Be Not A Selfish Me

true.

bold.

cold and the way it should be told.

dear Friend, you wrote my heart there.  Others with differing views/reasons are free to disagree.

A poet- sees, a poet doesn't hold back.

Thank You for this!

Just really bothers me seeing so many children being born and then after the newness and all the attention wanes, they're treated like yesterdays news, and the parents pass off their responsibilities to others as if it's OK and completely normal.
Babies aren't puppies or kittens, that you ignore or neglect as they grow. Children are for life and one should be prepared to adjust to a whole new way of living.

Thank you C_f, your pen and ponder prouds my page.

T

Fully agree that all those yet to have children should at least be aware of their reasons for having a child

A large number just assume that it's a right of passage to find mate, copulate & create for the selfish desire to all of the negative lines in your write

I disagree on the "You are not in a stable and loving relationship" slightly
What appears stable and loving secure this year might not so be the case next

Relationships fail, even those built on good foundations are prone to erosion
All you can do is put all the right materials into the mix when building

"I disagree on the "You are not in a stable and loving relationship" slightly
What appears stable and loving secure this year might not so be the case next"

To be honest, I was expecting someone capable of deep thinking would call me out on that one.

When I composed it, my thoughts were couples in a rocky relationship, thinking adding a child to the mix would stabilize it.
Totally agree, no one knows what the future holds and people's lives can change for a number of reasons.
Also may get some thoughts regarding a single person wishing to have a child. If that person is capable of handling the responsibility and can honestly answer no to the others I listed, then I see no reason they should not have children.

Just too many immature people having babies for many wrong reasons.

Thanks Rose, you have a beautiful mind and it shows.

Teri

When I composed it, my thoughts were couples in a rocky relationship, thinking adding a child to the mix would stabilize it...

Unfortunately this goes on Daily with many many couples "papering over" the bad, in some cases toxic cracks with creating a baby together

I do agree with the sentiments of this write. As a poster above said though, life changes and what once were stable relationships or even financial security can change in the blink of an eye. I know as I have been there. I didn’t bring a child into the world ever intending to not be secure financially or relationship wise, but it happened. That said, my child always comes first before anything and it is true that some people don’t have the capacity to be selfless.

Parts I agree with and disagree with for those reasons, however I do think that you have mostly spoken the truth which people are afraid to hear. Having children is life altering and you must adjust yourself around your child,  not the other way round. People who expect their life to stay the same are the ones who should not have children, I see it every day, it pains me.

"I didn’t bring a child into the world ever intending to not be secure financially or relationship wise, but it happened."

Here, like I answered on Rose's comment, yes, there are no guarantees in life, but there should be a guarantee like the one you stated,

"my child always comes first before anything"

If at the time you were ready, willing and able to be a parent and later, life situations changed, that is not your fault, and the fear or possibility of change should not be a reason not to have children.

Thanks SS for weighing in, I think we're in sync on our views.

Teri

Yup ...you're pretty much on target, but I'm in the group of those who makes the child, the first priority, in every instance, bar none...

As well as we all should be, regardless of how they came about arriving.

Thanks Poe as always.

I deeply appreciate the compliment, though I feel is it very questionable.  
 
Philosophy is merely an outward projection of opinion, and as such, subject to the "sniff test".  
So, I suppose you could be correct. "Queen of sniff tests" :-))))  
 
Much enjoy your presence on my page Hans.

one of the REALEST poems ever!!!!!
i say this from a man with one child who was created with conscious intent and love ...
although her mother and i didn't work out we were/are ALWAYS in agreement as to what is best for her future..
and i have verbally communicated to her [the mother] how honored i am to have co-created with a woman of her caliber...

i witness as an outsider the chaos so many go through because they weren't sincere in intent or just plain irresponsible ...it's just a shame the level of selfishness that's reeking through society these days...

profound and timely write!!!

Thank you Sir Naajir.

I try, for what is the point otherwise.

Teri

So glad you returned and expanded on your comment. Your words here should be a reminder to others of how unplanned situations as you have experienced are best handled.

When we were raising our two daughters it was agreed that should anything happen with our marriage, the girls would reside in a permanent home and we would be the ones to move in and out in shared custody, basically trading living arrangements. Fortunately that never occurred.

Like you, I have seen couples use their children as pawns in an unending vendetta to make each other miserable or in some asinine and vengeful attempt at getting what they consider even, not realizing or not caring how it effects the child.

That you and your ex practice the higher road is credit to a maturity level not reached by many that in some part is the reason for the mess society finds it's self.

