I could have fucking told them that! And I'll echo: Why is this such a shock?

I have to agree with you too - why is this earth shattering news? Women are happy and living fulfilled lives even without *gasp* popping out babies! Somebody alert CNN!

On the one hand, it is frustrating that this is considered "news". But as someone who is ChildFree, I appreciate any attention this subject can get. There are far too many people who DON'T recognize that it's a legitimate choice, and who will belligerently question or cast doubt on the choice when they learn of it. "Oh, you'll change your mind", etc. Basically, most CF press is good press, as far as I'm concerned-- so long as it helps people become aware that there are, in fact, many individuals and couples who have no interest in procreating.

While I agree that this *shouldn't* be shocking, I am actually glad to see such an article, because I think it still *is* shocking for a lot of people. Most people I interact with talk about when you have children, not if. As mentioned in the article, it is majorly ingrained into our culture that the next step after getting married is to have children. So I think it is important for articles like this to highlight that it is not actually that uncommon to not have children, and it does not have to be automatic.

Also, I HATE the claim that not having children is selfish. People often forget that besides the personal impact (on both the child and the parents), a single new human being has a HUGE environmental and economical impact that should not be taken lightly. In my opinion, the only people who should have children are the ones who really truly want them and are willing to devote the time and resources to raising them well. To have children just because that's the thing to do is much more selfish than making the conscious decision not to.

While the fact that women can be happy and fulfilled without *gasp of shock* having kids should be obvious, I agree with sbsanon and cest.la.vie that it's really nice to see something in the media supporting childfreedom.

I'm not surprised that it's 'shocking' because there are still a lot of places where part of living a full life is having kids (and no I don't criticize that because sometimes it is a woman's dream, to be able to create and raise a child). I am going to 'breed', pop out babies and such when I'm older, but I agree with sbsanon, it's a major choice, not to be taken lightly. I fully respect people who make this choice. Sorry, I know soo redundant of me.

"(Childless women) didn't think they'd be childless. They always thought they'd have children," said Cain. "Often, their jobs took up a lot of energy, and they decided life was too frantic, or they didn't feel that being a working woman and a mother blended in a way they thought was right."

I'm not sure about women in other generations, but I think lots of women in the younger generation that are just hitting their twenties are not planning on getting married or having children in the future. Alot of women in my generation grew up in single parent households or in families on the brink of divorce. Not wanting to experience that some women are opting out of getting married and having kids altogether. Other women are having children without getting married. Marriage to my generation doesn't mean a person is going to have kids and having kids doesn't mean someone has to get or be married. Furthermore a large percentage of this generation my never be interested in relationships with men to begin with, so the idea of marriage until it becomes legal for gay couples is out the window.

I'm not saying it's not good to have the news out there, hell, I've ended friendships because people couldn't accept that I didn't want to have kids, and it does need to be more mainstream, but it still seems funny that it's being put out there like someone found a new planet. :)

Ok, did anyone catch the part of this article that said that we're a society that tells people they can have an abortion?

It seems to me that a crowd of people shouting curses at you in front of a health clinic does not form a society that tells me I have the right to have an abortion. I don't know how this author meant it.

Florence Nightingale, George Elliot, Mary Seacole... Anyone else want to add a name or two to the roll call of selfish bitches who don't have kids?

*gasp* Those selfish harlots!

/sarcasm

*gasp* Those selfish harlots!

/sarcasm

Who exactly am I being "selfish" to for not having children? It's not my mother, because she doesn't care. It's not my boyfriend/future husband because a) I'm currently single and quite happy to remain that way, and b) if I ever do get involved it will be with someone who also doesn't want children. If what you mean is I'm being selfish towards my entirely hypothetical, non-existant child/ren by refusing to birth them... you need to seek professional help, because there is no universe in which that is not a totally bugfuck crazy thing to believe.

June, the question is not "at whose expense are you being selfish?" (obviously nobody's harmed when you decide not to have children)
It's "who benefits from this decision?" And the answer is: you. And THAT is what's so offensive to some people. That you'd do anything (or not do something) for YOURSELF.

There are two types of "selfishness." One is selfishness at another person's expense. For example: Taking two pieces of birthday cake for yourself when there are only two pieces remaining and there's someone else waiting for her piece.

Then there's selfishness that harms nobody! It's just pleasing yourself, living for yourself, loving yourself. And there is nothing wrong with that.

