant concern, property and student loans are increasing exponentially, and due to the newfound acceptance of the LGBTQ community, the singular image of what constitutes a couple is quickly evaporating. Meanwhile, women are still expected to love, desire for, dream about, and produce children. For a society which claims to be “progressive” and “modern,” this expectation seems rather old-fashioned. Why does society continue to idealize having kids when the practicality of having them keeps decreasing? Why are women still expected to want to be expecting? Is it just because of the precedent history has set, or are there other reasons? Thankfully, Melanie Notkin from Time Magazine has the answers in “Why Have Kids?”, and as it turns out, the number of women wanting to be mothers has been consistently decreasing since the 1800’s. Yet in the 19th century, the opportunities available to women were greatly limited, whereas today, no two woman’s lives are exactly alike. Despite this societal shift, the stigma surrounding women who choose not to have …show more content…
Ludden also highlights a nonprofit organization, Conceivable Future, which proudly proclaims “the climate crisis is a reproductive crisis.” I may not be the most environmentally cognizant person however it would be selfish on my part to ignore the global impact birthing a child has. While, as Ludden mentions, people are not going to stop having children, it is our responsibility as human beings to do our part to leave the world in a better state than when we enjoyed it, which will not occur if the current birth rate remains