Not having children to save the environment

In 2019, British musician Blythe Pepino started the Birthstrike movement. The movement, which advocates remaining childless for the sake of the environment, is attracting more and more young people in this part of the world who share Pepino’s thoughts and actions.

The musician relies on studies such as those run by Sweden’s Lund University in 2017. Researchers explored the question of what is the most efficient way to reduce a person’s own CO2 emissions. The findings: a plant-based diet saves around 0.8 tons of CO2 equivalents per year, every Atlantic flight avoided saves 1.6 tons and going a year without a car saves a whopping 2.4 tons. But not having a child makes by far the greatest impact. According to the study, one fewer child born per year would save 58.6 tons of CO2 equivalents.

Should you therefore dispense with the idea of having children immediately? Journalist and web developer Marc Fehr says so, and two years ago he outlined his reasoning in a major opinion piece (article in German) in the Tagesanzeiger. It didn’t take long for the responses to roll in. The article garnered almost 400 – mostly critical – comments.

I decided to schedule a video call with 35-year-old Fehr. Marc Fehr has lived in Muizenberg, 30 kilometres south of Cape Town, since 2017. He works as a web developer at non-profit newsroom The New Humanitarian(https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org). While it’s almost 30 degrees here in Switzerland, Marc is sitting in his cool living room. It’s 10 degrees and pouring with rain on the Cape.

Marc, two years ago you had a vasectomy. Have you ever regretted it?
Marc Fehr: No, not at all. I was and am convinced that this is the right decision for me. Interestingly enough, however, I did waver before the operation.

Why?
Unfortunately, my life partner found out that she had to have her uterus removed because of a benign tumour. So, strictly speaking, I wouldn’t have had to have a vasectomy to live a child-free life with her. But, precisely because I’m so convinced that I don’t want any children of my own – no matter who with – I decided to take the step anyway.

In an article that made a real splash, you gave the reason for your vasectomy as not wanting to make your ecological footprint any bigger. Were you surprised by the huge response?
I already knew that my opinion piece would provoke discussion because, unfortunately, the fact that there are people like me who simply don’t want to have children is still taboo. There’s a widespread assumption that a couple will have a child. I was a bit surprised at the intensity of the responses and comments.

What kind of responses were there?
Apparently, I shouldn’t be alive anymore and would have died 1,000 times over (laughs). From «stop huffing and puffing» to «then you’d have to kill yourself too» to «luckily, people like you don’t have children», there was a bit of everything.

How did you deal with that?
Obviously, it was intense. At the same time, it was brilliant how people – not only in my personal life – opened up and began to discuss the topic with me. A striking example was someone from my family who became a father at the age of 18 and told me that he really identified with my viewpoint. There was also a lot of positive feedback with the basic message: «finally someone is talking about this taboo subject».

If your parents had been that radical, you wouldn’t exist.
Correct. And yes, I’m very grateful that my parents chose to have me and my two siblings. But this is far from the case for everyone. I think there are actually parents who should have thought more carefully about whether they’re really suited to having and raising children. When I was only 25, I told my mum that I didn’t want to bring any children into this world, and she understood even then.

Was that because of the environment even back then or simply because you didn’t want children?
The instinct to procreate just never came to me. I can’t remember ever wanting to be a father. I was still very young back then and lived a much more carefree life, so the issue of climate change wasn’t really on my radar at the time. It also has to be said that the topic has moved much further into the limelight in the last 10 years.

When I read your article, my impression was that you wanted to start a discussion.
Yes. I think it’s dubious that people who don’t want children are accused of selfishness. Everyone has the right to decide for themselves whether they want to have children. However, deciding not to is not often accepted in our society.

And then you kind of hit back.
So to speak. In my opinion, not bringing children into this world isn’t selfish. On the contrary: it’s how I’m helping to stop my ecological footprint getting any bigger.

But be honest. Isn’t it just the case that – for whatever reason – you don’t want to have children and are now simply looking for an argument to sell it as a sacrifice to the general public?
Well, unfortunately, the fact that there are various reasons why I don’t want my own children – some of which are very selfish – was actually lost in my article. Whether it’s because I don’t want to take on the responsibility, because I want to enjoy my free time or because I no longer want to have to expect my partner to use contraception. Just one of the reasons is wanting to make my contribution to a climate-friendly world.

