I’ve become a social pariah – just for having children

When Caroline and I got married in 2001, having four kids was not only fashionable, it was the socially responsible thing to do. Countries with declining populations like Japan were storing up problems for themselves, with labour shortages and tax shortfalls on the horizon — and Britain was at risk of going the same way. Having lots of kids was practically a duty if you were in a stable relationship and you both had postgraduate qualifications, as we did. Our offspring were likely to contribute more in taxes than they received in benefits, thereby offsetting the cost of the growing underclass. We were so convinced of our moral righteousness that we actually looked down our noses at professional couples who stopped at two and thought of them as ‘selfish’.

How times have changed. Twenty years on, having even one child is considered by many to be irresponsible because of the impact on the environment. A 2017 study found that one fewer child per family could save 58.6 metric tonnes of carbon a year. Boys must be particularly bad for the environment on account of all those, ahem, greenhouse gases they produce — and we have three.

In only two decades, what used to be a high-status indicator — having a large family — has become a low- status indicator. But what can you do? You can’t just get rid of them because they’ve gone out of fashion. Children, it turns out, are the tattoos of the 21st century.

Most popular

Julie Burchill

Will I ever pee again?

Concern about climate change is affecting fertility across the West — and no wonder, given the apocalyptic predictions made by everyone from Prince Charles to Greta Thunberg. If you believe the gloomsters, the icecaps are melting, forests are going up in flames, islands are sinking into the sea, large parts of the world will shortly become uninhabitable and wars will break out over the diminishing supply of clean water.