Bioethicist opinion: Science proves kids are bad for earth; morality suggests we stop having them

Bioethicist opinion: Science proves kids are bad for earth; morality suggests we stop having them

travis rieder

Travis and his child in his Twitter profile picture

The author of this opinion piece, Travis Rieder, PhD, is the Assistant Director for Education Initiatives, Director of the Master of Bioethics degree program and Research Scholar at the Berman Institute of Bioethics. He is also a Faculty Affiliate at the Center for Public Health Advocacy within the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

From NBC News: A startling and honestly distressing view is beginning to receive serious consideration in both academic and popular discussions of climate change ethics. According to this view, having a child is a major contributor to climate change. The logical takeaway here is that everyone on Earth ought to consider having fewer children.

Although culturally controversial, the scientific half of this position is fairly well-established. Several years ago, scientists showed that having a child, especially for the world’s wealthy, is one of the worst things you can do for the environment. That data was recycled this past summer in a paper showing that none of the activities most likely to reduce individuals’ carbon footprints are widely discussed.

The second, moral aspect of the view — that perhaps we ought to have fewer children — is also being taken seriously in many circles. Indeed, I have written widely on the topic myself.

But scientific evidence and moral theorizing aside, this is a complicated question with plenty of opponents. In what follows, I will address some of the challenges to this idea. Because while I recognize that this is an uncomfortable discussion, I believe that the seriousness of climate change justifies uncomfortable conversations. In this case, that means that we need to stop pretending the decision to have children doesn’t have environmental and ethical consequences.

The argument that having a child adds to one’s carbon footprint depends on the view that each of us has a personal carbon ledger for which we are responsible. Furthermore, some amount of an offspring’s emissions count towards the parents’ ledger.

Most environmentalists accept this sort of ledger view when it comes to recycling, driving, and flying, but support begins to decrease when applied to family planning. The opposition is typified by Vox writer David Roberts, who argues that “such an accounting scheme is utterly impractical” because it seems to entail that one is never responsible for one’s own emissions. Because “we don’t want to double-count,” as Roberts says, this means parents are really only responsible for their kids’ emissions.

The flaw in this objection is the plausible-sounding caveat: “we don’t want to double-count.” Because why wouldn’t we want to double-count? If moral responsibility added up mathematically, then double-counting would be a serious problem. But I think it’s clear that we should not accept a mathematical model of responsibility.

Consider a different case: If I release a murderer from prison, knowing full well that he intends to kill innocent people, then I bear some responsibility for those deaths — even though the killer is also fully responsible. My having released him doesn’t make him less responsible (he did it!). But his doing it doesn’t eliminate my responsibility either.

Something similar is true, I think, when it comes to having children: Once my daughter is an autonomous agent, she will be responsible for her emissions. But that doesn’t negate my responsibility. Moral responsibility simply isn’t mathematical.

If you buy this view of responsibility, you might eventually admit that having many children is wrong, or at least morally suspect, for standard environmental reasons: Having a child imposes high emissions on the world, while the parents get the benefit. So like with any high-cost luxury, we should limit our indulgence.

Read the rest of this opinion here.

DCG

Views: 126

Comment

You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!

Join 12160 Social Network

Comment by DTOM on November 20, 2017 at 8:08am

@Diana

On one hand the PTB demand population reduction, while on the other hand they tell us the West needs cultural enrichment from open borders immigration to compensate for low birth levels - it's not hard to work out the real agenda.

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. All these dangers are caused by human intervention… The real enemy, then, is humanity itself,”

https://12160.info/profiles/blogs/club-of-rome-group-that-admitted-...

https://12160.info/forum/topics/royal-society-enviro-eugenicists-ca...

Comment by Parrhesia on November 18, 2017 at 1:33pm

Why does he have a kid?  What about his moral responsibility to climate change carbon footprints?  Just like Al Gore's home consuming 34X more energy than an average home, while everyone else should feel guilty.  These people are such hypocrites.

Comment by DTOM on November 18, 2017 at 5:53am
Comment by DTOM on November 18, 2017 at 5:26am

More 'carbon' lies...as Fukushima continues to kill the Pacific...and nothing is said or done.

If Rieder and others that spout this crap, believe in it so much, they should set an example, and dispatch themselves and their families immediately.

"Destroying the New World Order"

TOP CONTENT THIS WEEK

THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!

mobile page

12160.info/m

12160 Administrators

 

Latest Activity

cheeki kea commented on Doc Vega's blog post Government Issued Wearables? What’s Wrong With this Picture?
"I wonder what wearables must have been like before the last reset. "
11 hours ago
Burbia commented on Burbia's video
17 hours ago
Doc Vega posted blog posts
18 hours ago
Doc Vega commented on tjdavis's blog post National Blueprint For Biodefense
"Another scare tactic to push people into anew regime of vaccinations! Either that, or this is a…"
19 hours ago
Sandy posted a video

Dr. Mike Yeadon Speaks Out Against Digital ID, CBDCs, and Agenda 2030

Dr. Mike Yeadon, ex-Pfizer VP, urges public rejection of digital ID, CBDCs, and Agenda 2030, warning of future restrictions on freedom and privacy.
yesterday
Doc Vega posted blog posts
yesterday
Burbia posted a video

"EVERYONE'S BEEN SHOT UP HERE": Arsonists Set Wildfire In Idaho, Open Fire On Firefighters, Police

- Shocking news just broke that multiple firefighters and officers were shot in an ambush at the Canfield Mountain Natural Area in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.Acco...
Monday
Doc Vega posted a blog post

The Draconian Show

Sometimes I talk to my invisible friend, IkeHe comes from another dimension when magnetic fields…See More
Friday
tjdavis posted a blog post
Jun 26
Doc Vega posted a blog post
Jun 25
Doc Vega posted blog posts
Jun 24
Doc Vega posted blog posts
Jun 23
Doc Vega favorited tjdavis's photo
Jun 22
Doc Vega commented on tjdavis's photo
Thumbnail

Game Night

"Ha! Good one!"
Jun 22
Doc Vega commented on FREEDOMROX's blog post MRNA VACCINES: Question
"Listen man I know where you're at but back in October of 2023 thru December of 2023 for months…"
Jun 22
tjdavis posted a video

Architecton | Official Trailer HD | A24

SUBSCRIBE: http://bit.ly/A24subscribeWritten and directed by Victor Kossakovsky and starring Michele De Lucchi. ARCHITECTON – Coming Soon RELEASE DATE: Comin...
Jun 22
tjdavis posted photos
Jun 22
tjdavis posted a blog post
Jun 21
Burbia posted a video

Europe Will Not Survive

The hubris.All things Archaix at www.archaix.com
Jun 21
FREEDOMROX posted a video
Jun 21

© 2025   Created by truth.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

content and site copyright 12160.info 2007-2019 - all rights reserved. unless otherwise noted