Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Having Kids (2019)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 323 posts

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#221

Post by genthree »

waynesonfire wrote: post #161
genthree wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each one's a reverse-lottery-ticket, though. Get the wrong draw and it's not a gift. Can easily massively reduce the QOL for everyone around, including other siblings. Mostly due to chronic illnesses, of either the physical or mental variety.

There is significant suffering in the world. You and everyone else are drawing lottery tickets everyday. Kids are far from its only source or cause. I'm ill equipped to unpack the meaning of life, but I am certain that suffering is fundamental--your comment is probing at this idea. This is a very difficult subject since there exists un-imaginable suffering and it's hard to reconcile that. That life is a gift under th…

I think a lot of folks don't consider that each child comes with a high-enough-to-worry-about risk of negatively affecting the life of everyone in your family to a level on par with one of the adults in your family becoming permanently and severely disabled relatively early in life.

Yeah sure we also risk some micromorts and the life-altering-disability equivalent every time we drive a car or get a sunburn, all right.

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#222

Post by bcrosby95 »

brightball wrote: post #148
GlibMonkeyDeath wrote: post #106

Caveat emptor. I am a grandparent now, so I think I have some perspective on this. Of course we love our kids, and we had (and still have) a lot of good times with them. But kids can really break your life and marriage, too - amongst my peers I can't tell you how many have a struggling young adult kid or two (with relatively serious mental or physical health problems), with no resolution in sight. So stay lucky - hav…

The serious mental and physical health problems are real and a societal concern. Everyone "notices" the trends, but maybe it's not you so you just think there's nothing you can do about it and do your best to stay healthy. Then you have a child and you are suddenly hyper-aware of everything going into the body and brain. Everything they eat, every doctor visit, every time they get sick and what could have exposed the…

There's definitely a balance here. Not giving a shit, which seems to have been the tradition I was raised in, is not great. Recognizing problems is good. Acting on all of them is bad. You need to raise grounded kids who can grow into resilience so by the time they're adults they're able to navigate this strange world.

Especially trying to control who their friends are and what they hear. Questionable behavior from friends at younger ages can actually be a good thing: it lets you plant the seed early when your kids still listen to you.

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#223

Post by [deleted] »

drfloyd51 wrote: post #214
socalgal2 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still judge parents, because I compare them to other parents. Good parents = kids not 100% glued to phones/tablets, social around friends and family, not throwing tantrums at 8-16 yrs old. Bad parents = kids always throwing tantrums, kids basically always getting their way because they've learned parents will always give in, parents and kids 100% ignoring each other. One set of friends - I go to visit, I play with…

Trust me. Don’t judge. Even if you compare to other parents, you are judging the reference-parents. If you have data over time you can draw conclusions on things you want to try as a parent.

[deleted]

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#224

Post by sublinear »

neonnoodle wrote: post #205

I often wonder in these threads what proportion of the commenters is male. HN skews heavily male, and statistically speaking, fathers are spared a huge chunk of the physical and mental burdens of pregnancy, birth, and parenting. Being a mom and being a dad are not equivalent, and I have a feeling that not many male HNers would readily swap places if such thing were possible.

I don't mean to inject politics, but there's a huge mental burden on fathers with more conservative values that take their role seriously.

Unfortunately, there's no way to elaborate what I mean on HN or much of the web without stirring up a ton of pointless argument. People will just get defensive and refuse to consider perspectives they can't agree with.

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#225

Post by pixl97 »

foxglacier wrote: post #152
corry wrote: post #28

This is one of my favourites from PG, not least because it's a bit antithetical to what I perceive as a growing trend among smart, ambitious people (for whom children might represent friction, inconvenience, etc)... as well as folks for whom COL is making the question irrelevant due to practical concerns. Actually, it's really striking that even in America -- the developed country with the #1 highest birthrate -- sti…

Kids cost time, not money. So the wealthier you are, the more difficult it is because you probably have less free time. You can pay someone else to raise your kids (daycare/etc.) but then you lose a lot of the value of having kids. This bullshit excuse that somebody can't afford to have kids is proven wrong by the fact that poorer people have more kids than rich people. You can even be unemployed. Gone are the days o…

Um, wtf is this rambling statement that doesn't seem to be based in any kind of truth at all?

In the past both poor and rich tended to have tons of kids, this is because kids tended to die young regardless of being rich or poor.

Then you're trying to compare massive social changes in the west that occurred around the same time. For example womens suffrage, women being allowed to work, sexual revolutions and birth control.

