By Amy Phillips Bursch, Media Relations Manager
I don’t know if you’ve seen this great PSA from Population Media Center. It brings up a crucial point: It’s all of our responsibility to consider the environmental impact of decisions we make.
I try to be a good environmental steward. I recycle everything I can. I bought an electric kettle because it’s much more efficient than the stove. My husband and I own a car, but we hardly ever drive it. We live in a one-bedroom apartment. I should give up meat, but I really love a good burger or steak. Our carbon footprint is reasonably low (for Americans, anyway, which isn’t saying a whole lot.)
But the biggest environmental choice we’ve made is one that most people don’t think about – or at least talk about. We don’t have kids.
Now I know there are probably a few parents out there who are ready to hit the caps lock key and give me a VERY BIG PIECE OF THEIR MIND (Warning: Link is gross but funny.) Please understand that I am entirely pro-choice – what you do with your body in your bedroom is none of my business. If you wanted kids and had them, great! If you don’t want kids and didn’t have them, super! If you didn’t want kids and had them anyway – well, that’s why I support full access to voluntary family planning everywhere in the world. Families need the ability to decide whether or not to add another member.
I’d be lying if I said that 7 billion people plus on our planet is the reason we made the decision to go totless. It’s not. I’d say “severe lack of interest” is more accurate. But environmental concerns ARE a reason many people decide to Just Say No – to reproduction. The costs can’t be ignored, according to scientists at Oregon State University:
- 20 Americans would need to recycle, buy nothing but compact fluorescent bulbs and drive super high mileage cars – among other efficiencies – to equal the carbon legacy and greenhouse gas impact an additional American kid will make over his lifetime.
- An average American kid leaves 160 times the carbon footprint over her lifetime than the average baby from Bangladesh.
- Each American kid “ultimately adds about 9,441 metric tons of carbon dioxide to the carbon legacy of an average parent – about 5.7 times the lifetime emissions for which, on average, a person is responsible.”
You get the picture. Americans are tough on the planet. As the PSA showed, if everyone lived like we do, it would take FIVE EARTHS to sustain us. As far as I’m aware, this is the only one we’ve got.
So some environmentally minded people take matters into their own hands. Or their urologist’s hands. (You know, vasectomies? I’ll be here all week). There’s even a name for it: GINKS. As in “green inclinations, no kids”:
- “There are a lot of perks to childfree living, not to mention a lot of green good that comes from bringing fewer beings onto a polluted and crowded planet.” – Lisa Hymas, senior editor, Grist
- “If you are not the kind of person who wants to [parent], it’s not going to be fair, given the fact that the planet doesn’t need your kids. It’s important to make sure that if you do have kids, that it will be good for you and the planet.” – Peter Wenker, Colorado Springs
- “Once I fully wrapped my brain around the relationship of overpopulation to climate change, especially in the West, I made a big decision: I won't bring more kids into the world.” – Author Stefanie Iris Weiss
They’ve all decided not to have kids. Others do have kids, but only one or two instead of four or five (or 19 like the Duggar family.) The good news is that reproduction is no longer mandatory – we have choices. And with increased access to affordable contraception, it’s easier to have the family size each of us wants.
For my husband and me, that means no kids. Seven nieces and nephews, but no little people of our own. Given the state of our planet – and my track record at keeping plants alive – that’s probably for the best.