Guest Post: Roll of the unMother
Adrianne Writes:
I am a single 22 year old woman who has been a member my whole life. And I have always felt that there is something inherently wrong with me because, gasp, I have no desire to be a mother. None. Whatsoever. In fact, the very idea of having children makes me feel incredibly sad and frustrated.
In no way meaning to disparage SAHMs, but I could never do it. Of course, this doesn’t mean I dont value mothers, or SAHMs whatsoever. In fact, I think it’s awesome that women are able to do these things. I also don’t hate children–I love babies and think that kids are cute. But, I don’t want any of my own. I would prefer to be the aunt or some role like that.
The problem I face is that I am constantly told or implicitly given the message that if I don’t want kids, if I don’t have kids, I am violating a commandment of God and thus, I cannot be exalted. I am told that there is nothing greater for me to do with my life other than be a mother and to not believe this, to not feel this way, will make me somehow less of a good woman in the church.
I have been told I am selfish for not wanting children–that wanting to live a life free from the burden of children means I am unsacrificing and I care only for myself. But all of my plans for my future focus on helping other people. I have been told that my priorities are in the wrong place. I have been told that I will meet a man and that, suddenly, because I am in love, I will want to fill my uterus with his children, because I will want to fulfill my role as his wife. I have been told that I will change my mind, that every woman wants children, and no woman will feel happy without them. But I cannot believe these things.
I think it would be selfish to have a child to fit in with what my fellow churchgoers think I should be. If I don’t want the baby, but I have it anyway to be a ‘good’ person, that is the wrong reason. Children should wanted. Not social status, not even a spiritual duty. I don’t believe that being in love will change the root of who I am. I don’t think that every woman wants children. And this is not about priorities, it’s about how I feel. I do not feel a desire for children. I do not crave to take care of someone else. It has nothing to do with “I’ll make money before I have children.” It is “Where do I think I can help the most?” And never has my heart told me in motherhood.
So, that leaves me here–feeling like I am somehow inadequate, upset that I am pressured into a role that doesn’t fit me, and frustrated by the idea that I am a bad person for wanting to do what are potentially good things in the world over being a mother. Please, any ideas or comments would be greatly appreciated. I’m confused, I’m angry, and I feel as if I am somehow flawed, but I can’t help but feel as if there is a reason I feel the way I do. Does God want all women to be mothers? Are my feelings of wanting to work and make money and give to the community really bad? Will I be denied entrance into Heaven if I chose to not have children? And where is there official scripture/etc on this, because I can’t find any!
Please help!
I’m actually going to reserve most of my thoughts on the matter, but let you know that I work with a woman who has also felt no desire to have children. She admires others who have children, she thought her sister would also want children, does not mind stories about people’s children, but she just doesn’t want any. And she’s been married 24 years.
So, I would have to assume that you’re not any weird exception and, unfortunately, you will probably always be judged by fellow members, because we are taught to believe that having children is the closest you’ll come in this life to the celestial kingdom, so not to want that is *WEIRD*.
I love my kids, but I can’t blame anyone for not wanting them. They take up lots of time, energy, and until they learn to pick up after themselves and take the garbage out, I think I’m running a negative rate of return on my investment.
Comment by M L — May 20, 2005 @ 2:03 pm
Adrianne -
I am just a couple of weeks shy of my 27th birthday, and have been married for nearly 3 years. I, too, have never felt any active desire to be a mother. In fact, the thought of myself as a mother scares me to death. I know my husband would be a fab dad, and when I think about it I conclude that I might actually be a pretty okay mom in the end, but it’s not something that I’ve ever really wanted for myself–and yes, the absence of that “instinct” makes me feel like something of a cracked plate.
What is more troubling to me, however, is the idea that my life is only important because of my potential to give life to someone else. I cannot believe this to be true, and I suppose that most people don’t actually believe that to be true, no matter how often they imply it with their talk of commandments, divine pinnacles, selfishness, and sacrifice. We’ve been given talents, abilities, and opportunities for a reason, and I cannot bring myself to believe that the only reason is parenthood. Certainly doing good in the world apart from bearing children is another reason among many.
Lately I’ve begun to think that being a mother might not be that bad, and I will never say I never in regard to not wanting children (I’m changeable and I know it), but I never thought I’d even reach this point. Your feelings may change and they may not, but I wanted to tell you that you’re certainly not the only one who feels (or has felt) this way.
Comment by Athena — May 20, 2005 @ 3:01 pm
Maternal stirrings, Athena? I’m shocked!
I think that it’s possible that God speaks through our desires. If you do not desire children, don’t have them. God has given commandments, etc., about having and rearing children, but there’s always the all-important loophole that provides for personal revelation. And your lack of desire could be just that–personal revelation.
Of course, there will always be people who will not accept your nonconformity. Unfortunately.
Comment by Minerva — May 20, 2005 @ 3:08 pm
Adrianne–
I would be more worried about a single 22-year-old with a burning desire for children than I am about you.
Let me ask you this: If/when you marry, would you prayerfully determine whether God wanted you to have children? If you felt that God wanted you to have one, would you (even if it wasn’t tops on your list)?
If you can say ‘yes’ to those questions, you should feel free to tell everyone else to stick their heads in a pond.
If you cannot say ‘yes,’ then your issue is with God, not children, not Mormon cultural expectations.
Comment by Julie in Austin — May 20, 2005 @ 3:20 pm
Athena, I totally agree. I do not believe our parenthood or potential parenthood is the defining or validating point of our existence. I am 29, married, and not a mother. Yet. However, I have enjoyed my years of motherlessness and I feel that they’ve been very positive to my personal development, spiritual or otherwise. My husband and I deliberately didn’t have kids right off the bat because we wanted time to develop our own relationship first (much to my parents chagrin–they’re campaigning for grandkids and I’m their only married kid).
Take the model of salvation stewardship–in the quest for each of us to return to God, we, ourselves, are our very first responsibility. We cannot put anyone’s salvation as a higher priority than our own, it would be wrong. Our next priority is our spouse, should we choose to have one, and the next is our children, should we choose to have some.
I think it’s the same with our life. If this life is a learning experience and/or test, then we need to learn for ourselves, develop our skills (nunchucks anyone?), and be true to our deepest selves. And, yes, we need to put God first and sometimes we have to sacrifice and give up things we want for a greater good (our own or somebody else’s) and sometimes we need to do things we don’t want to and don’t understand yet–but it’s not selfish to give ourselves at least as much care and consideration as we do others or to find fulfillment in life from our unique passions and abilities.
Adrianne, I think that as long as you’re doing what truly feels right to you and keeping a close relationship with God, you can’t really go wrong and you don’t have to feel guilty. In fact, I think the occasional refusal to bend to the overwhelming wave of a culture can actually make you a stronger, more faithful, more genuine person.
Comment by Artemis — May 20, 2005 @ 3:53 pm
I’m wondering if you don’t need to rename this blog “Olympus,” Lisa.
Or should I call you Hera?
Comment by Kaimi — May 20, 2005 @ 3:59 pm
Hey–goddesses seek the company of goddesses. Nothing wrong with that!
Comment by Artemis — May 20, 2005 @ 4:01 pm
Yeah man…divine nature ‘n’ stuf…
Comment by Athena — May 20, 2005 @ 4:32 pm
Hey I need a goddess name….I guess i could just adopt my pseudo-hindu name of Mindala.
Adrianne, I applaud you for thinking about your desire/lack thereof for children. I wish more people in the world thought about it, then perhaps we wouldn’t have so many neglected/abused children. Beyond that, I think my thoughts are pretty close to what Julie said. I view it as a matter between you and Heavenly Father. If it were me, I think I’d want to have some sort of “mind your own business” retort ready, especially if/after you marry, simply because there are a lot of busybodies in the world and it’d be nice to know what to say to them beforehand.
Comment by Mindy — May 20, 2005 @ 4:47 pm
I think it’s interesting that we frame the discussion in terms of what we want. Certainly when it comes to a decision as life-altering as parenthood, we ought not push too far into territory that we think will make us miserable. But on the other hand, it seems pretty clear that there are plenty of things that are good for us, even that we ought to do, that are not necessarily attractive.