If you look at countries that tended to develop later, the rate of childbirth tends to drop with accessibility to birth control and education.

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#226

Post by sublinear »

drfloyd51 wrote: post #14

Before kids it was easy to judge bad parents. Then one day with child I found myself due to circumstances in a store way past my child’s bedtime. She was screaming and crying, because it was way past her bedtime. Then I realized… I was now “the bad parent” I had so easily judged. Then it was easy to judge parents with children younger than mine. Until I learned that not all children have the same issues in the same o…

I'm glad you at least determined the root cause.

Plenty of truly bad parents shrug responsibility off by making the "technically correct" claim that all kids throw tantrums, therefore they're not a bad parent. They then proceed to provide an unstable environment to raise their kids and the tantrums don't end until well into adulthood.

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#227

Post by neonnoodle »

sublinear wrote: post #224
neonnoodle wrote: post #205

I often wonder in these threads what proportion of the commenters is male. HN skews heavily male, and statistically speaking, fathers are spared a huge chunk of the physical and mental burdens of pregnancy, birth, and parenting. Being a mom and being a dad are not equivalent, and I have a feeling that not many male HNers would readily swap places if such thing were possible.

I don't mean to inject politics, but there's a huge mental burden on fathers with more conservative values that take their role seriously. Unfortunately, there's no way to elaborate what I mean on HN or much of the web without stirring up a ton of pointless argument. People will just get defensive and refuse to consider perspectives they can't agree with.

Yeah, I agree, if you’re talking about the role of the patriarch as a stoic provider who isn’t allowed to be a vulnerable man with his own emotional needs.

It has been encouraging to see how much more men now seem to desire being engaged and nurturing in their children’s lives (even among those who otherwise consider themselves conservative or traditionalist).

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#228

Post by sershe »

jasonkester wrote: post #22

Before having kids, I expected it to be this huge life changing thing. That it would effectively end the part of my life where I was free to do whatever I wanted, and start the part where I was just Daddy, doing nothing except serving my childrens' needs. But that didn't happen. We just carried on being Jason and his partner, but with a baby in tow. I had spent most of my 30s cramming in as much "living" as possible,…

That doesn't appear to be a common story. I now have to schedule phone calls with my retired mother because between my sister and her partner who both work, and her, with 2 kids - one small but active that needs constant minding and one that needs chaperoning to activities - she often doesn't have one uninterrupted hour in the evening for an entire week.

Nearly everyone I know with kids is more similar to this story than yours.. to each their own but it's certainly not for me:)

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#229

Post by tavavex »

sublinear wrote: post #224
neonnoodle wrote: post #205

I often wonder in these threads what proportion of the commenters is male. HN skews heavily male, and statistically speaking, fathers are spared a huge chunk of the physical and mental burdens of pregnancy, birth, and parenting. Being a mom and being a dad are not equivalent, and I have a feeling that not many male HNers would readily swap places if such thing were possible.

I don't mean to inject politics, but there's a huge mental burden on fathers with more conservative values that take their role seriously. Unfortunately, there's no way to elaborate what I mean on HN or much of the web without stirring up a ton of pointless argument. People will just get defensive and refuse to consider perspectives they can't agree with.

That huge mental burden is entirely self-inflicted, though. It's not a fair comparison to the physical burden that is unavoidable.

Growing up in a more conservative society, I've seen many people with that parenting style, who often pop a proverbial blood vessel trying to ensure that their children are more like army cadets that perfectly reflect their worldviews and don't take an unapproved step in any direction. Their rationalizations ranged from real safety concerns to arbitrary opinions like what religion is right (and exactly how someone needs to act at all times, with no limits on specificity or ridiculousness) or what large groups of people are evil (nationality, religion, identity - any group is fair game, just pick one and wall off your child from ever knowing about them). Regardless of motivation, ideology is a choice, and they could've relieved a whole lot of this burden on their own at any point.

Re: Having Kids (2019)

#230

Post by Trasmatta »

com2kid wrote: post #210
Trasmatta wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that if you just see a kid on the street throwing a tantrum, you don't know which of those situations you're actually looking at

OP was referring to observations at friend's houses. Presumably they'd be aware of any underlying issues. Judging random people on the street isn't wise. Judge your friends and loved ones instead! :D

I mean, do you even know the full story at a friend's house? I guess it depends on how closely you know them, and whether they've confided any developmental issues they're children are dealing with.
Post reply on HN