Certainly gives Journalism a whole new meaning. Her opinion dressed up as fact was just what this “journalist” was touting. Any quality newspaper editor would have at least asked her to back up her “article” with facts.

mercurior - I’m pretty convinced whatever she is, she isn’t a journalist. More an opinion columnist as Chris said, calling herself a journalist.

one sided journalism, in reality journalism should be about the facts, not feelings, give evidence (from the latin that which is seen), yes put your own slant on it, but also be prepared to put the opposite view as well.

there are always 2 sides to a subject, to just listen to one does you a disservice. if she put this is my opinion, and should only be taken as such that would be ok, but as chris said dressing up opinions as facts (and its done in so many areas now), sets a bad precedence.

… When Christine first had shown me the article, I read it and thought Lydia was just a “opinion columnist”, being paid to write her opinion on topics. When I went to her site, I realized I was right! I did notice on her home site that it does say just that, along with “controversial” and “fearless commentator”. Well, she’s certainly fearless in the regard to making fuzzy claims and pawning them off as literal fact. If she wants to call that “journalism”, spewing out baseless “facts” (or not backing them up), I’ll give it an alteration: “Journaljizzm”.

My advice to her, if I were allowed to give it, would be to stick to her opinions and don’t dress them up to be facts that everyone in their right minds should know. After all… what do we know? Were just selfish people who don’t want kids.

Newsflash to Lovric: Everyone has needs. Some people have different needs than others.

Again, thanks to all of you.

And I do mean shops. That’s another reason — discretionary income. I’ll freely admit that I’m regular consumer but I’m not paying for a child’s university education and I need more shoes…and bags….and a weekend in New York…;-)

ohhh….I’m so selfish…..

“In my opinion, the childfree as a group have been too willing to accept the selfish label. The decision to not have children is no more self-serving than any other personal choice that adults make, including the choice to have kids. How can a personal choice not to subject children to an unhappy existence be considered selfish?”

Jannette - It’s very interesting when one turns myths on their heads by challenging them isn’t it? Beggars belief that a well thought out choice can be called selfish, whereas thoughtlessly popping out kids “just because” is celebrated. Ass-backwards for sure.

AM - Thank you for sharing this. I know very few couples who even consider acceptance that maybe it wasn’t meant to happen. Most seem to automatically head down the in-vitro route and only after failing and great financial and emotional expense to they consider any other option. Perhaps being unable to live with being “different”The fertility industry (and everyone else) is only to ready to sell them the fantasy.

Oh, and I loved the environmental note. Yep, there are more than enough humans around! ;-). And now I have Mick’s song going round and round in my head.

I am childfree by reality- it was not truly by choice, since my husband and I have tried for about 7 years to conceive naturally, and never made it past a first-month pregnancy. I agreed to a few tests, and nothing came back. There seems to be no reason, but hey, that’s life. Like Mick once sang, you can’t always get what you want. I could have gone down the road of a battery of further tests, in vitro, etc… but I chose to just accept that maybe things aren’t meant to be. We haven’t seriously considered adoption, so maybe we aren’t all that determined to push what is meant to happen to us. Some of my school friends with children envy us our freedom to travel and just do what we like, and then, when we really have a more serious conversation, we both realise that it’s not better or worse, it’s just different. There are advantages and disadvantages to both lifestyles, and why people like Lovric can’t accept that differences are what makes the world interesting is beyond me.

On a more environmental note, there are enough humans around. I don’t need to make myself immortal by adding another- I can just teach and influence the next generation by proxy.

we dont need mcmansions, we dont need suv’s, we dont need the new fashionable diaper, or fashionable baby clothes. children just take until they start to earn at 18 or 21 or even later.

compare the needs of a child, and an adult. most cf adults will save up for things, most parents buy on credit.

http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art1235.asp

this is an ok article

**The true meaning of selfishness must be considered in evaluating whether or not the childfree are selfish. The definition of selfishness includes a willful disregard for the well-being of others. But the childfree have carefully considered the life that their potential offspring might lead before making their decision to not raise children. By choosing not to bring children into a home that may have too little time, money, or interest to raise a child properly, these folks are not demonstrating selfishness. Their decision is based on concern for the happiness and welfare of everyone, including their possible progeny, family, friends, and communities.**