I would never say I know that to be the case with you, Adrianne, only that I believe there are other important considerations besides our own natural desires. Still, I can sympathize with your position, knowing that your lack of mothering desire sets you apart from a majority of women in the church, and that that must be isolating sometimes.
Further, to the person who mentioned that the church treats motherhood as the sole purpose of life or the pinnacle of mortality, I’m not sure I’ve seen that so much. Yes, we in the church treat motherhood as a very important calling, but I don’t think there are many who think it’s so important that those who don’t achieve that are worthless.
Finally, Artemis, I’m also not sure I believe the line about how ‘working on your marriage’ is a logical reason for not having kids. In the five years I’ve been married, I can’t see that my two and a half years as a dad have seen any less progress in my marriage than our two and a half childless years. Is there any evidence to support that idea that getting used to someone, or drawing closer to them, must be done without babies around?
Comment by Ryan Bell — May 20, 2005 @ 5:18 pm
I’ve known some people who wanted children so badly and just could not have them. A good friend from law school almost lost his wife in their efforts to have children, when she died and almost was not brought back he put his foot down and said “enough.” I felt so for him.
But, there is a time and season for everything. Singles ought not to be obsessing about the chance to babysit … though I think Julie has it right If you can say ‘yes’ to those questions, you should feel free to tell everyone else to stick their heads in a pond. …
Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — May 20, 2005 @ 6:37 pm
Adrianne-
You haven’t mentioned your needs and/or wants in terms of marriage. It may be none of my business, but I’m still curious within the context of this post. If you aren’t interested in marriage, then you probably won’t see any further issues out of your desire to not have children.
Though, if you’re hoping to marry a man - especially a Mormon man - who will agree to be fatherless with you throughout this life, I’m afraid your issue of not wanting children will spill over into a larger issue of finding a future husband (assuming you want one).
I’m not saying this because I think this way. Heavens, my wife and I have been married nearly three years and still don’t know if/when children would come. I’m saying this because I’m all too familiar with Mormon culture and know the difficulties you’ll probably encounter.
Most Mormons date from a pool of other Mormons. And dating from a pool of Mormons who don’t want children? I wish I had better news for you, but the probability that you’ll find someone compatible with you who also has no desire for children whatsoever within a Mormon culture is probably pretty low.
But life is full of surprises, changes, and/or compromises from which neither you nor I nor your future husband are exempt. But I know the answer of “things change” is totally inadequate for a 22-year-old looking for an answer now. I wish you the best in a society which might not accept you in the best way.
Comment by Bob Caswell — May 20, 2005 @ 7:04 pm
It’s a no win situation for women. Have too many and you’re a crazy Molly Mormon. Have none or not enough or spread them too far apart and you obviously are too worldly.
After having my son nearly four years ago, I started feeling pressure to have another one (by family and ward members) when I was by no means ready to even think of such a notion. I love being a mom, but I got the feeling that those pestering me about having another one interpreted my desire to wait as me not really liking motherhood at all.
I don’t think it’s crazy that you don’t want to be a mom. Though, I wonder if perhaps it’s just that you don’t want to be a stay-at-home-mom. There are men out there who are perfectly happy in the domestic role. My husband loved being an at-home dad for the first year of our son’s life and frankly, I loved two hours every evening I had of being a mom before putting him to bed. We often talk of switching roles again, as we are both perfectly comfortable and happy in either. A lot of people in the church think that is strange too.
Comment by Marci — May 20, 2005 @ 7:05 pm
All I can say is that i am happy someone had the courage to say this. I think it’s great that you know yourself, and that you are able to be honest.
Not everyone is meant to be a mother. Some can’t have children for physical reasons, but others have deep emotional reasons not to have them. I think we need to respect both, and remember that we just can’t know what is really going on in another person’s life.
Personal revelation on the subject is vital, and beyond that it really doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks of your childlessness, or childfullness.
Comment by Aimee Roo — May 20, 2005 @ 9:38 pm
FIrst of all, thanks to everyone who has responded. It’s really been good to hear all of the different comments and ideas and has really helped ot answer a few of my qustions.
Now, specifically to Bob’s question on whether I want to be married or not…I think I would like to be married, but, I do realize that the chances of me finding a compatible Mormon male who will be content with a wife bt no children is very low. I don’t think I would curl up and die if I never got married (although, to be perfectly honest, I’d be really sad about missing out on those physical aspects!!), because I’m pretty self-sufficient and independent and I’m happy being single, as I’ve never seriously dated anyone for longer than…ooo…a month. If the opportunity came, though, I wouldn’t be opposed to it, provided he was the right man.
To Marci’s comment–it’s not just the stay at home part that isn’t appealing to me…it’s the whole deal. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, midnight crying, diapers, potty training, schoolwork, the mandatory 13-15 year old stage where every girl hates their mother with all the hate they can muster, the college tuition, the worrying, the boogers, the sickness, the calls from school, etc. etc. I realize that it’s MORE than just this, and that these are side items to all the great things that kids do, but, it’s the entire package, not just the stay at home element. Although, that element is really scary as well, for me.
Again, thank you everyone for your comments! They are SO helpful in ways you can’t even imagine!
Comment by adrianne — May 20, 2005 @ 10:30 pm
Adrianne,
I took my married daughter with me to see Star Wars today (fun flick BTW!). She’s now 24 and I have to say we are good friends (I’m 48). The upside to kids is that they grow up, get past the “I hate you” stage eventually, and the resulting relationships can be deeply wonderful. It definitely gives life a lot more richness and meaning. Some parent/child relationships fail, and fail badly. But when they are good, they are unbeatable! Look way beyond the diapers, lost sleep, shortage of cash, etc. while you are trying to figure out your future life. And make your decisions about kids like the old saying goes — cross that bridge when you get there! If you find and fall in love with a good mate, it may suddenly seem clearly the next logical step (or perhaps not). But in the meantime, don’t sweat it! And count on the fact that people will always want to tell you what to do and when to do it. That’s life (in or out of the church). You just need to keep some good, sharp arrows/barbs in your quiver, handy for such moments ;o)
Something to chew on anyway…
Comment by Rich — May 20, 2005 @ 10:58 pm
Julie in Austin is super duper smart. (see #4)
BTW — I have always felt that there is something inherently wrong with me because, gasp, I have no desire to have a day job. I ended up giving in to social pressure and getting one though… You know what Brother Jagger said: “You can’t always get what you wa-ant”
Comment by Geoff J — May 20, 2005 @ 11:18 pm
Adrienne, I think I wrote this in my head and you stole it from me.
Most people will tell you you’ll “grow into” the mothering role. That eventually, sometime, you will switch gears and want to be a mother.
Well, I grew out of it.
I wanted to be a mother. I wanted to be a wife. I wanted to do what I believed was right, normal, expected. And I wanted it genuinely. I was certain motherhood was my purpose and I was eager to fullfill it.
But the faster I sped towards adulthood, the less I wanted my dream. I became suddently aware of my other talents and abilities, and decided to pursue a challenging career. One that required an almost ridiculous amount of university education (which is what I’m currently struggling through) and promised only 60+ hour work weeks in the future. I lost myself in it. It’s awakened a passion in me I didn’t know I had.
I still nursed my wants of a family through the first year of school, but by the time that year ended they seemed unrealistic. I made a choice between my two goals, and I chose a career.
I don’t picture myself married with kids anymore. If I imgagine myself at 30, I’m still single, in love with my job, living in a swanky bachelorette pad in downtown of a big city. I drive a sports car, not a minivan. Nobody wakes me up in the middle of the night. I only have to cook for myself. Etc.
This is a scandalous dream in the mormon community. It’s so blatantly “wrong” my sisters can only shake their heads silently in disgust or pity. It’s so worldly and selfish, people say — but I don’t believe that. I go out of my way to annoy them further by promising to adopt 2 little girls from China and have a nanny raise them. Naturally this sparks some argument to which I triumphantly retort, “IT’S BETTER THAN A CHINESE ORPHANAGE!!”, but they don’t laugh.