On first read it felt really preachy - on the second read I found myself nodding in agreement with every line and wanting to add some to it (lol)

its a very challenging write and it will get reactions and that's always good - excellent write my friend :-)

First and always foremost is my thank you for your visit David.  
I would welcome any thoughts in adding to it, for I am sure I left some things out. What I have listed, are the ones most prominent in my mind.  
 
If it does come off as preachy, it is certainly not my intent. I just feel somethings need to be said regardless of how others perceive the delivery, and I am at a loss to say them in a way that leaves no doubt my beliefs without sounding judgmental.  
 
That after reflecting on it, you found yourself in agreement with what I have written here and thinking of other reasons as well, is of no surprise to me, for I feel I have come to know many of your perspectives parallel mine through reading your pieces.  
 
If the delivery is the only thing we disagree about, then that is a welcomed opinion and does not weigh heavy on the scale of friendship.  
 
Deep respect for you my friend, and the RL is much appreciated.

I always read poems at the very least twice - sometimes first appearances can and usually are wrong.

to comment on one reading I find is always a mistake

I love your courage and and your wisdom

much repoect my friend

   
     I've appreciated reading your  write; what I would also call words of wisdom. it was like a dagger to the heart....  
     every time I think on this subject matter; I say to myself,  
     " I'm not worthy of playing such a role of parenting, at this stage in my life...."  
     I often find myself questioning, if I ever will be....  
   
        I feel that finding someone who "completes you" is just as much a task....  
        I feel it takes an incredibly selfless, strong minded, strong willed, well established individual,  
       and much more....who won't be additional stress to a child, in a hellish world;  
        but who could raise a child in a carefree environment to play such a role as parenting....  
        I have the upmost respect for every parent....    
           
      

I'd first like to say this: I believe being "worthy", being "prepared" and being "willing", to take on the responsibilities of being a parent are 3 separate matters. That you do not feel "worthy", to me shows a degree of maturity, in that you realize for whatever reason, you are not in a position at this point in your life to provide an environment that is in the best interest of a child. Many parents are not mature enough to be raising children in todays world but yet here we are.
Perhaps "prepared or willing" may be a better choice of words for the reasons you feel you're not yet ready to be a parent.

Some people chose not to have children for a variety of reasons which should not be considered selfish and are actually the exact opposite.

If, as you have said, "you may never be ready, I don't think it will be for a lack of maturity on your part.

Thank you PF for your visit and sharing you thoughts.

AT

I whole-heartedly agree with your message and it's intent. But, since philosophy is amplified opinion, I'll relate my philosophical position with my only disagreement:

"so I may leave something on this earth showing I was here[.]"

I can see how this statement could be a red flag, but I don't see it as inherently negative.  Being motivated by mortality to do right by one's offspring so that a piece of oneself can be successful is a good thing. I'd argue that such a drive is a fundamental force of evolution. The knowledge of one's mortality is why it's so important to not be selfish in the care of children because children have longer left to live.

I hope the comment doesn't wreak.

From the bottom up.  
 
Your comment, far from wreaking.  
 
"Being motivated by mortality to do right by one's offspring so that a piece of oneself can be successful is a good thing. I'd argue that such a drive is a fundamental force of evolution. The knowledge of one's mortality is why it's so important to not be selfish in the care of children because children have longer left to live."  
 
Not being completely sure of your intended meaning within the above paragraph, I offer my perspective below.  
 
To me, this brings two chains of thought.  
 
First, procreation, to me, is not a good reason for having children. Perhaps in the history of mankind it was necessary or desired to populate as quickly a possible to insure the survival of our species. But, using todays balances of humans to world needs or species needs, I feel, nullifies this reason.  
 
Secondly, "Vanity". If one brings a child into this world, wishing to use them as a vessel for carrying forth their own perspectives after death, then I certainly feel this is wrong, which I covered in my forth reason .  
If one is doing right by the child only for the reason of having the child carry forward a part of themselves or in hopes the child will inherit their talents or traits, and is more concerned in this respect than in the child's right to be self determining. then again I feel it is a poor reason for having children.  
If one is concerned with leaving the world some reason for knowing they were here, then I would rather they do so in some form of media, rather than placing the burden of doing so on their child.  
 
I truly believe that the only reason for having children is to give them the opportunity to experience life, period. And when that decision is made, it is incumbent on the parents to provide as much love and assistance as possible for the child to reach their full potential, be an asset to society, and free of inner turmoil.  
 
If you still feel you are in disagreement with the reason I put forth, there is certainly nothing wrong with looking at something from different perspectives. It is only when one attempts to force their beliefs on another that the ills which we as a society suffer today, leads to discontentment and consequence of actions  
 
Debating civilly, without the injection of emotional reaction can be an awarding experience, one I wish not to turn from, for fear I may destine myself further down a flawed path.  
 
