Katie
I received an advanced reader's copy of this book thanks to the author and Seal Press.
This is not the book I hoped to read when I saw the cover. It is written primarily through the lens white dominant culture and centers the experience of having children throughout United States and, at times, European history.
The introduction's discussion of ‘choice' felt compelling and true, knowing how our choices about parenthood can be constrained and shaped by our society. I didn't see this theme play out, as all the chapters focused on active choice- a movement towards a goal or away from an aversive experience. I'm guessing there is less interest in and historical documentation in this middle place of not choosing to be childfree but also missing out on opportunities to try to have kids. This is unfortunate, as the middle group really does make up the majority of the story for those of us without kids. The chapter that could have contained this, “Because We Can't” only discusses IVF and egg freezing. (For a broader look check out “Not Trying: Infertility, Childlessness, and Ambivalence” by Kristin Wilson)
I think the author could have benefitted from considering her personal views about motherhood before she wrote this, or rehashing the concept of the book entirely once she had more insight. In the conclusion she states that she had softened towards parents during the pandemic and describes her previous annoyance with mothers and how they are prized. Most childless people I know are already soft towards parents and happy to support the raising of our youngest fellow humans. I think that this initial resentment scaffolded the concept of the book but then by changing gears the unique focus was lost. That ending sentiment that we should all just get along reads very shame-y and was contrary to a lot of what the book showed about the ramifications of bias about parent status.
While there was some really interesting information presented throughout, (I loved reading about the start to NON and the NotMom Summit!) it wasn't enough to feel like this is a comprehensive history that lends new insight into the lives of those “Without Children.”
There are two racially and ethnically insensitive terms on the first page and a half. I didn't need to go any further. I'm disappointed that what could have been a lovely message from the author also contained language that communities have loudly and clearly asked us all not to use, and certainly not while making an income.
Sometimes you have to wonder if white people ever look around and see their bubble. I can't get past the fact that virtually all of the author's academic and cultural references are white, famous, and kind of over-played IMO. There are so many other viewpoints out there, do I really need a rehash of what is already written and podcast-ed to death?
The second very large issue is that she asserts that most of neurodivergence is due to trauma, which I believe to be highly inaccurate. Where is the discussion of how marginalized identities experience trauma and literally can't get ‘unstuck' due to lack of systemic power? Racism appears only as an ‘incident' rather than a lifelong experience.
Despite these issues, I found some really great nuggets that I will probably use with clients and loved the writing style and structure of the book. Her 5 minute challenges and journal exercises are good.
A big meh and then a raised eyebrow. This author is obsessed with mothers and heteronormative identity. We all know about the epigenetic mouse study, yes? It's interesting and relevant but this book veers into la la land. We certainly do pass things down within families, but he leaves out many ways this happens. Read My Grandmother's Hands for a better idea of intergenerational trauma and innate response.
I just can't recommend this one. I was looking for a cultural review of the concept of happiness, and instead got a bunch of unsubstantiated stereotypes. There are some cute anecdotes? Continuing to portray Bhutan as happy in tandem with their massive ethic cleansing is a no-go. That's just one example- other reviewers have pointed out harmful and inaccurate narratives in other sections of the book.
I started off the book thinking “yes, girl, shout that louder” about the paucity of research regarding psychotropic meds. A lot of what she says is clear and valid and then... oh wow.. suddenly the rest of the book discredited all her good points in the beginning. She's anti vax and anti mask and that was enough for me.