I don’t know how God feels about my choice. I think He’s happy, because I am so happy, but those that are so caught up in doing the “right” thing would care to argue. The guilt is definitely the most difficult thing to take. Sometimes I think I ought to just marry and get pregnant so I don’t have to defend myself any longer. But it’s more important to me to be true to myself, than to the mormon culture surrounding me. My mind may change next year, or in 10 years, and I’ll go back to wanting mortherhood. And if that happens, it’s ok. But even if it doesn’t, and I go on single and career-driven my whole life, that’s ok too.
It’s ok to be who you are.
Comment by Bridget — May 20, 2005 @ 11:48 pm
Ryan, I’m not saying that you progress or develop less as being parent than not being a parent–not at all. They both present different kinds of learning experiences and both are valuable. I never said you must be without babies to get closer to your spouse. But marriage is a huge change both in your life and in your relationship with the person who becomes your spouse and having kids is yet another huge change on top of that. I think it’s both helpful and healthy to have some time to adjust to the first couple of changes and to have time to explore and develop your relationship as a couple before the kids come along. However you look at it, kids do take a lot of time and energy and if you haven’t explored and gotten used to your relationship as a couple first, having less time and energy can make it more difficult to do it after. I think having some time “alone” together also establishes a precedent (habit, whatever) for making sure you take time out to nurture your marriage, even after the kids come along.
Besides, I think your spouse IS your first priority after yourself and I think it’s okay to give that relationship a little of its own special time. Once you have kids, you’ll always have kids. Forever. You don’t have to rush into it.
Comment by Artemis — May 21, 2005 @ 1:25 am
I was so glad when Adrainne sent in this guest post. It was a topic I’d been thinking about, something we’d touched on in other places. But how do I, a mother of three, and someone who always wanted children (although I’ve never been fond of babies) (weird huh?) (although I do like mine) (usually) talk about women how really don’t want, shouldn’t have, can’t have kids. It was just perfect. Thank you Adrianne! And thanks for all of the insightful and interesting comments. I always learn something here. Every single day.
And Something else I’d like to learn, Kaimi . . . what does that mean. My classical training has been somewhat remiss, along with my math, and chemistry, and English (esp spelling), and economics. Basically I’m a big ignorant brick. I know that olympus is where the Gods live, right? On a Mt. Olympus?? Yes?? And Hera, she’s married to Zeus?? I suppose I could look this all up, but I still might not get what you’re getting at. Even though I’m pretty sure it’s a compliment, which is why I want to know, because you never can milk those enough. If you know what I mean.
Comment by Lisa — May 21, 2005 @ 2:05 am
Hera was one of the three most beautiful goddesses, and the queen of heaven, married to Zeus, lived at the top of Mt. Olympus with the rest of the gods. Kings loved her. Competed with Athena (Zeus’s daughter) and Aphrodite (Venus) the goddess of sleaze in a beauty contest that started the Trojan War.
Skip all the details, take the complement and the fact that it is a short name that ends in “a” …
Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — May 21, 2005 @ 4:41 am
people say some silly things wiht regard to children, adn we should all learn to keep our own counsel. When I was an active cxhurch member and about 4 months after the death of my first child who had arrived prematurely after 4 miscarriages I was appraoched in the Temple by a woman i knew only vaguely, ” Oh Sister Overal, married 18 months now, no children yet” ” yes I do “I said ” but she’s dead” I should really feel ashamed that I felt so pleased to have embarassed her, but the need to reproduce or not should be extensively discussed before marriage, together with child care issues if reproduction is the choice. No one inside or outside the relationship should make assumptions.
Comment by christine overal — May 21, 2005 @ 5:09 am
In a very ‘family oriented’ church there are those that are ‘family obsessed’. My wife and I had a lot of pressure to start a family, especially since we had more than nine months and no sights of pregnancy or baby. When my wife stated that we did not want to have children it was outrageous. We even got called to the bishop’s office and interviewed. We said that it was not our time to have children, but if they came, it was allright. But the pressure of the sisters towards my wife was quite unbearable, until she said that some people can not conceive and such questions (when are you starting your family?) were very offensive. No more pressure.
Although it is not our case, we have known peole that would have loved to have children and did not have them. Does having children influence the degree of exaltation? Hardly. D&C 76:51 - 53 gives the requirements to be in the “church of the Firstborn” and having children is not a requirement. Although Gen. 1:28 the commandment of being “fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” was given, it should be noted that the decision of having children is only to be taken between husband, wife and the Lord.
If you, Adrienne, feel that you do not want to have children, it does not diminish you as a daughter of God, neither it diminishes your possibility of obtaining an exalted state. That depends solely on you and your actions as you comply with the commandments of the Lord. An example of a woman that I personally admire is Sherri L. Dew, former member of the General Relief Society Presidency who is not married (as far as I know) and has no children (again, as far as I know).Is she ‘less worthy’ than, say, Sister Abasanta who had seventeen children? No, not by far. I would think that the decision, both to have or not have children,is to be taken prayerfully.
Alex
Comment by AlexG — May 21, 2005 @ 5:15 am
Not so very long ago, women did not have this choice. A woman from a previous era would have great difficulty supporting herself without a husband, and if she did have a husband it would be her wifely duty to have sex, and because there was no reliable birth control, she would most likely have children. If a woman from that era said she didn’t want children (and I’m sure there were just as many then as now who would rather not have kids), she’d be asking for a very tough life. Quite possibly just as tough on her as life with kids would be. And exactly what could she contribute to the community when the community allowed women no education, no property, no loans to start a business, etc.?
But we as women have more options now. We can get an education and earn good wages. We can use credit and own property. And technology allows us to separate sex from childbearing. It is not only possible, but easier than ever, for us to support ourselves and live a fulfilling life without having kids of our own. However, many people’s attitudes are still based on the way things used to be.
Comment by B — May 21, 2005 @ 9:55 am
Lisa,
Well, I saw all the goddess names popping up — Athena, Artemis, Minerva (Minerva is a Roman rather than Greek goddess, but ignoring that little detail).
So I figured that this blog ought to be called Olympus, since that’s the home of the Greek gods.
And if this is Olympus, then the boss around here — that’s you — has to be Hera, who was the queen of the gods. That was the extent of my thinking when I commented.
But now that Ethesis mentions it, yes, Hera was a real hottie as well.
(Of course, you don’t want to take the parallel too far — Hera was also a major b*tch. Partly because her husband Zeus had a habit of bedding every sexy mortal woman he noticed. And so Hera (understandably jealous) regularly used her powers to do terrible things to beautiful mortal women, and to the many bastard children, half-god and half-mortal, that Zeus fathered).
Comment by Kaimi — May 21, 2005 @ 9:59 am
Ok, the arguement that once you marry you will possibly change your mind is really bothering me.
Yes, it is possible that once you marry you may find yourself wanting children.
But, marriage doesn’t change people. Who you are before you marry is the same person you are after. If you didn’t go to church before, you aren’t suddenly going to become active after a ceremony. If you hated peas and carrots before, but your spouse loves them, I bet you will still hate them
I don’t want children, and I have been married for three years. If anything, the possiblity of it happening has only reinforced my belief that I would not be well suited for motherhood. I am open to it if I felt inspired otherwise, but getting hitched didn’t suddenly give me a deep desire to procreate.
Comment by Aimee Roo — May 21, 2005 @ 11:04 am
I remember being pregnant with my first child at 18, 8 months along, looking down at that beach ball, wondering how it was going to get out and slowly realizing, “this is going to hurt.” And being really scared. I never asked, nobody ever told me, I was sort of Appalachian ignorant, and almost had my baby at home because I didn’t know I was in labor. I thought I had a bad stomach ache or something. When he was born, ten minutes after we got to the hospital, I was shocked and grossed out by him, at all that gunk. Who knew?
Motherhood has been a mixed bag for me, but sometimes I think wistfully of how much less complicated my life would be. I love my kids and grandkids, but I sometimes play with just wandering off and living simply in one room, like the heroine in Anne Tyler’s novel, The Ladder of Years.