I think people call it selfish because they feel like they are making all these sacrifices for their children, so it is selfish of other people not to be willing to make those same sacrifices. Or something like that. My response to that is well, if it was such a big sacrifice for you, maybe you should have thought about it a little more before you had kids. I think it's just people's insecurities coming out, because if everyone who had children was making a conscious decision about their priorities, then I doubt if they would see other people as selfish for not having them.

I was going to address but it has already been addressed but I want to re-iterate the term:

Chinld-FREE as opposed to Child-Less.

Childless implies (to me) that there's something defective with the woman, or that she cannot have children but wants them, etc.
It reminds me of how every Biblical story involving babies and unions that don't produce babies are basically a waste of time and aren't legitimate. Ever notice how not ONE story where there is no child, the man is blamed? The woman "was barren" or the woman "was not opening her womb", etc. It's always our fault.
Yes, perpetuation of the species, etc all that, that's your decision, but it's not our mission or sole purpose to pop out babies. People shouldn't be surprised that a woman may or may not want to put her body, financial resources, happiness, or health at risk. We aren't commodities and we aren't property or a means to an end.

I think you make some valid points, dhsredhead, about the changing patterns of marriage across generations, but I've read more than one study (I'm too lazy to go find them right now) that say that even though people are marrying later than ever before, the vast majority of people still expect to marry one day, and most of them end up doing so (I'm going to say more than 90% as my fuzzy memory guess). One thing that is definitely different among younger people is the trend of cohabitation without getting married, however, a lot of such couples do get married eventually. I agree with you that the patterns of having children are different, and I would guess that I know more women (I'm in my 20's too) who plan to forgo on the kids thing, but most think that they'll marry eventually. So I guess my long-winded point is that, yes, there are some experiences that younger generations have that are different than older ones in terms of marriage and family, but almost everybody still eventually ties the knot. At least for now...

"We are a hypocritical society," said Cain. "On one hand, we tell women that they have the right to have an abortion, but we expect them to have children at some point in their lives."

Im sorry Mrs. (or Ms.) Cain, but who do you involve in "WE EXPECT THEM TO HAVE CHILDREN AT SOME POINT IN THEIR LIVES" in this quote?

I dont expect women to have children at some point in their lives, and yes, if we support women's right we do also support the right to remain childless. I HATE IT, when people make assumptions, or generalizations...psh

How are abortion rights and a cultural "expectation" towards women to bear children linked?

My grandmother had an abortion. She also (clearly) had children. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I do find it irritating that this concept is still treated as shocking or deviant but I agree that it is nice to see it get some notice since it seems that we live in a fetus/child centric world at times.

I consider myself childfree. I think as long as its still an issue and a choice that people do not respect or agree exists (or ought to) an occasional reminder is a good thing.

Katherine Hepburn didn't have children. : )

My husband is actually attempting to analyze the merit of the "it's selfish not to have children" argument. We've heard it so often that we were driven to start asking: "Ok, then why DO people have children?", in an effort to understand the 'unselfish' reasons for their decision.

Thus far, the reasons behind the decision to have children are (as far as we have been able to determine), more selfish than not. The BEHAVIOR, after birth, may not be described as selfish. But we have yet to find a clearly unselfish, ethical motivation to have children at this point in history.

Naturally, this argument tends to cause controversy and heated arguments (most people feel very strongly about this subject), so at this point we both try to avoid discussing it, at least until his research is complete. But it is an interesting spin on the "childfree individuals are selfish!" accusation. The information we've come across so far has been fascinating.

Has anyone heard about a new GSN show called “Without Prejudice?� It’s a new show where a group of people judge others based on first impressions. Some really interesting issues are discussed like immigration, gay marriage and adoption, job outsourcing abroad, a woman's right to abortion, interracial relationships, mothers with career vs. stay at home, women in politics, right to spank children, prostitution, war and terrorism, sex and violence in the media, the death penalty, legalization of marijuana, religion and right to bear arms, etc. Should be juicy!! Tune in Tuesdays at @ 9PM.

child-free people are certainly no more or less selfish than those that choose to have kids.

I know it may seem like a slippery slope, but the (mostly religious) families that have 13-16 children disgust me. Not saying I won't have kids one day. I do not know. I just think it IS selfish to have that many children, take up that many resources, and not even consider adoption.

My husband and I are child-free. This is something we decided 18 years ago. For a while our parents suggested that this was quite a selfish decision. We have deprived them of the joy of having a grandchild, and have not produced a male child to carry on the family name.

