Amanda Porretto isn’t sure about becoming a parent. At 27, she’s the same age as many first-time mothers in the U.S., but she feels different. Growing up as an only child, she feels pressure from her family, especially since her father looks forward to being a grandfather. Her late mother often reminded her that motherhood would be a fulfilling journey.
“Some people look down on me for not wanting kids,” Amanda, who works in advertising, shared. “But I wonder if bringing a child into this world is the right choice when there are so many issues we still need to tackle.”
More and more young Americans are echoing Amanda’s thoughts. Many are concerned about climate change and its effects on future generations. Research shows that they worry about extreme weather and environmental degradation caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
A 2024 study in The Lancet revealed that over half of respondents aged 16 to 25 felt “very” or “extremely” anxious about climate change. Alarmingly, 52% said this fear influenced their decision on whether to have children. Adults under 50 without kids were four times more likely than those over 50 to say climate played a role in their choice. Another study from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found a similar trend, highlighting the impact of climate concern on family planning.
Nandita Bajaj, who leads Population Balance, emphasized the significant environmental footprint that comes with having children. “Having a child has a larger carbon impact compared to other decisions,” she noted. This is due to what bioethics professor Travis Rieder calls a “carbon legacy.” He explained, “You’re not just contributing through your lifestyle choices; you’re also raising a person who will have their own carbon footprint for life.”
The issue is not as straightforward as it seems. Factors like wealth greatly influence a child’s environmental impact. For instance, the U.S. produces 123 times more carbon emissions per person than countries like Ghana. So, parents’ lifestyles can leave a substantial mark on the planet.
While discussions about reducing carbon footprints often ignore the benefits of smaller families, this could change. Experts like Rieder and moral philosophy instructor Trevor Hedberg point out that addressing parenthood in climate conversations can be sensitive. Celebrating a pregnancy is a common reaction, often overshadowing the climate debate.
Personal stories also underline the emotional conflict surrounding this decision. Ash Sanders, who once felt pressured to have a child, placed her baby for open adoption. “I struggle with guilt,” she admits, “wondering if I added to a world already filled with challenges.”
Juan Jaramillo made his choice years ago, opting for a vasectomy. He connected his environmental concerns with his decision not to have children, feeling it was important to think about the planet’s health.
Rieder, despite his studies into climate impacts, also balanced his desire to be a parent, choosing to have one child. “It’s a tough balancing act,” he reflected. “Having kids can be meaningful, but it’s also an environmentally costly choice.”
As the climate crisis continues, the concerns voiced by young people like Amanda and Ash shed light on a growing tension between personal desires and environmental responsibilities. Understanding this dilemma helps to reshape discussions around family and sustainability. It’s clear that as climate conversations evolve, so too does our approach to family planning and its lasting implications.
Source link
Environmental science, Anxiety, Climate and environment, Climate change, U.S. news, General news, Health, Article, 126996979