My 26 year old stepdaughter, who I adore, divorced her first husband and has lived with her boyfriend for almost five years now. She says she doesn’t want children, although she loves her nieces and nephews, she is the greatest aunt. I don’t condemn her decision or anything, but I feel sort of bad and hope she changes her mind.
It’s really hard being a mother, it’s work, no sleep, it’s scary, it’s tricky, difficult, fraught with heartache and failure, no matter how hard you try. There should be a “but” here, I guess, telling you all the joys and rewards. There are, but I don’t fault anybody for any choice they make. It’s between them and God.
One thing, though on a practical note, really, not trying to dump on you here, I’ve noticed that old people who have no families, no kids or grandkids, are very lonely and somewhat more at a hardship with no help except from the state or neighbors. I like to think of my family as “storage people” for my old age. Don’t tell them I said that.
Comment by annegb — May 21, 2005 @ 11:09 am
Ah hah, it all makes sense now. I’m all about being a goddess, so it’s perfect really. Well, without all the nasty revenge plots and beauty contests and cheating husband and stuff.
Comment by Lisa — May 21, 2005 @ 11:55 am
From the original post: Will I be denied entrance into Heaven if I chose to not have children? And where is there official scripture/etc on this, because I can’t find any!
The scriptural reference is the commandment to multiply (aka bear children) given to Adam and Eve (see here, here, and here). We are of course free to heed or ignore any of the commandments but we miss out on the blessing that are directly associated with specific commandments when we don’t keep them.
(Don’t blame me, that just what our scriptures say…)
Comment by Geoff J — May 21, 2005 @ 2:32 pm
The adjustment from being one person to being a mother is intense, but for me nothing in my life has been better. Although my kids are still pretty young (6 and 10) I already find I am adjusting to the fact that they don’t need me like they used to.
I’ve loved all of it, but I was scared before I had children - and when I was 22 I was definitely not ready for it. I did have in my mind that I wanted to have children, though.
You may find too that falling in love and growing older and just the changes of life bring about a different perspective and you’ll want to be a mother.
Or, you may find that these feelings never change. It’s good to accept where you are at and not let other people’s expectations get you down. Your life is yours and whatever path you take, you’ll touch other people’s lives.
I wouldn’t waste your energy stressing over it. You can only do what feels right for you.
Comment by Laura — May 21, 2005 @ 4:14 pm
The decision as to whether or not to have children or when is between a husband, wife, and the Lord. However, Adrianne, you are only 22. There’s a good chance that you /will/ change your mind, not because you’re not sure of yourself now or whatnot, but because of hormones and such. There’s an awful lot of life that is influenced by those little buggers, particularly for women. At your age, I emphatically did not want children and had not for most of my life. Two years later? I’m seriously starting to think that I do .
At 22, you still have most of your life ahead of you. You aren’t me, you could be different. The key, however, is to be flexible.
Comment by Firebyrd — May 22, 2005 @ 3:00 am
Well, first of all I’d like to second [or third] what Julie in Austin said way back in #4. That of course is the answer.
Then I’d like to tell y’all a little story . . .
Dh and I would have both been quite happy never having kids. We had no desire to have them and in fact neither of us really even liked them. Babies drool and scream. Toddlers are brats. Teenagers are sulky. [Add other favorite stereotypes here ___ ] We were happy and had a good life — why change?
But, well, there was that little commandment about having kids [it’s in the temple sealing ceremony; at least that’s how I interpretted it]. So we heaved a sigh and took a step of faith. I was scared, not knowing if our lives would end, or at least our happiness evaporate forever. And? Well, at least for us it’s been a positive experience. Really. Not easy, but I wouldn’t trade my kids or the life they’ve brought me for the world [and funny thing, I’ve become much more tolerant of other people’s kids. Well, most of them . . . ]
I still don’t care for babies — that was hard. But the older they get, the better it is [yes, I have a teen. No, this child doesn’t hate me.]
So I for one am glad I took that step of faith.
NO
Comment by Not Ophelia — May 22, 2005 @ 6:31 am
Julie in Austin is so very correct. It’s nobody else’s business, Adrianne. Hang in there and do what you feel is right. It’s your family and your salvation to work out. I have two children, and it’s hard. I don’t say that to discourage, only to emphasize that you show wisdom by not taking motherhood lightly.
Comment by Miranda PJ — May 22, 2005 @ 3:40 pm
Geoff
Your reasoning is dangerous. Your comment could be construed to say that, without qualification, not having children disqualifies one from heaven. That is patently false.
Comment by J. Stapley — May 22, 2005 @ 4:10 pm
I actually didn’t address the subject of qualifying for heaven in my comment, J. But I can see how someone might misread that. I only was pointing out that when we have ample opportunities to obey any commandment and we willingly choose to disregard it we cannot obtain the blessings that are connected to that commandment. In other words, we reap what we sow in life. However, in cases where we are willing to but cannot keep a commandment (for whatever reason) the grace of Christ covers for us.
Your reasoning is dangerous.
Ha! Well I am a dangerous and mysterious person you know…
Comment by Geoff J — May 22, 2005 @ 7:11 pm
I am not a blogger but I’m married to an almost obsessive blogger who goes by the name of Geoff J. Every once in a while he’ll have me check out a post on one of the blogs that he thinks is pretty interesting (poop chronicles is my only other experience at this blog, too funny). Today he told me to check out this post and he was right, it is a fascinating one.
I agree with a lot of you that Julie in Austin is right on the money. I also thought annegb’s comment was great.
I think there is a misconception here that most Mormon women have a burning desire to breed and if you happen to fall outside of that mold then you are judged harshly. First of all most humans (mormon or not) want to procreate at some time in their lives and finding a spouse that will agree to forgo having children in their lives might be difficult in many circles of association.
Secondly, I was called to be the enrichment counselor in the relief society a few months ago and my instructions upon receiving the call were; NO CRAFTS! No super Saturdays (hallelujah!), and no activities that were exclusionary in any way, ie mother/daughter night, marriage relations, etc. So if someone is judging you harshly, or harassing you it is due to their own bad behavior and not because of their membership in the church.
Finally, I hope you are willing to be flexible in this life. There is too much learning and growing to be done and being inflexible has a tendency to stunt progress I think. Just do what Julie says and I think you’ll be fine!
Comment by Kristen J — May 22, 2005 @ 8:59 pm
Just another woman who didn’t want to have children when she was 22, though I married that year. Wasn’t ready, until 27. And then it was my time, I was ready enough. But I never was baby hungry, I still don’t relate to that.
Julie’s #4 comment is the key. And also to remember, if you have kids, you’ll do it your way. It makes motherhood look more alien if you have think you have to become an alien, be like those girls at school or church that you never had much in common with anyhow. I took my baby in a backpack through American museums, I traveled in Europe, I spoke to her in the foreign languages I had studied, when she got older I fed her the kind of food I liked to eat. Part of being a mom is being who you are and having your values.
I didn’t think I was the type to marry or to have kids. Now I have four. It makes me really happy that the Lord extends this blessing, not just to the women who are the obvious candidates.
Comment by Johnna Cornett — May 23, 2005 @ 12:12 am
Hey Adrianne. Good post. I love the fact that we can discuss anything at FMH.
If you would be interested in a man who doesn’t want kids, here’s what to do. When you’re in your late thirties or so, starting dating divorced men who are late forties to early fifties, whose kids are pretty much raised and gone. You’ll be a step-grandmother, but that should be easy compared to raising bitty kids. I’m single still, and I’ve noticed that once you get into your thirties, the men who are interested in you are at least a decade older than you are. Several don’t want a second family. They’re great guys, so look for one of them. (Personally, I’m looking for one who would want a second family!)
Another point - while raising kids is a lot of work, and has its miserable times, adult kids and grandkids sound like a good thing. It’s one thing to be childless at 30, and another thing to be childless at 80. Who’s going to choose your rest home and visit you every week? If you don’t have kids, make sure you cultivate a good relationship with nieces and nephews. You’ll need them to help take care of you when you’re elderly.
Comment by Janey — May 23, 2005 @ 12:19 pm
Here’s a me too for Johnna’s post (37).
