A phenomenological exploration of the childfree choice in a sample of Australian women

Abstract

Childfree women 2 AbstractThe choice not to have children is considered to be a deviation from cultural norms, particularly those concerning the dominant pronatalist discourse and the socially-sanctioned developmental path of maiden to mother. However, little research has documented the experience of women who had consciously chosen to remain childless. Ten voluntarily childfree women participated in a qualitative study in which unstructured interviews ensured each woman's unique story emerged through its telling. The data analysis revealed three broad themes -first, the experiences and processes of making the choice; second, the ongoing effects of their choice, ranging from support and acceptance to pressure and discrimination; and finally, there was no regret as the women described engaging in meaningful, generative activities that contributed to society.Childfree women 3 Voluntarily Childfree Women: A Phenomenological Exploration of the Childfree Choice Women who 'reject' the notion of motherhood and choose to remain childfree are a relatively new and growing cohort in industrialised countries (Abma & Martinez, 2006;Park, 2005;Rowland, 2007;Shaw, 2011). A survey of 7,448 Australian women aged from 22 to 27 years revealed that 9.1% desire to remain childfree The conscious choice to remain childless automatically places women outside the constraints of cultural and societal expectations underpinned by an ideology of pronatalism (Park, 2005). Pronatalism encourages an increase in birth rate and reinforces the sociopolitical, familial and religious obligations of producing children for the good of the country and future generations (Rowlands & Lee, 2006); together, these provide a powerful mandate for the value of parenthood as a cultural norm (Koropeckyj-Cox, Romano & Moras, 2007).Furthermore, there is an expectation that married individuals have a civic and moral responsibility to have children, and that the couple should automatically want to do so (Veevers, 1975). The pronatalism mandate is reinforced by sociocultural influences that render parenting as a highly desirable life choice. Thus, pronatalism means that women who choose to opt out of childbearing are viewed as challenging the 'natural' role of women and rejecting the fundamental essence of the feminine identity in a pronatalist society (Gillespie, 2000;Mollen, 2006).Women choosing childlessness also challenge the sanctioned 'normal' developmental path of womanhood from maiden to mother (Hird & Abshoff, 2000;Letherby, 2002;Park, 2005). For instance, an analysis of marriage and family textbooks produced from 1950 to Childfree women 4 2000 illustrated that the depictions of childless adult were mostly negative, and voluntarily childfree adults were characterised more disapprovingly than the involuntarily childfree (Chancey & Dumais, 2009). Similarly, surveys of parents, students, and the general public demonstrate that women without children are considered to be selfish, deviant, undesirable, empty, and ultimately unfeminine (Gillespie, 2000;Kelly, 20...

Social Exclusion of Australian Childless Women in Their Reproductive Years

“…The findings also supported earlier studies revealing childless women's agency (Doyle et al, 2013;Park, 2002), by suggesting childless women are not simply passive receivers of social exclusion. Rather, their internalised, disempowered or empowered responses influenced experiences of social exclusion.…”

“…Many women were expected to justify being childless, supporting earlier findings that being childless was a discrediting attribute that women were required to justify or conceal in order to maintain credibility (Bell, 2013;Rich et al, 2011). In addition, confirming and expanding upon research finding childless women felt workplaces prioritised childed people's needs for annual and carers leave, flexible work and work-life balance, and that others doubted their professional credibility (Doyle et al, 2013;Rich et al, 2011), many women experienced subordination of their needs to those of childed people, assumptions they lacked qualities only childed women could possess, and discrediting of their views and expertise, in all domains of life. At the other end of the continuum, some childless women experienced exclusion from resources and participation in domains of life dominated by, prioritising or catering exclusively to childed people.…”

“…Some involuntarily childless women internalised pronatalism, perceiving themselves as failures and incomplete (Bell, 2013;Sternke & Abrahamson, 2015). There is, however, limited research investigating the exclusion of childless women in their reproductive years from the social domain, which encompasses social networks, support and interaction, and social and leisure participation (see for example, Albertini & Mencarini, 2014;Bell, 2013;Debest & Mazuy, 2014;Doyle, Pooley, & Breen, 2013;McNamee & James, 2012;Sternke & Abrahamson, 2015), the service domain, which incorporates availability, accessibility, affordability, appropriateness and adequacy of services (see for example Baker, 2003;Hammarberg, Astbury, & Baker, 2001;Mollen, 2006;Onat & Beji, 2012;Parry, 2004) and the economic domain, including participation in employment, the nature and quality of working lives, and material and financial resources (see for example Doyle et al, 2013;Fieder, Huber, & Bookstein, 2011;Huber, Bookstein, & Fieder, 2010;Malik & Coulson, 2013;Rich et al, 2011). There is no existing research in the civic domain, which includes participation in community and political activities, groups and organisations.…”

Personality and voluntary childlessness

“…Abma and Martinez (2006) estimated that in their large sample of childless American women aged 35-44, the distribution was 42 % voluntary and 28 % involuntary, with 30 % classified as temporarily childless: those who had not had children yet but expected to do so in future. However, the voluntary-involuntary dichotomy may be too simplistic, since the pathway to childlessness often involves a combination of both voluntary and involuntary factors (Doyle et al 2013;Gillespie 1999;Jeffries and Konnert 2002) and some researchers prefer to use the broader terms childless by choice and childless by circumstance (e.g. Cannold 2004;Connidis and McMullin 1996).…”

Accidentally-on-purpose: findings from a qualitative study exploring pregnancy intention and long-acting reversible contraceptive use

“…Although remaining ‘voluntarily childless’ in a society which values motherhood has its own challenges,26 27 for one participant these challenges manifested in an inability to access sterilisation. Although alone in this dataset, this experience has been reported elsewhere, where women report that their request for sterilisation is not taken seriously by their doctor,28 or report being discriminated against for their choice to remain childless 26…”