Thank you for your time and thoughts Dr. M.

I believe that the same biological systems that drive animals to procreate are linked to, at least mammals', innate protection of and sacrifice for their offspring (because evolutionarily it's more beneficial for the young to succeed than the old).  I think that's a good thing. Animal parents are naturally pushed towards your ideal parent type.

I don't think it's a vain thing to want to instill important views or perspectives into a child. Otherwise, I'd mark it as a continuation of wanting to live vicariously through one's child, which I agree is inherently bad. Wanting to live on in others can be a wide range things like being a memory or passing on "common sense" knowledge or knowing that someone you helped develop became a healthy, functional member of society.

A divergent, but related philosophic question: can the ego/self be truly removed from an act/action? I think not, so even the most selfless approach to parenting is rooted in something selfish. Of course you're free to disagree.

Nice discussion as always AT

Your first paragraph I have no disagreement with.

In your 2nd, I also agree. My point had more to do with someone wishing to indoctrinate their child not giving the child the freedom to express a different point of view (blind adherence) to that of the parents views. Of course the standards of behavior would have to be within social norms, i.e. a good citizen, etc. etc.
I do take exception to parents that would pressure a child to follow in the foot steps of parents, i.e. grandfather was a teacher, father was a teacher, so, you need to be a teacher, or having a child just to carry on the family name, i.e. Johnny Jr. the IV.

I think we are on the same page, and possibly only misunderstanding each other's wording.

Your 3rd paragraph brings these thoughts. If the act/action, is meant to benefit or pacify the parent, this I would consider to be selfish behavior/selfish ego. If the action/act is aimed at assisting the child in becoming successful in all aspects of life regardless of differing  beliefs or lifestyles,  then I would not consider that as being selfish, only good parenting.
Since the ego is the conscious opinion of oneself, it can not be separated from actions or thoughts, but not every ego is necessarily selfish. Some people are selfish, yet others have true humility, i.e. selfless. Both traits are based on the ego and vary greatly in degree.
So, I concur with a portion of your question, but not with all aspects of it. The fact I do not agree with all of it, does not translate to a lowering of respect. If it did, then it would be testament to being selfish or having a selfish ego.

Yes, the discussion has be pleasant and thus enjoyed.

Teri

I'll skip to para. 3; I agree.

I don't consider divergence on core tenets to be disrespectful unless it's done disrespectfully. I infer that you also believe in true altruism (another closely related tangent), yes? It's always good to have respect for those that are different than ourselves.

If by true altruism you mean would I rush into a hail of bullets to save a stranger, then no. I believe self preservation would override this action. If the situation did not necessarily assure death but held the possibly of injury, then yes, but it would depend on whether or not I thought I could make a difference.
There are many animal species that display the trait of altruism when in a group, but none I can think of off hand sans a mother protecting her offspring, that would do so to the death. Even mothers of the species I'm referring to will flee when they sense the situation is hopeless.

Less killed in action, more doing actions without any reward/personal benefit.

Yes there are, bees and ants come to mind (but they are hive-minded so Idk if that counts) as well as other primates and dolphins. I think animals (for the most part) differ from humans because their neuro-chemcal systems don't reward perceived good deeds like humans' do.

Agreed (hive-minded) souldn't be considered altruism in the context of good deeds. However, if doing something for the benefit of feeling good about yourself, I don't feel that would be true altruism either, for the ego is doing so expecting a reward, which to me is for selfish purposes. I think most split second decisions in placing oneself in harms way is instinctive without first thinking of the effect on the ego.
It is only after the act is over, does the ego come into play.

What if n those split-second decisions the brain decided to do what's right for a dopamine kick, before the conscious mind even realizes that there was ever a choice?

I do think the brain can do something for a dopamine kick without conscious thought entering into the decision, .I.e. lighting up a cigarette and not realizing it until after you have done so. But, I believe that would fall under "habit" or "addiction". I don't think deciding to do something that places one in danger for the reason of assisting another falls under "thrill seeking" either. I don't feel doing what is right enters into split second decision making. I feel It is either instinct or trained behavior that make those type decisions.
I feel the adrenaline rush felt during times such as these, are more closely linked to self preservation rather than pleasure.
Perhaps you can describe a scenario wherein what you are proposing would quantify the hypothesis. I can not think of any.

Fair point, dopamine might not be the best neurotransmitter for motivating selflselflessness involving potential harm: serotonin or oxytocin, perhaps. I was thinking something like diving to push someone out of the way of an oncoming car, putting one's arm out to "protect" a passenger while driving, the first impulse of deciding to pick up something someone else dropped  or whether to hold the door for someone.

Hmm...I've taken us quite a bit off course, but the core of our difference isn't with the surface situation.