By not having children?
Yes. Because if I father a child, I can’t predict how many children will be born to their children. Because for every child I fathered, an unknown number of offspring could one day be born. And, theoretically, I would have to attribute their emissions to myself. They’re my responsibility. It’s in my hands.

«Responsibility» sounds good. But isn’t it a bit far-fetched to shoulder the responsibility for the actions of future generations? Do you then blame the grandparents of a mass murderer? Where do you draw the line?
The fact is that my biological children could eat, breathe, travel, possibly even have their own children. This would then lead to an additional burden on the environment, the cause of which would clearly be me and the mother of the children. I believe that you have to take the blame for 50 percent of your children’s carbon emissions, 25 percent of your grandchildren’s, 12.5 percent of their children’s, and so on. I don’t want that and that’s my decision. But again: I don’t want to forbid anyone from having children. Anyone who feels that inner urge and has thought long and hard about the consequences and possible alternatives should of course be allowed to have children.

My next question is obvious. You’re not having children for the sake of the environment. Can I assume that you’re also doing everything else imaginable to keep your ecological footprint low?
Well, to be perfectly honest, no. I have a VW bus in Switzerland, fly from South Africa to Switzerland and back once a year, eat meat every now and then and my partner and I have two dogs and two cats, which is not exactly good for our ecological footprint. But that’s exactly why I wanted to avoid by not having children, at least to prevent my ecological footprint getting any bigger. When I die, that should be the end of my impact on the environment.

For me, though, this – let’s say inconsistent – attitude puts your motivation into perspective.
The issue of environmental protection is very complex. Many restrict themselves and make compromises to ensure the survival of humanity on earth: a plant-based diet, no air travel, cycling instead of driving and so on. There are so many factors that help shape our impact on the environment. That’s why I personally prefer to call it a «climate shadow» rather than a «carbon footprint».

What do you mean?
OK, let’s think about it. Person A has a vegan diet, leads a climate-neutral lifestyle and cycles to work. Person B eats meat, flies for holidays every year and has gas heating. At first glance, of course, you’d think that person B does more harm to the environment. However, if you find out that person A works as a consultant for Shell or as an accountant for Nestlé, their climate shadow increases substantially. That’s how I see my decision not to have children. I do a lot of things «right» when it comes to protecting the environment, but I know that I also display certain behavioural patterns that aren’t 100% climate-neutral. So, the answer is: it’s complicated.

Yes, it may be complicated, but I still have to dig deeper. You obviously care about the state of our planet. So is the solution really to just not have children? Aren’t you making this a little easy for yourself?
Yes, of course. I absolutely adore nature here on earth; we live on a breathtaking, wonderful planet! However, if humans as a species are not able to keep their own habitable environment intact, then we are to blame for the consequences. Basically, I don’t think the planet cares what we do here; it will outlive us all. That’s why I find phrases like «save our planet» a bit misleading. If no one had more children, it would be bad for humanity, but not necessarily for the planet.

Or to put it another way: if you had wanted to have children, would you have opted for a vasectomy for the sake of the environment?
Good question. I don’t think so. It’s also interesting that, especially before the vasectomy, I kept hearing: «Just wait and see, you’ll want to have children at some point and then you'll regret it». Incidentally, this constant nagging by people around me was also one of the reasons for my vasectomy.

But you might actually regret it one day.
Yes, I can’t rule that out entirely. But couldn’t you ask the same question to someone who has decided to have a child? In my opinion, the decision to have a biological child is even less reversible than my vasectomy. I think parents often play down how challenging and difficult «project child» can be. I also see this in friends who are very open about how children affect their relationship. And if I did regret it one day, there would still always be the option of adopting a child. It’s much more common here in South Africa than in Switzerland. If I did adopt, it would be nice to share my privileges with a child who has already been born.

Conversely, you could say that new life is the most sustainable investment in the future, because only future generations can steer the earth out of the mess it’s in with innovative ideas and new forms of society.
Yes of course! New life generates new ideas and solutions! That’s why my decision only works if enough other people take care of creating the next generation. And they are – the Earth’s population is steadily growing. And anyway, the probability that my child would have made the world a better place is about as high as winning the lottery.

Last question: would you write your opinion piece again today?
Yes, definitely. I think it’s important to address controversial issues and taboo subjects. However, I would maybe make sure that the ecological footprint argument isn’t given so much weight, because it’s only one of several reasons for my decision. It’s crucial that everyone thinks long and hard about having children and doesn’t just feel like they have to because of pressure from others or society.