Summary of Thesis

Background and Purpose: This study attempts to determine the motivators of individuals who choose to be childfree. This study also aims to determine if the childfree can be subdivided into smaller groups based on their motivations. Finally, this study attempts to register the opinion of the childfree on certain social and political issues.

Methodology: This study was fielded on the web. Respondents were invited to participate via messages on childfree message boards, usenet groups, and through the childfree social organization, No Kidding! Respondents were self-selected. It would be inappropriate to generalize the results of this study to all childfree individuals.

Participants: Respondents needed to meet certain criteria to be included in this study. Respondents needed to be American; they needed to answer “unlikely” or “definitely not” to questions on whether or not they would have biological children in one year, five years, or ever, and whether they would adopt a child, ever. They also needed to have completed the entire survey, and show variance in their responses. (Note: Data for non-Americans was collected, but the sample size was too small to analyze. It will be run later this summer and presented on this website, for those who are curious.)

In general, the childfree sample was composed of white women, aged 25-44, college educated, making $50,000-$74,999 a year, and living in suburban or urban areas.

Results: Childfree Motivators

· Overall, the strongest motivators for the childfree were: not wanting to sacrifice privacy/personal space for children; having no compelling reason to have children; not wanting to sacrifice time for children; actively not wanting children around; being perfectly content with pets; and seeing the effects of children on family/friends.

· The data, when analyzed using hierarchical cluster analysis, showed the emergence of three subgroups within the childfree sample. All three groups showed support for the above statements, but the secondary motivators tended to be different. The first group was most concerned with the effect of childrearing on their personal and social lives. The second group appeared to simply not like children. The final group showed a more broad-based set of motivators, including the environment, and their misgivings about their ability to be a good parent.

Results: Social/Political Questions

· Results from the social/political questions indicate that the respondents have strong feelings on certain issues.

o Birth Control: The respondents support government subsidies, and health insurance covering, birth control and sterilization. They also believe insurance should cover abortion. Furthermore, they believe that adults should be allowed to be sterilized, regardless of their age.

o Parental Responsibility: Respondents are strong proponents of parental responsibility, both in having children, and for the children’s personalities and actions. They feel that people should know what parenting entails before having children, and also feel that if men or women knew what parenting entailed, many would choose not to. They feel that many of children’s behavioral problems can be attributed to poor parenting, and that parents should be financially (and to a lesser extent, criminal) liable for crimes committed by their children. They also feel that parents have little right to complain about how difficult parenting is, since parents chose that lifestyle of their own free will. Finally, the childfree feel that parents should only have the number of children they can afford to have, and people on welfare should not get additional funds for having more children while on welfare.

o Environment: Respondents feel that there are serious problems with human overpopulation, pollution, deforestation, the extinction of plant and animal species, and scarcity of food and water. They feel that people should make attempts to limit their family size to replacement rates (two children per couple), and that parents should pay more in taxes, because they and their families use more public resources.

o Freedom: Respondents want child-free areas, and rights for homosexuals. They would want childfree areas of restaurants, childfree hours at movie theaters, and the ability for landlords to have exclusively childfree buildings if they wanted. (They would also favor the option of landlords being allowed to have exclusive families-with-children buildings as well.) They also favor the rights of homosexuals to get married or have civil unions, and to adopt children.

o Discrimination: Respondents do not want to be discriminated against in the workplace, by politicians, or by marketers. They do not believe parents should get preferential treatment from employers for days off or flexible hours, or when employers are choosing whom to lay off. They do not tend to support political candidates who stand for “family values”. They do not think that people should get tax credits for having children, though they are neutral on people getting tax credits for adopting children.

o Reproductive Eligibility: Respondents believe that not everyone should make efforts to have children. They do not believe that people who have a high risk of passing on genetic flaws to their children, women at high risk of miscarriage, or women at high risk of death during pregnancy or delivery should try, or continue trying, to have children. They do not believe that fertility treatments should be covered by insurance companies. Finally, they do not believe that prisoners should be entitled to conjugal visits, regardless of whether or not they use birth control.

o Stereotypes and Criticism: Respondents do not appreciate stereotypes against them. They do not believe that people who choose not to have children are selfish. They reacted negatively to the statement “Women should be mothers.” They reject the idea that parenthood tends to make people more responsible. They also do not believe that most people who say they do not want children will change their minds and have them eventually.

All questions/comments about this study should be directed to the primary author of this study, Vincent Ciaccio, at Blaubas@yahoo.com . The full version of this thesis is available in electronic form via this website, and by request.