Yahoo article claims parunts happier, but not untill the kyds move out

Am I reading this correctly...Parunts are happier people, but not untill they are empty-nesters? Great spin on what we already know. We've been told marital happiness doesn't return untill the kyds are gone, but this article claims parunts are happier than rest of population who don't. Yeah, right.




Parents of young children have heard some version of the same line from mothers and fathers whose kids are all grown up. “The little ones grow up too fast. They’re so cute at this age. Cherish their younger years because they’re the best years.” Social scientists have discovered that not only are these empty nesters lying, but they are having a much better time than everyone else. While it is still true that people who have families tend to be happier and healthier for it, new research reveals that the benefits of parenthood come with one big catch — they don’t kick in until children grow up and move out.

Perhaps empty nesters are not intentionally being deceptive, but are just drunk on happiness. The massive European study of over 55,000 people 50 and older found that parents experienced significantly higher levels of life satisfaction and fewer symptoms of depression than people without children, but only after their children no longer lived with them. Despite the large data size, the research did not compare empty nesters directly to parents with young children or look at parents in America. However, another study did both things using over 4 decades of data from the U.S. General Social Survey and found that empty nesters ages 50 to 70 were 5 to 6 percent more likely to report being very happy that parents with young children living at home.

To put it bluntly, “it is not reflected in the data that young, resident children cause happiness,” says economist Stefan Trautmann, co-author of the new european study.

This may be hard for new parents who are all jacked up on oxytocin to believe, but what they are likely feeling when they hold their children is not exactly happiness, but a biological bond meant to increase the likelihood of their offspring’s survival.

That’s half of the reason having kids gained a reputation for enriching parents’ lives; the other is that parenthood is associated with marriage and married couples tend to report higher rates of life satisfaction, well-being, and better mental health in the long-term overall. When these relationships are healthy, this typically gives couples an edge on single people when it comes to achieving goals like staying healthy, advancing professionally, and raising children.

Conversely, people who stay single tend to compensate with larger friendship networks. A large body of research indicates that it’s this support group that is the secret sauce for happiness. In other words, we all get by with a little help from our friends, family, and partners. Kids, on the other hand, are an entirely different animal. They might one day be supportive, but right now, well, they’re a burden.

This is partially why researchers have had a harder time sorting out the upside of parenthood, and some experts have argued that the impact on well-being may be overstated. What the data seems to indicate is that parents of young children are relatively equal in terms of how happy they are, but only when they have supportive partners. Single parents have significantly higher levels of depression and poorer physical health compared to single people without children. But the gap between single people and parents seems to widen as children grow older and moms and dads become happier generally speaking. Until recently, it was believed that this was because people who don’t have children become sadder and lonelier over time, but there is also evidence that the more independent kids are, the better off moms and dads are.

“As all parents know, parenthood can often be exhausting. The main psychological benefits may accrue once the kids get older and have left the home, and later provide social support,” Trautmann says.

Still, the reason empty nesters are happier than other parents is not just because raising young children is hard and they are no longer encumbered by those responsibilities. Empty nesters are better off because they know they have someone to take care of them when they’re too old to take care of themselves. That’s how parents ultimately cash in their investment, Trautmann explains, even before they need that support, just knowing that it’s there increases their quality of life a lot.

Trautmann, who is a father as well, is careful to note that it is not about having children versus not having children, or parents versus single people, but about this recurring concept of support. In countries like Norway and Portugal where parents have government support with childcare, and generous parental leave and sick leave policies, parents don’t have to wait for their children to move out to be happier, other studies show. Thus, the takeaway is not for parents to white knuckle their way until the day their kid gets a job, but to welcome whatever help they can get from their friends, communities, families, and partners along the way. Trautmann also points out that studies show having too high expectations can actually decrease life satisfaction, so if parents of young children expect less now, they might actually turn out to be happier. If not, the good news is that the best years are still yet to come.

“My kids are entering their teen years now, and I learned that each parental episode has new and different rewarding as well as exhausting aspects to it,” Trautmann says. “Let’s see how it is in 20 years.”

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/having-kids-makes-parents-happier-180451639.html

Quote
cfuter

Parents of young children have heard some version of the same line from mothers and fathers whose kids are all grown up. “The little ones grow up too fast. They’re so cute at this age. Cherish their younger years because they’re the best years.”