Yes, we both recognize this as absolute fucking bullshit, and couldn't help but wonder who was really being selfish here.

I let them know that if it was really that important, I might consider birthing a child, if they're willing to raise it.

My offer was met with shocked silence and they haven't brought up the topic since.

I'm quite happy limiting my parenting experiences to my two dogs, one of whom is Scooter.

"I'm quite happy limiting my parenting experiences to my two dogs, one of whom is Scooter."

Cool. :) BTW, I'm curious now - I heard that from an adult pet dog's point of view, the human owner is more pack alpha than parent. Is this true?

Hello, Everybody. I am new to the blog. Thank you for having me. Thank you also for your illuminating comments thus far.

I want to discuss further why the decision to be “childfree� is called selfish by some.

Selfishness means being concerned primarily (or only) with oneself. How much of one’s concern should be directed to oneself and how much should be directed to others is not obvious (nor should we necessarily think of it in (only) quantitative terms). While too little concern for others can be a vice and mentally unhealthy, too much concern for others can also be a vice and mentally unhealthy. Where “being NOT-selfish� lies in between these two extremes may vary from person to person and vary over time. However, we have some intuitive notions of how much concern one should have for others. We do need to realize that our knowledge of actual people’s abilities and needs is so limited that we may only be able to assess our own standing on this spectrum, remembering to charitable in our own self-assessment.

Calling a single decision selfish can’t be taken too literally. The context of the decision as well as the person’s decisions in other areas needs to be taken into consideration.

SaraMC gives a good example of a singular decision that we would be tempted to call selfish. She writes, “Taking two pieces of birthday cake for yourself when there are only two pieces remaining and there's someone else waiting for her piece.� We are tempted to call this selfish because birthday cake is a luxury that no one really needs. There seems to be no reason other than self-absorption to keep both pieces for yourself. Also, the cake is easily divisible such that you could have kept one-and-one half pieces while still giving some to the person waiting.

Finally, there are only bizarre or parentalistic situations where one would be reasonable in keeping the two pieces of cake despite the waiting person (e.g. Bizarre-you know that you will be killed by the host/ess if you don’t eat two pieces. Parentalistic-you know the waiting person is diabetic and will be severely harmed if she eats any cake). If we alter these characteristics of the example, then we are not so inclined to think it is always a selfish act.

Also, if we knew the person keeping the two pieces of cake spent the rest of her time and resources promoting worthwhile social causes despite great sacrifice to herself, we may think her keeping the cake was weird or mean, but we may not think that her act was selfish. We definitely would not say that SHE is selfish.

Back to the decision to be childfree, it only makes sense to talk of that being selfish or not in the broader context of the person’s life. As many others pointed out, there are often good reasons for someone to choose to be childfree, most notably because one cares for other people in need. There are also selfish reasons to have children, like to save a failing marriage. Only by a comprehensive look at the actions, capabilities, needs, and preferences of the person in question can one determine whether a particular decision is an instance of the person’s general selfishness or the legitimate pursuit of satisfying one’s own needs/preferences.

Given this holistic conception of selfishness and the fact that both men and women can choose to be childfree, it is interesting to think why women who decided to be childfree are more condemned as selfish than men who decide to be childfree. Some reasons have been given in other comments. Any more thoughts?

Hello, Everybody. I am new to the blog. Thank you for having me. Thank you also for your illuminating comments thus far.

I want to discuss further why the decision to be “childfree� is called selfish by some.

Selfishness means being concerned primarily (or only) with oneself. How much of one’s concern should be directed to oneself and how much should be directed to others is not obvious (nor should we necessarily think of it in (only) quantitative terms). While too little concern for others can be a vice and mentally unhealthy, too much concern for others can also be a vice and mentally unhealthy. Where “being NOT-selfish� lies in between these two extremes may vary from person to person and vary over time. However, we have some intuitive notions of how much concern one should have for others. We do need to realize that our knowledge of actual people’s abilities and needs is so limited that we may only be able to assess our own standing on this spectrum, remembering to charitable in our own self-assessment.

Calling a single decision selfish can’t be taken too literally. The context of the decision as well as the person’s decisions in other areas needs to be taken into consideration.