I didn’t feel any need to have kids several years into my marriage. We lived on our sailboat and were planning a boat trip down the West Coast. About four years into the marriage, I felt a strong impression that it was time to have baby one — this was a spiritual impression, not any social pressure or whatnot. No one was giving me a hard time. So, we sold the boat and bought land. I also knew when it was time for baby two, and by the time I got the revelation for baby three I was ready to rebel! But He sent baby three anyway as a surprise, ha ha! But my kids are so cool (but no more please [eyes heavenward]) I don’t want to trade them in now.
And, I’m the mom I want to be — I take my babies surfing in backpacks (not out in the water silly, to the beach), I’m planning on putting my older two on snowboards this winter, we camp, hike, kitesurf, mtn bike. The fun just multiplies.
(I still don’t like other people’s kids much, but like someone else said, I find I can tolerate more now. I must be [gasp!] growing!)
Comment by Amber M — May 23, 2005 @ 5:11 pm
I remember feeling the same way when I was in my early 20’s–that because I didn’t desire children, there must be something “wrong” with me, at least according to the church. I remember having all of the same thoughts you discuss here. I went back and forth between feeling annoyed and feeling genuinely inferior. Once when I was feeling especially bothered by it, I had a conversation with my dad, and he said, “There is nothing more valuable to me than my family–but there’s more that a woman can do in her life than have children.” He didn’t say I’d change my mind, he didn’t judge one way or the other; it was just his way of saying, “You don’t need to be bothered by this. You can make your own choices.” For some reason that was very comforting to me–it should have been obvious from the start, but I guess I just needed to hear it from someone else. It didn’t make me suddenly want to have children, by any means, but it neutralized the issue for me. I just realized that there was no one “right” way to live my life. I still got the same messages about family and motherhood at church, but they didn’t bother me (as much) anymore because I just figured I’d cross that bridge when I came to it. In the meantime I was just going to live my life and make the best choices I knew how.
Having children only because you think you “have” to is not a good way to start a family. You may change your mind in the future, or you may not, but regardless of whether or not you have children, there will always be other worthy and fulfilling pursuits in your life. I guess that is the message I got from my father. Every person (and parent), male or female, is different and has something unique to offer the people around them–and if those people happen to need their diapers changed from time to time, it still doesn’t change who you are fundamentally. God made you a whole person, not just a mortal body generator.
Comment by RLJ — May 24, 2005 @ 5:52 pm
This may be the most depressing thread I have ever read on any LDS-oriented blog, ever.
Comment by Lowell — May 25, 2005 @ 8:47 am
Actually, I meant to say the thread as a whole was depressing. Didn’t mean to be attacking Adrienne or her post.
Comment by Lowell — May 25, 2005 @ 9:37 am
Lowell, rather than being depressed, I suggest that you choose to be more supportive of your wife, if you’re married, to realize that being a mother, while immensely rewarding, is also the hardest job on earth. It’s constantly frustrating and discouraging, not to mention the lack of sleep.
I haven’t found it depressing at all, though my comments have been partly negative. I have found it validating. I appreciate the posts.
Comment by annegb — May 25, 2005 @ 11:45 am
annegb: I was too terse in my comments. What depressed me were the numerous expressions of a lack of interest in being parents and the number of commenters who validated and even seemed to support that lack of interest. Here’s what stood out to me:
1. The desire of many here to distance themselves from those who are “baby-hungry.”
My wife and I have three children and will not have any more, and we are considered insufficiently productive by many. But it makes me sad to see the denigration, by other Latter-day Saints, of those who, with righteous intent, want to have babies, and lots of them. Frankly, making fun of those folks seems like an activity that one might expect to see going on in a certain “great and spacious buiiding” but not among the Saints.
2. Comment No. 24: “If you, Adrienne, feel that you do not want to have children, it does not diminish you as a daughter of God, neither it diminishes your possibility of obtaining an exalted state. That depends solely on you and your actions as you comply with the commandments of the Lord.”
This is a startling comment, and again, quite depressing.
3. Comment No. 18: “I don’t picture myself married with kids anymore. If I imgagine myself at 30, I’m still single, in love with my job, living in a swanky bachelorette pad in downtown of a big city. I drive a sports car, not a minivan. Nobody wakes me up in the middle of the night. I only have to cook for myself. Etc.
“This is a scandalous dream in the mormon community. It’s so blatantly ‘wrong’ my sisters can only shake their heads silently in disgust or pity. It’s so worldly and selfish, people say — but I don’t believe that. I go out of my way to annoy them further by promising to adopt 2 little girls from China and have a nanny raise them. Naturally this sparks some argument to which I triumphantly retort, ‘IT’S BETTER THAN A CHINESE ORPHANAGE!!’, but they don’t laugh.”
Forgive me for being judgmental, which is not very accepted these days, but I don’t know what’s more depressing– that openly and unapologetically selfish set of future plans, or the childish desire to “annoy” those who disagree in order to make the commenter feel better.
4. Comment No. 24: “But we as women have more options now. We can get an education and earn good wages. We can use credit and own property. And technology allows us to separate sex from childbearing. It is not only possible, but easier than ever, for us to support ourselves and live a fulfilling life without having kids of our own. However, many people’s attitudes are still based on the way things used to be.”
Are different attitudes by LDS folks based only “on the way things used to be,” or perhaps on a set of deeply-held convictions arising from what the believers consider to be revelation?
The whole discussion just leaves me more than cold.
Lowell
Comment by Lowell — May 25, 2005 @ 2:30 pm
Lowell,
1.”But it makes me sad to see the denigration, by other Latter-day Saints, of those who, with righteous intent, want to have babies, and lots of them.”
I’m baby hungry, and proud of it. I want babies, I look at them and I hunger. I’ve got three already and I’m not sure this hunger will ever go away. I literally pop one out, look at it and my next thought is, I want another.
But if Jane or Joe does not hunger, how does this denigrate me? I don’t understand your reasoning.
They do not distance themselves from me and my hunger. Only express differences.
They do not hunger,
I do.
My husband loves cars,
I yawn.
I’m fascinated by politics,
he avoids.
I see no denigration, only differences.
2. So what do you want women who do not desire children to do?
Do you want them to believe that they are diminished as a daughter of God for this lack of desire for children? Do you want them to have children even if every cell protests? Do you want them to pick desire off a tree and eat it?
Frankly I just don’t get this. Because what you are implying here seems both illogical and cruel.
3. Listen Lowell, Frankly I’m not much into swanky bacholorette pads or sports cars. I find them empty and sad as ambitions.
However, your decided lack of humor has crippled you in your (harsh) judgement here. Calling someone selfish and childish when you know no more about her plans or ambitions for life than a paragraph she posts, tongue in cheek, is a very short- sighted, useless and probably untrue use of your judgementalism.
If you want to glorify judgementalism, at least save it for when you have some knowledge to base it in.
4. Your leaps in logic here are astounding. Painful. Ugly. I could from your comment assume that you think that women lacking the right to work and own things and be considered a full human being, and control her reproduction are admirable and propehtic.
I know this isn’t what you mean. However. Do be clear about what you do mean.
Comment by Lisa — May 25, 2005 @ 3:21 pm
Lowell,
Per #1–I don’t think anybody here is making fun of people who want to have lots of babies. But I do think a lot of people want respect for making alternate choices, choices that, for all you know, are rooted in personal revelation. I think it’s awfully judgmental to start saying that people who make alternate choices are part of the ‘great and spacious building.’ Make sure you’re not going after motes there.
Per #2–I fail to see how comment #24 is either startling or depressing. I think it’s a given that salvation is dependent only on oneself and one’s willingness to obey God. Such a given, in my mind, allows for things like personal revelation and decisions not to have children. As long as you have a close, obedient relationship with God, nothing else matters.
Per #3–I think you’re taking comment #18 a little too seriously….
Per #4–I have experienced faithful LDS who have some deeply-held convictions that are based ONLY on tradtion, i.e., the way things used to be, although they’ve interpreted and conflated both scripture and doctrine to support their views. It is essential to be able to separate doctrine & revelation from tradition, personal interpretation, and opinion.