I guess when you look back at 18+ years of something you want to find something positive to say so highlight the moments when the brats are little. Guess the sleepless nights, fits, crying and constant vigilance are considered the best part of parenting.

Quote
Quote
Still, the reason empty nesters are happier than other parents is not just because raising young children is hard and they are no longer encumbered by those responsibilities. Empty nesters are better off because they know they have someone to take care of them when they’re too old to take care of themselves. That’s how parents ultimately cash in their investment, Trautmann explains, even before they need that support, just knowing that it’s there increases their quality of life a lot.

Breeding lil' caretakers! They'd be much better off investing 10K a year for long term care/retirement. The stock market is a better gamble than the genetic lottery.

Too bad you have at least a 10% chance of producing a genetic/emotional defect.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!

I think what they're trying to say is that most parents would like to be grandparents in the sense that they can pick and choose when to deal with the sprogs, but still have plenty of time for themselves. A majority of people would love to have a cute baby to coo over and make goofy faces at for a little bit, but then hand it off to someone else to change the shitrags, shove milk in its face and wake up with it every 15 minutes every night. Oh, but they still want to be able to brag about being parents.

Empty nesters are happier because they can have real human interactions with their fully mentally developed adult children instead of ones involving screaming bloody murder for no reason, incoherent babbling, whining, bodily fluids and picky eating. Their kids can become more like friends instead of dependents. Because even if you really love someone, it can be very hard to not have a little resentment toward them if they become dependent on you because it will limit your freedom and your finances. With kids, there is a lot of resentment.

Quote

Conversely, people who stay single tend to compensate with larger friendship networks. A large body of research indicates that it’s this support group that is the secret sauce for happiness. In other words, we all get by with a little help from our friends, family, and partners. Kids, on the other hand, are an entirely different animal. They might one day be supportive, but right now, well, they’re a burden.

Bingo. With any other relationship - family, friends, spouses, and even pets - there is typically both give and take. You give something to the relationship and will get something in return, ranging from favors to affection and anything in between and it generally makes the relationship not only worth it, but doesn't make it feel like work. No relationship should feel like a job long-term. With kids, the parents do all the giving and the kids do all the taking and there is very little payoff for the parent for the first 20 or so years and it feels like a fucking job all the time.

---

If parents could have kids and just have nannies do all the ass-wiping and tantrum calming and take the kids whenever they felt like it, they'd be a LOT happier. I think a lot of people out there want to have kids, but they don't really want to be parents. It's like the reproductive version of clip-on earrings - all the beauty of the piercing kind with none of the suffering of getting the piercing done.

Quote
Cambion
If parents could have kids and just have nannies do all the ass-wiping and tantrum calming and take the kids whenever they felt like it, they'd be a LOT happier. I think a lot of people out there want to have kids, but they don't really want to be parents. It's like the reproductive version of clip-on earrings - all the beauty of the piercing kind with none of the suffering of getting the piercing done.

I agree with you Cambion. People like the idea of having kids but not the reality. If they could have kids and see them for an hour or two a day without having to parent them they would do so. Playing with them at a park, etc. versus nagging them for the thousandth time in a week to take a bath or pick up after themselves. And all those Kodak moments they long for.

Yawn. Just another Dud researcher who cannot see past his own choices.

Quote

Trautmann, who is a father as well, is careful to note that it is not about having children versus not having children, or parents versus single people, but about this recurring concept of support.

Um, Dud, your research shows people are happier when their kids are GONE and prior to departure, the marriage gets happier the more independent the kids are. So it DOES appear to be about the decision to have children, whether you can wrap your mind around it or not.

He wrote something about married couples having an edge as far as longevity. I believe it's married MEN that live longer and report greater satisfaction. He left out the decline of marital satisfaction after kids--that's one item that has been very much researched and proven.

And JFC! I am so completely weary of all these "studies" that come to the same conclusion: parunts need more support, marriages with children need more support.…

We have over eight billion people in the world. We are drowning in a sea of pollution and chemicals and we are on the verge of environmental collapse. We DO. NOT. NEED. to support parents.


And I have to pat myself on the back yet again for being smart enough to see through bullshit like this article and stay the course.

"If you wait for the right time to have kids, you'll never have them."

"If you wait until you have enough money, you'll never have them."

"We just got married and we want kids--might as well get it over with and have kids while we're young so we can be young empty nesters and enjoy our lives someday." *

*spoken with all the joy of someone who is marching to the guillotine.

People who say things like this must be brainwashed and brain dead.