SaraMC gives a good example of a singular decision that we would be tempted to call selfish. She writes, “Taking two pieces of birthday cake for yourself when there are only two pieces remaining and there's someone else waiting for her piece.� We are tempted to call this selfish because birthday cake is a luxury that no one really needs. There seems to be no reason other than self-absorption to keep both pieces for yourself. Also, the cake is easily divisible such that you could have kept one-and-one half pieces while still giving some to the person waiting.

Finally, there are only bizarre or parentalistic situations where one would be reasonable in keeping the two pieces of cake despite the waiting person (e.g. Bizarre-you know that you will be killed by the host/ess if you don’t eat two pieces. Parentalistic-you know the waiting person is diabetic and will be severely harmed if she eats any cake). If we alter these characteristics of the example, then we are not so inclined to think it is always a selfish act.

Also, if we knew the person keeping the two pieces of cake spent the rest of her time and resources promoting worthwhile social causes despite great sacrifice to herself, we may think her keeping the cake was weird or mean, but we may not think that her act was selfish. We definitely would not say that SHE is selfish.

Back to the decision to be childfree, it only makes sense to talk of that being selfish or not in the broader context of the person’s life. As many others pointed out, there are often good reasons for someone to choose to be childfree, most notably because one cares for other people in need. There are also selfish reasons to have children, like to save a failing marriage. Only by a comprehensive look at the actions, capabilities, needs, and preferences of the person in question can one determine whether a particular decision is an instance of the person’s general selfishness or the legitimate pursuit of satisfying one’s own needs/preferences.

Given this holistic conception of selfishness and the fact that both men and women can choose to be childfree, it is interesting to think why women who decided to be childfree are more condemned as selfish than men who decide to be childfree. Some reasons have been given in other comments. Any more thoughts?

"(Childless women) didn't think they'd be childless. They always thought they'd have children," said Cain

Even as a child, I swore that I never wanted kids of my own. I don't think it was ever the thought that kids would interfere in what I wanted to do, but I think just the thought of getting pregnant (me in paticular, anyone else I think it is just fine) makes me sick to my stomach. Nothing to do with looks or anything like that, just the thought of something growing inside me just creeps me out for some reason.

Someday I know I and my husband will have kids, but whether it be through pregnancy, surrogacy or adoption who knows. All I know is that if my husband's grandmother asks one more time when we are going to have kids or says 'ou're getting

"(Childless women) didn't think they'd be childless. They always thought they'd have children," said Cain

Even as a child, I swore that I never wanted kids of my own. I don't think it was ever the thought that kids would interfere in what I wanted to do, but I think just the thought of getting pregnant (me in paticular, anyone else I think it is just fine) makes me sick to my stomach. Nothing to do with looks or anything like that, just the thought of something growing inside me just creeps me out for some reason.

Someday I know I and my husband will have kids, but whether it be through pregnancy, surrogacy or adoption who knows. All I know is that if my husband's grandmother asks when we are going to have kids or says "you're getting older, you don't want to be chasing a baby around in your 30's" (I'm just about 25 btw) one more time I am going to lose it :P

June, the question is not "at whose expense are you being selfish?" (obviously nobody's harmed when you decide not to have children) It's "who benefits from this decision?" And the answer is: you. And THAT is what's so offensive to some people. That you'd do anything (or not do something) for YOURSELF.

Well, you and the rest of the world's population, since the result is that the world's limited resources don't have to be stretched quite as thin. "Selfish" — a term that, in my opinion, applies at least equally well to anyone who has kids just because it's expected of them — is a term that is often used to castigate women for decisions that others disapprove of. I think it is in that technical sense that "selfish" is being used with respect to women who decide not to have kids.

"As many others pointed out, there are often good reasons for someone to choose to be childfree, most notably because one cares for other people in need."

Greg, I hope you're not suggesting that women need a "good reason" for not having kids, otherwise they might be considered selfish? Women shouldn't have to justify their decision not to have children (or become Mother Theresa to make up for it) - that's the whole point of the feminist argument. What if my only reason for not having children is because I think they'll stop me from having the fun I want in my life? Certainly, I'm living my life in a way that might be considered to be "concerned primarily (or only) with [my]self", but I don't think that makes my decision a selfish one.

I think you've failed to emphasise a crucial point about selfishness - that being selfish involves depriving someone else of something purely in your own interests. What if I took the last two pieces of cake, but I was the only one who wanted any cake? I doubt anyone would consider that selfish (greedy maybe!). In the same way, by not having children, I am not depriving anyone else of anything (some might say quite the opposite), so I don't need to have a "good reason" to prevent my decision being selfish. I don't think a woman's choice not to have children is ever a selfish one.

