The scientific description of a woman who has never given birth is nulliparous, from the Latin nullus, meaning none, and parere, to give birth. The term applies to a wide range of women: women who are going to give birth but have never done so before (a woman who is pregnant for the first time, before giving birth, is considered nulliparous), women who will never give birth because they cannot have children for medical and/or socio-economic reasons, and finally, women who will never give birth because they don’t want children.
According to a recent IFOP study, the latter category includes 30% of women of procreation age. This particularly high figure seems to suggest a change in what is normal with regards to the importance of creating a family, or even the decision to procreate at all, as well as some big changes in the systematic role of mother that we assign to women. To what extent can we measure this change and what are the experiences of women who choose nulliparity? Let’s take a closer look.
The freedom to say no
The first reason that most women cite when choosing not to have children is their need for freedom. Chloé Chaudet, author of J’ai décidé de ne pas être mère explains that “when you read social studies on the subject, the desire for freedom is shared by everyone who does not wish to become a parent.” Freedom from what? The organizational and financial constraints of motherhood (children are expensive)
Some women have just never wanted to be mothers. They are not interested in parenthood, so they have never considered the issue when thinking about their future. Yet it’s important to note that men distance themselves from the idea of becoming a parent more than women. Or at least they are the ones who express it more.
Career and social mobility: the burden of choice
For many, not having children is also a conscious career strategy. Chloé Chaudet explains: “I’ve noticed that at certain times, not having children is an advantage. At the end of conferences or study days, I very often find myself having after-work drinks with male colleagues or slightly older women. I can then move among the people who are there at key times, when careers are shaped.”
When you don’t have family responsibilities, it’s easier to be in the room where these informal socialization opportunities—crucial for promotions—happen. In the United States, studies show that in working-class environments, social mobility is frequently associated with childlessness. But the situation is a double-edged sword. While these women have easier access to positions of responsibility, they are also subject to increased pressure. Employers and colleagues often assume that, in the absence of family, these women have unlimited availability. And that work is the only important thing in their lives.
A political and ecological act
Finally, choosing not to have children might be the result of personal and political convictions. According to Margaret Movius, one of the pioneers of studies on the voluntary choice not to have children, the only way to truly achieve equality between men and women is to remain childless. As such, the awareness of some women about unequal sharing of parental and household duties that puts so much pressure on them in every aspect of their lives (work, social circles, personal fulfillment) leads some to decide not to have children at all. Others also cite environmental reasons.
The uncertainty of tomorrow’s world, especially with climate change, is discouraging some women to give birth to a generation that will have to live with the consequences of the lifestyle of previous generations.
Freedom with a side of stigma
Despite this progress, women who do not wish to have children are still heavily stigmatized and forced to explain their choice. They may even receive inappropriate or abusive comments. It’s almost as if women are allowed to refuse motherhood in theory, but not in practice. The idea that woman = mother is still quite strongly present in our societies, so much so that some women who have never expressed a desire for children say they felt the need to seek psychological support out of fear they might have something wrong with them.
This social need to justify the absence of a desire for children stems from the invention of the “maternal instinct”. The concept originated during the Industrial Revolution. It aimed to stabilize society by encouraging working mothers to stay at home. Before then, children were seen as an additional resource in the working classes; and for the upper classes they provided assurance that their noble lineage would continue. Noblewomen rarely took care of their children.
The world of work faces new contradictions
We now talk more about balancing work time and family time, rather than balancing work life and family life. The aim of this new way of seeing things is to ensure that each person’s individual situation outside the workplace is considered.
The idea is to reconsider the role of work in people’s lives; to understand that there are other obligations than family and work, and that those obligations also contribute to achieving physical and mental balance. However, there are still significant differences between theory and practice. One way personal constraints have gained recognition in the workplace is through greater awareness of how family responsibilities affect employment, particularly for women.
Although many companies now allow provisions for better reconciliation of family constraints, motherhood is still a significant obstacle in women’s careers. On average, 24% of all women leave the labor market five years after the birth of their first child. According to an INSEE survey, 63% of working women report difficulty in reconciling family and workplace obligations. There is still plenty to be done.
This historical priority given to family obligations in work-life balance policies actually has both positive and negative consequences for women who don’t have children. Employers favor them for positions of responsibility and their careers progress better. On the other hand, with no family obligations, these women might be considered as completely free outside of work, and more demands might be put on their time.
Ulrich Beck, sociologist and author of Risk Society, ironically suggests that the business world is seen as childless: “The job market demands mobility but doesn’t take personal circumstances into account. Couples and their families want the exact opposite. So, this system makes childless women both the biggest winners and the biggest losers. Many complain that a disregard for their obligations, and the prioritization of parents in terms of annual leave, is unfair, and that more empathy and conciliation is shown to parents.
Even if they manage to escape the demands and constraints of motherhood in their personal lives, they may suffer when colleagues, employers and recruiters express what is known as the presumption of motherhood: systematically believing that all women of childbearing age intend to have children. This simple prejudice can be detrimental even to women who seek to free their careers from the constraints of motherhood.
It’s important to respect each person’s parenthood choices, and companies should be encouraged to implement more flexible and inclusive models that reflect real-life diversity, while remaining aware of the mental load and unprecedented changes involved in parenthood, and to an even greater extent, motherhood.
