Do People Really Lose Their Minds Once They Become Parents?

I never even heard of parents losing their minds until I was reading a column by Dear Abby or Ann Landers many years ago where a letter writer asked the question, "At what point do parents lose their minds after having children?" Then an article from Time appears and attempts to investigate the concept that having children makes one, well, delusional.

When you think about it, our pro-natalist society has managed to transform an otherwise healthy-minded set of adults into Ozzie and Harriet Nelson, a popular 1950's television sitcom family that portrayed American life as highly idealistic. The children were always well behaved, Harriet wore immaculate day dresses and served supper on time after greeting her husband with a kiss at the front door after his long, hard day at work. Thinking that real life should be like that certainly is delusional but not enough to require the person being deluded into wearing a straitjacket. Instead, American society goes a notch higher with pro-natalism: that children are a gift from God rather than the result of sexual intercourse, and that one's child is the center of the parent's universe. It is an oxymoron to be sure, to believe in both a God and at the same time set your child on that same level. But perhaps that is an external cover for a far more dark side of parenting: depression, crumbling of marriages and closeness in relationships, and possible nervous breakdowns. Time also notes that people have a natural inclination to reproduce, but that is an error. People have the natural inclination to fulfilled sexual needs, but reproduction is something that can in fact be controlled by individuals.

It is more accurate to say that individuals have to be socialized into reproduction and wanting children. For example, it is not at all unusual for a woman in an office who is pregnant, to have her female co-workers shortly follow suit in pregnancy. Back to our pro-natalist society for a moment, women who do not have children like myself are always questioned why we are not reproducing. No woman should ever "give in" to another woman's demanding to know why the other woman is not going to reproduce. Arguing that a uterus must be put to its intended use is like claiming one must rob a bank at gunpoint just because you have two hands to do it. Cognitive-dissonance in this case seems to appeal to some people simply because misery loves company, as the old saying goes. Some people fall for the line of "But you would be such a good parent, and children bring so much joy to you!" while the person saying that is trying hard to conceal being a nervous wreck from their out-of-control child. Granted, not all parents allow their child to control their lives - indeed, some parents retain their own active lives while having children - but the consensus on helicopter parenting and putting one's child on display to the general public turns off most people who wonder if those parents have actually lost their minds.

It is not hard to deduct what sort of life one might expect if one decides to have children. Since having children is not an obligation in our society, observing the mental state of those who think having children is a benefit to the parent's finances and emotions might think otherwise. Children tend to be "resource gobblers" and as for emotional fulfillment, well, let us just say that that is something that can come from one's spouse or long-term partner, not a child who has no concept of emotions. Maybe too many new parents mistake infant dependency for unconditional love, for babies are grateful someone can change their diaper since they are too little to change it themselves. The romantic view of having children has not yet come to an end in American society, but maybe people will be able to use their ability to reason before they actually have children so that they provide a rational answer as to why they had children to begin with.

http://healthland.time.com/2011/03/04/why-having-kids-is-foolish/

http://hsb.sagepub.com/content/46/4/341.short?rss=1&ssource=mfc

http://www.jstor.org/pss/353345