Also, can I just say I hate the term "childfree"? It just sounds like another unwanted label. Do we call people who choose not to have pets "petfree" even though choosing to have a pet is just as common a decision as choosing to have a child?

Greg, to address your point about men not copping flak for not having kids, it's fairly obvious - women are considered to be "made for childbearing" and for "nurturing", so a decision not to conform to those stereotypes somehow means we're not fulfilling our assigned roles in the world and therefore must be unnatural, unwomanly, or "selfish". Further, selfishness is a trait that women aren't meant to exhibit - being that we're supposed to give our bodies and lives up for the purpose of making others happy - so it inflames those who hate to see women doing things for themselves, not for their husbands or children. And thus we get labelled selfish - it's like a way of saying, "you're not a proper woman".

Men, on the other hand, are meant to do nothing but sow the seed and then go back out to work (an offensive stereotype in itself) - they aren't meant to be nurturing or look after children, so nothing abnormal is seen in a man choosing that life. He's not selfish, he's manly - how many jokes have you heard about men not wanting to be "saddled" with a wife and kids? That's just boys being boys, but if a woman said that, guess what we'd call her?

Ledlight, the term 'childfree' is accepted by the childfree community as best representing their identity, as has been explained earlier. Initially it can sound strange, but when you have been harassed and beaten down by the constant questions of other about your breeding status the label of 'childfree' sums it up nicely. I think there are bigger societal issues with having/not having children than with pets - which leads to the choice being labeled/defined by those who made it, not by those who chose the alternative of having children.

Ledlight, the term 'childfree' is accepted by the childfree community as best representing their identity, as has been explained earlier.

I'm not wild about the sound of "childfree", personally, mostly because it sounds like something McDonald's might put in the nutritional info about their burgers; however, at least it doesn't have the connotations of lacking and sadness that "childLESS" tends to have.

This is a great article from a mother's point of view - she is basically saying "I'm glad I had children but I'm not going to force my decision down other womens' throats."

She even says that there are some people who should NOT EVER procreate...something I have been advocating for years. Amen, sister.

I don't understand why anyone would care if a woman decides not to have children--if someone doesn't want kids, the definitely shouldn't have them. Of course it's not selfish. That's just plain stupid.

But, as a woman who DID have two kids, could you please not refer to us as 'breeders' or having kids as 'breeding'? That's what animals do. Women with kids aren't animals. Thanks.

Prudie's been mocked here before, but this week she's hitting a stack of antifeminist buttons, most notably on the flipside of this issue (letter #3) http://www.slate.com/id/2170557/

That letter and her response really pissed me off.
The woman has a great guy and stepkids, but she's not content unless she can have one of her own. Talk about selfish...
She knew going into the relationship that he didn't want more kids, but nevertheless threatens to leave him if he doesn't give her the baby she wants. How would we respond to a man divorcing his wife because she's infertile and can't "provide him an heir"?

But of course Yoffe doesn't point any of that out. Instead she chides the woman for not marrying the guy before emotionally blackmailing him into fathering a baby he doesn't want, reinforces the notion that a woman who doesn't personally birth a baby will surely wither and die from lack of fulfillment (remember, she can still be a mother to his kids) and then suggests her boyfriend will "come around" once the baby is born, with no mention of him ever resenting being bullied into fathering it! I'm sure many women who had babies to "save the marriage" thought so, too...

And we wonder why headlines like the one above are reported as such a shocker to people. *eyeroll*

Ledlight wrote, “Greg, I hope you're not suggesting that women need a "good reason" for not having kids, otherwise they might be considered selfish? Women shouldn't have to justify their decision not to have children (or become Mother Theresa to make up for it) - that's the whole point of the feminist argument. What if my only reason for not having children is because I think they'll stop me from having the fun I want in my life? Certainly, I'm living my life in a way that might be considered to be "concerned primarily (or only) with [my]self", but I don't think that makes my decision a selfish one.�

Thanks, Ledlight, for your helpful comment. First, generally it is preferable that people have good reasons for their decisions than bad reasons. If one has no reasons, then one is irrational, which doesn’t seem preferable either. I am using the term “reasons� quite broadly and NOT in some sort of rational/emotional dualism. If a person makes decisions based on bad reasons, then we think shers decision is less praiseworthy than if made based on good reasons (and moral pejoratives are often attached to the person). I am using “good� and “bad� as rough terms for our intuition on what is generally acceptable to an enlightened person.

