Being an only child requires patience. There’s a lot of explaining about not having siblings, and about whether that was “strange” and about how Disneyland might have been more fun with a sibling but if I’d had a sibling my parents couldn’t have afforded to take me to Disneyland. It requires listening to people talk about how only children are terribly spoiled and trying to decide whether to enlighten them or not. It means I frequently listen out-loud ruminations on why anyone would ever choose to have just one. I’ve never minded the questions, but I’ve also never had much of substance to say, besides that my life seems to have turned out OK so far. But now I’ve got a few more answers.
Bill McKibben, environmental author and educator, wrote Maybe One after he and his wife made the decision to have only one child. It is, as the subtitle describes, a case for smaller families. He is a brave writer, and one of the few I’ve read who states directly that having more babies leads to overpopulation and therefore damage to the earth. That’s sort of a no-brainer, but it’s a controversial statement. Americans, as we know, are locked in a war over reproductive rights and responsibilities. China’s one child policy remains controversial. But it’s a highly relevant discussion topic, and he handles it gracefully.
Beginning with a chapter full of research on why the stigma of being an only child is undeserved, the book brings together a bevy of facts and clinical studies along with anecdotes on small and large families. As an only, I’m biased toward the idea that having a brother or sister doesn’t create a “better” person, but it was nice to read some data that backs up my hunch. And, speaking of his bravery, McKibben brings up religion early in the book as well. He argues that the commandment to “be fruitful and multiply” and “populate the earth” is as much an order to care for those we’ve produced as it is to have babies. And, in possibly my favorite line from the book, he notes that we can probably check “populate the earth” off our to-do list. Mission: Accomplished.
The largest portion of Maybe One is devoted to environmental issues. This section wasn’t the most compelling to me, for a couple of reasons. One: Like most Americans, I will consider environmental concerns as I choose my family size, but they won’t be the sole deciding factor. I care about population density, but I care about my child and my family’s immediate happiness more (a bit of a humbling admission, but I’m doing my best to be honest). Two: I only discovered this book recently, but it was published in the late 90’s. Many of the issues discussed are either in much worse or somewhat better shape than they were ten years ago, so it seemed a bit dated. But I got the point: family size (yes, even, and sometimes especially, in Western countries) has a huge impact on the long-term health of our planet and the human race.
The book ends with the acknowledgment that this decision is as much about parents’ emotions and beliefs and hopes as it is about our planet. McKibben has kind words for large families as well as small, and strives not to alienate those who choose to have a bunch of kids. He asks only that we think carefully about it first.
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
I’m not sure where this only children are “spoiled brats” idea came from. I think this is one of those finding the right balance between being a completely selfish and a completely selfless parent things (either one of which can lead to a self-centered child, I believe). I think if parents set the right example, the number of siblings doesn’t matter. I haven’t heard anything about China having an epidemic of spoiled brats.
On top of that, I think having only one child is very environmentally responsible. The religious arguments about being fruitful were all about outbreeding other religions. At this point, it’s not going to be possible for any religion to outbreed another, and as you say, the world is pretty much completely populated now, if not overpopulated.