Comment by Artemis — May 25, 2005 @ 3:22 pm
Also, when my husband and I talk about having babies, I’m always the one wanting more. I’m the oldest of 7 kids and I love the idea of having a gaggle of my own. Believe me, there’s no denigrating of having babies coming from this corner.
Comment by Artemis — May 25, 2005 @ 3:46 pm
Just a semi-related ramble on “baby-hunger”. I have 2 kids, a daughter who is almost 3 and a son who is 5 months old. I don’t think I’ve ever felt baby-hungry. I got pregnant shortly after we got married (planned) and I was excited to have my first baby. I get excited for others having babies because I think it is awesome to be a parent. My son was not planned…I was leaning towards spacing the kids 3-4 years apart. When he was born, I loved him every bit as much as my daughter, and was so happy to have him in our family, but I hadn’t hungered to have him. I think I’m too much of a realist to hunger for a baby. I can’t be hungry for someone to come who demands so much. But I still adore my kids, and I’m a good mom. But I honestly don’t think I’ll understand being hungry for a baby. I know people who, like Lisa, have babies and are still baby-hungry. Not me! I think I like to have a chance to forget all about the good and bad things about babies before I have another. 2 1/2 years was about sufficient…I have had a lot of fun rediscovering babyhood with my son.
Comment by mindy — May 25, 2005 @ 4:26 pm
Lowell - Lisa, in comment 45, gave a superlative response to your castigation. I will only add to her response to #4:
Perhaps, If you revisited our history, revelations, and the lives of our Saints (in all ages), you might reevaluate your reverence for currently accepted norms.
Comment by J. Stapley — May 25, 2005 @ 4:39 pm
Lisa:
Thanks for responding. First off, I did not mean to offend, and apologize if I did. I’ll try to clarify:
1. On “baby hunger:” Often those who are LDS and who have good minds and more subtle tastes about life (including, but not limited to, those with an intellectual bent) fall into making fun of those whose world view is less nuanced. I have always found this repulsive and uncharitable, and I was sensing it in this thread. If I am mistaken I take back everything I said along those lines. Enough said.
2. You ask, “So what do you want women who do not desire children to do? Do you want them to believe that they are diminished as a daughter of God for this lack of desire for children? Do you want them to have children even if every cell protests? Do you want them to pick desire off a tree and eat it?”
I suppose you are asking these questions as rhetorical devices, because my comment gives no reason to believe I would desire such unkind things for anyone. I assure you that I am not implying anything that is cruel, and I don’t think I’m being illogical at all.
I feel compassion for LDS women who do not desire children; in our culture and in light of our doctrine that must be a heavy cross to bear. I don’t judge them. If such a woman were my daughter or someone else loved, I guess I would listen to her a lot, pray with her, encourage her to do some soul-searching, and help in whatever way I could. I might even come to believe she would be better off not having children– especially if she sincerely does not want them. But that would be a rare case indeed.
3. I guess I missed the humor, and frankly, I think many reasonable readers would have missed it too. I like humor but didn’t really see it there– I saw mainly anger. Take another look at that post and tell me if you still disagree.
If she is really 100% kidding, then the joke is really on me and I apologize. I guess by the time I got to that post I was awash in what seemed to me to be a selfish tenor to many of the comments here. But it still doesn’t seem to be a case of 100% kidding.
4. I disagree that I made any leaps in logic and I reject any claim that I said anything painful or ugly. I probably did not express myself clearly enough. What I was responding to was the argument that if LDS people do not support the notion that LDS women can live “a fulfilling life without having kids of our own,” that is necessarily based on outmoded values or mere tradition. Surely you can see the weakness in such an argument. Yes, many hidebound beliefs are based on such shaky foundations, but I think we need to make distinctions and not throw out the good with the bad. Our LDS views on chastity, for example, have become downright quaint in the eyes of a great many (perhaps most) people, but that doesn’t mean those views are based merely on “the way things used to be.”
I hope this is more clear. I did not mean to offend and apologize if I did.
Comment by Lowell — May 25, 2005 @ 5:08 pm
Further responses:
Artemis:
I think we are largely in agreement, and my response to Lisa also covers your comments, except for No. 2. The commenter stated:
“If you, Adrienne, feel that you do not want to have children, it does not diminish you as a daughter of God, neither it diminishes your possibility of obtaining an exalted state.”
This is a statement that begs for discussion and perhaps some elaboration. Decisions whether or not to have children are momentous in one’s life. The decision of a person who could have children not to do so is potentially more than momentous, and I was surprised at the extent to which so many commenters here wanted to reassure Adrienne that she was just fine and should not worry.
J. Stapley:
(a) I meant to castigate no one, only to comment on arguments. I am in no position to do any castigating. Check out my long response to Lisa.
(b) You said: “Perhaps, If you revisited our history, revelations, and the lives of our Saints (in all ages), you might reevaluate your reverence for currently accepted norms.”
In other words, “If only you knew more about what’s really happened in the past, you’d know how wrong you are.” As I said to Lisa, it is very common in some circles to profess a higher level of understanding of gospel-related matters because of one’s “chances for learning,” especially as regards the imperfect teachings of history. Leaving that aside, if you think anything I have said here is based on a “reverence for currently accepted norms,” you haven’t read very carefully. See my response to Lisa above. I think my argument is pretty sound: There’s a difference between such norms, which can be tossed overboard, and revealed truth, which cannot, and we need to be able to make the distinction.
Comment by Lowell — May 25, 2005 @ 5:24 pm
You know, it seems like the real problem is that making motherhood the only acceptable option for women in the church leaves no room for those who aren’t mothers. There are many reasons to have children, and many to not do so. There are women and men who marry late in life and do not have the chance, there are people with health problems that keep them from having children, there are even people who have emotional problems that keep them from having children, etc.
In being so focused on motherhood as the only choice for a woman in the church, we are excluding those who are not mothers. We have set up a dangerous norm in which judgements are made, people looked down upon, considered to be selfish, etc… and yet we are taught not to judge.
I think it would be good to remember that the decisions of the individual, and the family, are just between them. It would be good to remember that we aren’t in a position to pass judgements about another person based on their choices as to how big their family is, even if it is just two people, or many more than that.
Hopefully in talking about these things we can make positive changes in our selves, and in our wards, so the next generation of members don’t have to feel badly about themselves for doing what they feel is right for them personally. We are blessed with a great gift of personal inspiration, and yet so many look down on each other because the choices of other people don’t always fit the mold.
Comment by Aimee Roo — May 25, 2005 @ 8:57 pm
Lowell -
I couched my comment in terms of “Perhaps” and “might” to eschew a condescending tone. It was unsuccessful. Accept my apology.
I stand by my comment in light of your response, however. It seems that I am reading our revelations and their impact on our culture fundamentally different than you are. The only revelations that I see to relate to the topic at hand fostered gender roles strikingly discordant with what are now the norms.
Comment by J. Stapley — May 25, 2005 @ 9:17 pm
Don’t worry, J. Stapley, it’s just a discussion, good for the soul and the mind. I am not offended, although I was in a bit of a low mood when I posted earlier today. I hope that did not come through, and if it did, I hope you’ll overlook it.
Comment by Lowell — May 25, 2005 @ 10:29 pm
I’d just like to point out that Sister Ardeth G. Kapp, the General Young Women’s President of the Church for many years, never had any children. This was primarily due to the fact that she and her husband were physically unable to bear children of their own. Interestingly enough, however, the Kapps chose to never adopt, a decision for which they were harshly criticized by certain people. Obviously an enlightened couple, he a mission president and she the General YW President, I cannot imagine that their decision to remain childless wasn’t informed by personal revelation. Their situation only bolsters the argument that Heavenly Father has an individualized plan for each of his beloved daughters, and that salvation is not contingent upon literal motherhood in this life.
Comment by maria — May 25, 2005 @ 11:53 pm
I am also reminded of Sheri Dew’s moving General Relief Society Meeting address “Are We Not All Mothers?” (found in the November 2001 Ensign) in which she clearly asserts that all righteous women, regardless of whether they have children or not, will attain “the highest degree of the celestial kingdom…[and qualify] for eternal increase in posterity, wisdom, joy, and influence.”
