[chronofar]

Because the evolutionarily programmed rewards from parenting will typically outweigh the rewards from general altruism. Your child becomes the most important thing in the world by default, which can flip all sorts of joy and fulfillment triggers in your brain that are difficult to flip in that way via other means. Having children is your genetic purpose, so much of our biology is driven to that end, thus it would figure to provide uniquely strong rewards.

I say this as someone who does not have kids and has no plan to have kids as I don't care to pay the immense costs required, so maybe I shouldn't even be replying to this, but I tend to see the same sorts of replies to these sorts of questions which I think put a bit of extra gloss that obfuscates the true motivators a bit.

[pjerem]

> pay the immense costs required

I’m not trying in any way to change your mind but I want to say that this is only an opinion.

If you are ready to have kids, those costs are pretty easy to support. As you said, you are biologically programmed to support them (the costs).

I would die without a fear if my son’s life depended on it, and still I’m far from suicidal.

It’s just that, your brain naturally accepts the costs. Even if we are only talking about not being able to go that random party you would never miss before. You will be annoyed, for sure, but you’ll be granted with what you’ll live instead.

But I do think there is something that triggers in your brain starting from the moment when you want a child and it looks like it’s lasting a lifetime.

However, I would never recommend having children to anyone who don’t want them for any reason. Chances are that it turns out to be nice. But I wouldn’t take the risk. I see a lot of children whose treatment by their parents makes me really sad for them. The last thing a toddler want is to feel like a burden. So, better not create yourself this burden.

[chronofar]

Right, the thing is before you have children you can weigh the costs/rewards dispassionately, but after you have a child the calculus changes because now this person exists who is now the most important thing in the world to you. As soon as that person exists your life is no longer yours, it is in service of that child (assuming everything goes according to plan, of course it doesn't always work out that way), so of course rationalizing any cost at that point is just part of the deal.

I want my life to be my own, thus the costs are not worth it to me. If I had a kid tomorrow of course that equation would change and it would be in my best interest to rationalize all costs in service of the child, and surely I would and suddenly they would be "worth it." I do not view this as an argument in favor of having children, rather I view it as a a specific detail of the biological programming working its magic.

I'm not a never-kid person either. I am open to the idea that one day I may decide the costs are indeed worth it and seek to have children. I think that seems unlikely, but part of the freedom of designing my own life is having the space for my preferences to change, and I could envision a world in which I would be happy as a parent. It would not be in a nuclear family as is common in the west, but that is perhaps for another discussion.

[alluro2]

Just wanted to share appreciation for how well-put your perspective on reasons to have children is - sorry to add, but especially as a non-parent (since, as you say, it's hard to take into account what happens after the "flips" happen), as well as reasonable and respectable your current stance for not having children is. If more people could see both sides that well, there would be more happy children and less unhappy parents.

[hackervegas]

>It’s just that, your brain naturally accepts the costs.

There's a big percentage of parents that have some form of post-partum depression (a quick search offers something between 10% to 20%)