Second, I am not sure what you mean by saying, “Women shouldn't have to justify their decision not to have children…� If you are referring to some public practice, I am probably on your side. Interpersonal relationships get fuzzier because one’s decisions affect others, sometimes deeply. “Justifying� sounds too harsh of a term. But, we do expect people to provide reasons for their non-trivial decisions even if the reason is “I just don’t like that� or “It’s not for me�. Depending on the decision, these reasons could be sufficient. These reasons are usually perfectly fine reasons for the decision to be childfree or un-childfree, but we do need to recognize that they are shorthand for a lot of other emotions, thoughts, beliefs, reasons, etc..

I DO think that a person has to give reasons (or justify) to ONESELF the decision to be childfree. But, this is no different from rationally deciding any significant aspect of one’s life.

Finally, the dictionary definition of selfishness IS being concerned primarily (or only) with oneself. I am not saying that dictionaries are never wrong or don’t oppress the oppressed or that they embody TRUTH. But, I think any analysis of the concept of selfishness would involve this element.

Most of my original post was to get us to stop thinking of singular decisions as either selfish or not. Rather, the entirety of the person’s life need be considered. So, I reject calling a decision to be childfree or un-childfree as the right kind of thing to which we can properly assign the term, “selfish�. Rather, the person who is thoroughly selfish can decide to be childfree or un-childfree and either decision can be an instantiation of the person’s selfishness.

An example of the thoroughly selfish person would be an extreme surfer bum. He has no job. Other people support him so he does not even need to tend the hotdog stand once in awhile. He has only superficial relationships which he sacrifices for even his momentary pleasure. He decides to be childfree as well as not to fulfill any social demands because they may cause him to miss the big wave. If anyone is selfish, this surfer bum is.

Juxtaposed to most other people, this example illustrates that people are normally embedded in social relationships which provide them benefits and impose on them costs. If one pursues fun at other’s expense and at the expense of ever meaningfully contributing to someone else’s betterment, then that person is selfish regardless of whether that person is childfree or un-childfree. One does NOT have to be Mother Teresa to be not-selfish, but, on most accounts of morality, one does have some reciprocal obligations with other humans that involve not always sacrificing their good to one’s own.

A complicated question is how do we refer to the person who only does what is fun, but what is fun for that person is to help others. In other words, how do we characterize the altruist along the selfish spectrum?

"An example of the thoroughly selfish person would be an extreme surfer bum. He has no job. Other people support him so he does not even need to tend the hotdog stand once in awhile. He has only superficial relationships which he sacrifices for even his momentary pleasure. He decides to be childfree as well as not to fulfill any social demands because they may cause him to miss the big wave. If anyone is selfish, this surfer bum is."

If anyone is selfish, wouldn't that be another hypothetical extreme surfer bum who has no job, is supported by other people so he does not even need to tend the hotdog stand once in awhile, has only superficial relationships which he sacrifices for even his momentary pleasure, doesn't bother to use condoms or get a vasectomy or ask his one-night stands whether they would carry pregnancies to term, and ignores the many children he has because acknowledging them may cause him to miss the big wave?

Yes, yes!! Mina spells out well some of the things I meant when I said the surfer bum does "not to fulfill any social demands" on him.

Yes, yes!! Mina spells out well some of the things I meant when I said the surfer bum chooses "not to fulfill any social demands" on him.

Seems to me that the argument can be made that child free people are quite generous.

As child free homeowners in the US, my husband and I pay the same comparative rates of property and sales taxes as (not to mention greater rates of income taxes due to no ‘diaper’ deductions than) everyone else. Those taxes go to support public school education as well as programs like Head Start, WIC and others. The fact that my husband and I don’t have kids means that the taxes we pay toward these and other programs aren’t being used up by our child free family, leaving more resources for others.

Dang that gsn show sounds like it is going to be crazy! Probably lots of yelling there will be some touchy subjects being talked about. . . I will definitely check it out.

The podcast for this show just came out on itunes, but you've been able to find videos for a while on youtube. Check it out: http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=260233972

Thanks for that podcast link. I'm addicted to those these days, I'm so busy I never have time to watch any shows. So now I can watch whenever I want.

No prob, its worth checkin out.