Years ago I found this talk to be extremely comforting as a single, prospect-less woman in a culture infused with motherhood messages, and it has returned to comfort me as my husband and I now struggle with the pain of infertility and are reluctant to deal with the many issues that arise with adoption. Although we continue to seek revelation and comfort on this issue, there is a very real possibility that we may never have children of our own while in mortality. For the time being, we are just trying to focus on serving others within our immediate and extended families, amongst our business associates, and, of course, within our ward.
Comment by maria — May 26, 2005 @ 12:02 am
Maria: My own sister faced the same challenge, and my heart goes out to you. I hope I made it clear that my disagreement is with those who can have children but choose not to do so– at all. I’m not concerned about those who struggle with infertility or other physical bars to parenthood. I’m talking about Latter-day Saints who simply don’t want any children, even though they could have them. That’s the position that I find spiritually problematic, disappointing, and frankly quite depressing, especially when I hear of folks like you who would love to have children but cannot.
Comment by Lowell — May 26, 2005 @ 7:01 am
Lowell: I frankly see people such as Sister Kapp, and myself, as “able” to have children if we choose to. Adopting a child is at least somewhat of a viable option for most people these days (although I understand not for all people can adopt due to their personal circumstances, whatever they may be).
I just think it is silly that someone like me passes your judgmental test of righteousness, while so many of the wonderful women here are dismissed as “problematic, disappointing, and frankly quite depressing” in your eyes. While I may have valid physical concerns that impede my desire to have children of my own, other women may have legitimate emotional, financial, marital, or just plain none-of-your-damn business concerns that justify their decisions to not have children (biologically or through adoption). I couldn’t create an exhaustive list of all the acceptable reasons why someone might choose to not have children, because, *newsflash* I wouldn’t dare suppose that I knew what was best for another person to do since I am not that person and have absolutely no right to pass judgment upon them. Your hubris in this respect is astounding.
I’ve been trying really hard to refrain from saying this to you (because I was sincerely hoping that I’d misread your previous comments, but it is now patently obvious what your intent is), but SHAME ON YOU. It’s the harsh and hastily critical people like you that cause so much pain in the hearts of women like Adrianne, and me, for I feel the sting of your unfounded reproach despite your alleged sympathy.
Comment by maria — May 26, 2005 @ 10:19 am
Maria, I do not think I am communicating well. Adrianne said:
“I have no desire to be a mother. None. Whatsoever. In fact, the very idea of having children makes me feel incredibly sad and frustrated.”
Athena said:
“What is more troubling to me, however, is the idea that my life is only important because of my potential to give life to someone else.”
Julie in Austin said:
“I would be more worried about a single 22-year-old with a burning desire for children than I am about you.”
Artemis said:
“Take the model of salvation stewardship–in the quest for each of us to return to God, we, ourselves, are our very first responsibility. We cannot put anyone’s salvation as a higher priority than our own, it would be wrong. Our next priority is our spouse, should we choose to have one, and the next is our children, should we choose to have some.”
I’ll stop there. I just find this depressing. I expect to hear it in West L.A., where I work, but not among LDS women. Surely you can see that many, many LDS people would read those statements and say, “What?” That does not mean the statements are wrong; it does mean that reasonable people can vigorously disagree about them. If you don’t think so then you might as well stop reading this now.
Now please understand: I believe that at bottom, whether or not and when to have children is a deeply personal decision and there is plenty of room for individual choices. There is no single rule for everyone. What I am talking about is people who can physically have children and who are free from medical limitations that make having children inadvisable (including mental health issues). It seems to me that any LDS person who says that Adrianne’s view is just fine, without urging some serious reflection about the eternal consequences of such a decision, is making some huge leaps over doctrinal teachings that are central to our religion. That’s about it. As I said, reasonable people disagree about this. My view involves no hubris.
I think I’ve beaten this horse to death and beyond. I guess I just found the subject fascinating.
Comment by Lowell — May 26, 2005 @ 2:17 pm
Lowell, I am 37 years old and I chose to have a vasectomy a year ago. This is something that I had been considering for literally the past 20 years. I joined the church 7 years ago so as you can see my desire not to have children predates my church membership. My wife and I married 2 years ago. She is 36 and an elementary school teacher. While it is unlikely she could conceive due to the well-documented studies about fertility past age 30, we didn’t want to take the chance. Right now her father is in ICU due to a recent heart attack and stroke, and her mother is in the advanced stage of alzheimer’s. Children would be the worst possible thing to happen in our lives right now, so we had to ensure it couldn’t happen. She likes kids, but she admits after some days in class she says “I can feel my tubes tying themselves right now”.
So please, lay off the judgment until you know what is happening in people’s lives and why they are choosing not to have children. It could be a pretty damn good reason.
Comment by Phouchg — May 26, 2005 @ 2:18 pm
I still don’t understand how you think my description of salvation stewardship is in any way depressing or undoctrinal, including the part about choice. We were put here on this Earth to CHOOSE, to choose the right, to choose God’s will, and to choose how we construct our lives, and not just in things relating to right and wrong. And there is nothing more truly LDS doctrine than someone’s salvation and welfare (physical, spritual, whatever) are that person’s first stewardship and priority. The whole trend of this thread, despite your allegations to the contrary, is for women contemplating children, to first and foremost (please note) to search their feelings in prayer, relying foundationally on personal revelation. Then she makes her choice.
What you don’t seem to get is that none of us here is going to judge whether Adrienne’s choice or anybody else’s choice is “truly revelation”, which is what I think you’re dancing around with all your rhetoric about “doctrinal teachings.” If Adrienne and God have agreed that for her, children are not a priority, than who are we (you, me, or anybody else) to say otherwise? It is not counter-doctrine, it runs hand in hand with the core of our doctrine.
Comment by Artemis — May 26, 2005 @ 2:34 pm
Cookie cutters are for cookies, not people.
-Chieko Okazaki
Comment by Phouchg — May 26, 2005 @ 2:40 pm
Lowell -
I am curious to disccover what it is that depresses you about the possibilby that women may want to accomplish something with their lives and talents apart from (this can be in addition to or instead of, as the case may be) raising children–a choice that in no way denigrates motherhood. As long as these choices are made in concert with spouse and spirit, how can they be of any personal import to you?
Do you similarly believe that men are given life soley to father children–and if so, does _that_ thought never depress you?
Comment by Athena — May 26, 2005 @ 3:11 pm
For reasons not clear to me (possibly my fault, possibly the inherent limitations of communicating in print) I don’t think I am making myself clear.
Phouchg: I have nothing negative to say about your decision. It certainly makes sense to me. As I noted above, I am talking about people who have no reason not to have children other than that they just don’t want to. I think people in that situation need to ask themselves hard questions about their motivations– is selfishness one of them? But it’s not for me to decide. I do think the hard questions need to be ask. Many here seem to resist that notion.
My wife and I have 3 children. All were C-sections. We were married for four years before the first one (by choice). Then it took four years to have the next one. We wanted to have a third, and after seven years managed to do that. Along the way we had 5 miscarriages, and decided “enough” after our third (my wife was 38 at that point). So I’m in no position to judge anyone and I certainly know how exquisitely difficult those decisions can be.
Artemis: You said, “Our next priority is our spouse, should we choose to have one, and the next is our children, should we choose to have some.” This is entirely my opinion, but to me the “default” position for married LDS people is to have children. Not having children is the exception, and I think the Lord’s plan is for that exceptional choice to be rare, depending on individual circumstances. Maybe I got you wrong, but it sure seemed to me you were saying that having children, if we are married, is one of those many things in life we choose to do if we want to, and we have no real guidance as to the “default” chioce. If so, I simply disagree.
Athena: You assume that what depresses me is “the possibilby that women may want to accomplish something with their lives and talents apart from (this can be in addition to or instead of, as the case may be) raising children–a choice that in no way denigrates motherhood.” I assure you, that’s not it. If you knew my wife and what she does with her life– with my happy and enthusiastic support– you would see I am just not that kind of a man. In fac, I am several planets away from that kind of man.
