Or, go on being so insensitive and expect the same from everyone around you.

God Bless your athiest heart.

Also many of the childfree women I have known have gotten tubal ligations because they had trouble with hormonal birth control and wanted to go off of it. I had my snip in part because the Pill left my wife feeling extremely moody and depressed after a few years, and I didn’t want her to have to endure that.

I don’t understand why this issue persists, honestly.

Heartily agreed, Calotype. I would think that the decision to have a child (or not) is between a husband and wife, full stop. For any outsider to attempt to influence such an intimate and weighty decision is the worst kind of hubris.

Pam is entiled to her opinions and it is a shame that her editor chose to publish her tale without further researching the terminology that was added on without Pam’s consent. But what everyone must keep in mind that everyone is entitleled to their own opinions regarding child bearing and their own bodies. I think that is where a majority of the strife comes in from the CF group – as it rightly should – it gets tiresome and redundant to constantly have to defend your choices against a group of women who urge and even get aggressive with you over your choice not to bear or not bear children. It is not a social matter anymore – we’ve reached a new century and have grown as a people. We are not at risk, as a planet full of people, of wasting away so it is no longer necessary to have a bunch of chilren. I think it has fully become a choice to made by a woman and her mate. If you chose to have a lot of children and can afford to have them and have the resources to support them then more power to you. If you chose not to have children then good for you as well. Choice, people.

I don’t understand why this issue persists, honestly.

Not much of a reader, are you? Doesn’t seem like Pam really manifested any desire to control you or Francois, does it? Almost seems like you do have a little religion thing going on there, doesn’t it?

It seems clear to me that neither I nor my editor was aware that the term “childfree” is a term of art defined by a specific community. When I first read the headline (after publication) I thought it fit, but I understand through the objections from this community at this blog that it did not apply to me. Okay. It doesn’t apply to me. Thanks for clearing that up.

I don’t bear any ill will toward members of the childfree community. And I definitely was not intending to reach this community specifically by writing my article (especially given that I published it in a publication that was most unlikely to reach this group).

I am not insulted by the assertion that my experience is ordinary and irrelevant to the lives of many women who may hear about it. I’m glad that I turned out to be a typical mother, and I’m glad that some other typical mothers who have contacted me about the article have found encouragement from my story.

I regret that my story has caused consternation among some members of the childfree community due to the inaccurate application of this term of art to my situation.

I’m sure that no one will be sorry to know that I am finished commenting on this thread. It has been very informative and I am glad for the insight I have gained from participating. My personal belief is that any time people who strongly disagree are able to “hear” each other, even if the disagreement ultimately remains, greater tolerance, peace and understanding are the likely result.

And I chose to trouble myself with this article because you wrote a little “conversion story” in which you claimed to have once been childfree, and then Saw the Light and got better, when what you really did was have a completely ordinary journey toward marriage and parenthood that the majority of wives and mothers go through in our society. The title of your article here claims a relevance and authority that you do not have (as well as calls into question the existence of another and entirely valid life choice through the use of derisive quote marks) and I thought the false analogy being put forth should be cleared up before anyone bought into it.

In short — you’re a typical mother, Pam, not a born-again childfree woman. Your experience simply has no relevance to the lives of genuinely CF women.

Why trouble yourselves so much over the idea that other women don’t believe as you do?

Pam wrote:

I guess I could ask you the same question.

So your argument is: “I didn’t want children at one time in my life. Then I converted to Catholicism and decided that I did want children!” Okay, great. I hope that makes you happy. However, I find that your story has zero relevance to my life. Also, your experience does not in any way qualify you to be a authoritative spokesman for the childfree community.

Pam wrote:

I published my story in a Catholic publication directed mainly at people who already practice NFP. If it doesn’t have any relevance to your life, that’s okay. You didn’t have to read it.

Most importantly, I never claimed to be – and don’t now – an “authoritative spokesperson” for the “childfree” community. I didn’t apply the term to myself, and am glad now to understand how the orthodox child-free by choice movement chooses to define the term.

Better to concern yourself with projects that might actually bear fruit, if you’ll pardon the pun. How about volunteering at an orphanage or fostering a child on weekends, if you care about children so much? Why trouble yourselves so much over the idea that other women don’t believe as you do?