You also say, “As long as these choices are made in concert with spouse and spirit, how can they be of any personal import to you?” They are not.
Here’s what I find depressing:
*That smart, articulate people with so much to offer struggle so with a basic life choice that the Lord made available to us and that I believe was one of the prospects of earth life that made us shout for joy in the pre-existence.
*That such people have to live with their feelings in a church full of people who don’t understand. It must be hell. You may be skeptical but that’s the way I feel. I find that depressing to contemplate.
*That I can’t make myself understood on these points without being mistaken for a neanderthal.
That’s about it.
Comment by Lowell — May 26, 2005 @ 4:17 pm
Lowell,
I’m still giggling about that bit about you being mistaken for a Neanderthal. Nice tension-breaker. Here’s a thought–maybe you’re a Greek and we all think you’re speaking it….
You say:
“Maybe I got you wrong, but it sure seemed to me you were saying that having children, if we are married, is one of those many things in life we choose to do if we want to, and we have no real guidance as to the “default” chioce.”
You got me wrong. I thought that my sequencing of priorities made it clear that the individual is the individual’s first priority, her/his spouse is the 2nd priority, and her/his children are the third priority. All of the the many other things in life fall in after that. I guess I should’ve articulated it more completely. Inherent in that statement, as well, is my belief that one’s choices regarding marriage, spouse, and children must be made with strong emphasis on personal revelation and, yes, choice. And when I say personal revelation, I mean really talking it over with God, listening to the Spirit, and generally studying things out in your mind and in your heart. If someone is doing all these things and honestly feels that to marry or have children is not right for them, even if only for the time being, and that God and the Spirit are backing them up, then they may be considered right before God, regardless of what society or church members may think.
I think almost everybody here would agree that Julie in Austen said it best in #4, and once you get past your objections to a single 22 yr. old woman burning to have kids (and BTW, I think she was saying ‘it’s good to avoid unwed motherhood’, not ’squelch maternal urgings’), her comment was entirely correct. Stake presidents and bishops have probably been saying it for years. I also think most of the comments used Julie’s comments as a starting point, so you need to read all the subsequent comments with her counsel close in mind.
Maybe you should re-read this post and look for all the good, doctrinal, faithful comments that are in it.
Comment by Artemis — May 26, 2005 @ 4:54 pm
Haven’t read through all of this but in comment 18. Bridget said: “My mind may change next year, or in 10 years, and I’ll go back to wanting motherhood. And if that happens, it’s ok.”
I just have to say AMEN!
We went through several years of miscarriages and infertility before having our first child 8 years into our marriage. I am SO GLAD God was wiser than me on this one! (Or whatever caused the miscarriages and infertility.) At periods during this first eight years when I was direct with nosy people the fact that we were NOT trying at various stages (as if it is anyone’s business anyway!!!!!!) as I recovered emotionally from the latest miscarriage or was simply burned out from the pregnancy quest and decided to focus on personal development and other areas of service, and then also after our son was born and I admitted that I didn’t know if we would try to have more, several of these people asked “Wouldn’t you regret it if later you wanted more children but you can’t have them?” You know, biological clock argument (tick tick tick).
Nope, I wouldn’t. Regret or secondary infertility or miscarriage later (if it did happen) would not change my need to make wise decisions in the present. We had another miscarriage between kids, and now have a daughter as well. Both have special needs (mostly invisible to others). So I am all the more grateful that I do not have the at least FIVE children I would have had by my own planning (okay, maybe if I’d had the first or second I’d have waited longer, but you know what I mean). Yeah, I could have survived it, but I’d have been a much worse mother, and a much more miserable human being.
I do sometimes wonder why God let this world go on for so long without as much reproductive choice as we have today. In spite of the crappy parts of modern living, I cannot imagine completely just “let[ting] the children come” (or not). But maybe it was easier in some ways to have larger families in closer-knit communities with extended families living together more? Don’t know, just wondering.
Comment by Lisa B. — May 26, 2005 @ 4:59 pm
Artemis: At last! Sweet agreement!
Lowell
Comment by Lowell — May 26, 2005 @ 5:13 pm
Lisa B.–
One thing to consider about fertility control: women might have been having ten pregnancies, but they were raising (if they were lucky) five children. I worry sometimes about our ‘nostalgia’ for the good old years when 50% of infants didn’t see their 5th birthday. (I’m not saying *you* are doing this, just in general.) (And this isn’t to say that those pregnancies and births would have been easy, but just to point out that they weren’t raising huge broods.)
I think the 1950s-ish LDS woman raising a dozen kids is a historical abberation, so I try to discourage other people from beating themselves up over not being that woman.
Comment by Julie in Austin — May 26, 2005 @ 5:54 pm
Addrianne:
I feel the same way. I am 23 years old. I still remember when I just turn 20 and my parents pressure me to get married. Last year, my bishop told me that it was time for me to get married. I told him that I did not feel ready. It was a bitter interview. He made me feel that I was a bad person. But you know what, I don’t feel bad because I am not a bad person. I just feel that I am not ready for such a big responsibility, specially having kids. You don’t have any idea how terrified I am to have children. But, I feel that I am in my best years and I want to get the best of them. I want to be prepared financially and know my qualities are since all my life I’ve been leaving someone else desires (my parents and the church). I also want to help the community and do good things.
I know Mormons in their 30’s and 40’s men and women that don’t want to get married and they are such a wonderful people. They are successful, happy and good human beings.
I think that what you have to do is look into yourself and find out why you feel upset, angry. Why is the reason you don’t want to get married? But, be true to yourself. I believe that independently that we have ‘roles’ as man and woman, we all have a personal mission in this earth. You said that you want to help people and maybe that is it your personal mission on this Earth. Maybe once that you begin to fulfill it things will change. You never know.
I don’t know if this might help you. You might think that my comments are silly. But believe me you are not alone feeling this way.
Comment by Selene — May 30, 2005 @ 11:05 am
I felt the same way when I was 22 and was torn with guilt thinking I was selfish for wanting to pursue a career and see the world before being tied down at home for 20 years (or more!) of childbirth and family.
Since I moved away from my family and have been working for (ages it seems) I don’t feel fulfillment there anymore and my desires have changed too. I want nothing more to do with Corporate America and I never thought I’d be here either wanting to be a SAHM (which I stil don’t want to be labeled as either!) Weird dichotomy.
What I discovered was that I had fulfilled one season of my life and was ready to move on to the next. In terms of someone being married 3 years and getting to know their spouse I heartily agree as I’m in the same boat. If I had tried to have a baby earlier when first married and when I didn’t want any kids it would have been disaster. Why make that child suffer for my lack of preparation? Everything is is the Lords timing - always remember that.
My advice to you Adrienne, don’t feel wrong about not wanting children, and if you do get married and find that special someone make sure he understands your views before you commit to each other and later DO NOT have a baby because the stupid members of your RS have no tact and are pressuring you to do so. People are stupid in LDS churches when it comes to family and children as has been discussed here previously.
It is really your personal relationship to the Lord and his plan for you in this life which may or may not include children, or marriage for that matter. Stay close to the spirit and let it guide you no matter what the RS sisters say. (sorry I have issues with RS)
Comment by Emily — June 15, 2005 @ 9:44 am
Maybe I need to clarify my LDS stupid comment - meaning that people say stupid things without thinking, especially in the LDS community because we are taught to think of each other at brother and sisters when really we hardly know our “brothers” and “sisters” in the church well as our own blood siblings.
My point in that paragraph is that if you are all right with the Lord and His plan for you, no one elses comments should matter really? I do wonder though that you may end up like me in doing a 180 degree turn on the children thing and really want that in your life. Like you mentioned earlier - children are not where you see yourself helping the most. I wonder what is? What else do you see in your life replacing the most wonderful gift of being entrusted to raise one of the Lords children (cuz really they’re not yours on an eternal perspective right?) By the way I don’t mean that question to sound like there’s nothing better than that - though some will say there isn’t -just curious to see where you see yourself serving best?
Comment by Emily — June 15, 2005 @ 10:25 am