Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Parenthood Can Help You Live Longer In Older Age, Research Suggests (theguardian.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the fountain-of-youth dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Parenthood could boost your chances of living longer in your later years, according researchers who believe the effect could be down to children helping with care and support. While previous research has shown that adults with children live longer than those without, the new study unpicks how the effect plays out in older age. Modig and colleagues used national registry data to follow almost 1.5 million Swedes born between 1911 and 1925 as they aged. The team found that while the risk of death increased with age for all adults, having children was linked to greater longevity. The results are published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. At the age of 60, men who had children had almost two years more on their remaining life expectancy than those without, at 20.2 and 18.4 years respectively. A similar trend was seen for women aged 60, with life expectancies of 23.1 years for those without children and 24.6 years for mothers. By contrast at the age of 80, parents had a life expectancy of 7.7 years for men and 9.5 years for women, compared to 7 years for men without children and 8.9 years for women without children. The findings reveal that the benefits of having children became more pronounced with age -- an effect that was greater for men than women. Furthermore, the team found that having children had a stronger impact on the longevity of men who were not married than those with a spouse.

38 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. I don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll never have kids, ever. They can fuck off.

    1. Re:I don't care by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if you do like kids, bringing them to the world we have today isn't exactly a gift to them...

      I know a great many youngster even today who deeply resent our generation's wasteful and selfish way of living, the consequences of which we left to them, and that they'll have to sort out when we're gone.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re: I don't care by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good thing that at least some of those people who shouldn't raise kids have the sense not to do so.

    3. Re:I don't care by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if you do like kids, bringing them to the world we have today isn't exactly a gift to them...

      My take also.

      Lived through that in the 70s. Thinking "the world we have today" warrants giving up altogether is thoroughly depressing.

      To cheer up people with a realistic view on life I'd say:

      • It's not all gloom an doom
      • The environment will be fixed. Even if it doesn't look that way right now.
      • Crackpot world leaders will eventually be replaced
      • Education leads to less kids that on average are brought up better
      • Kids will teach a nerd one or two things about social stuff. Much like reading a chapter in life's manual.
      • Allow your kids to decide for them selves on "the world we have today"
      • We need people concerned about the world. You seem to be one. Multiply so we have more of them!
      --

      I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
    4. Re:I don't care by known_coward_69 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      compared to the 70's, the environment has been fixed

    5. Re: I don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not in China, Indonesia, India...

    6. Re:I don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Having children doesn't make you live longer. They just make it seem longer.

    7. Re:I don't care by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if you do like kids, bringing them to the world we have today isn't exactly a gift to them...

      I know a great many youngster even today who deeply resent our generation's wasteful and selfish way of living, the consequences of which we left to them, and that they'll have to sort out when we're gone.

      If that's the case no-one should ever have had kids.

      Today, as an average, children are healthier, more likely to have food they need, will be exposed to less crime, have more protections, they're living in an age of more social acceptance, less likely to die in combat (sure, there are always wars, but this is an era of relative peace- over the last several decades globally wars are declining).

      People have been saying for decades that the world is in decline and everything is getting worse, but the truth is: there probably hasn't been a better time to be alive. Every generation thinks the generation after theirs is ruined and going to be terrible.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    8. Re:I don't care by Maritz · · Score: 2, Funny

      The environment will be fixed. Even if it doesn't look that way right now.

      You're on slashdot mate. The environment is fine. Big conspiracy, hippy illuminati, etc etc.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    9. Re: I don't care by goose-incarnated · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Must do wonders for your self-esteem to know that you're only getting some because of your bank balance. lol. Each to their own I guess.

      He's aware. Most men aren't aware that they are being used. You sound bitter that he knows what the deal is.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    10. Re:I don't care by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

      We'll probably have to deal with global warming is some way later.
      However, there are plenty of other problems that are just as damaging to us that are being addressed right now : nitrates, heavy metals, endangered species, waste disposal, etc... Even China and India seriously start considering it and it is not a stretch to think that a decade or two from now, they will be on par with the west.
      And it works. Every now and then we hear an encouraging story. It may be the ozone layer reforming, endangered animal populations recovering, atmospheric pollution decreasing in some cities, etc... So while the overall trend may be negative now, if we continue making small improvements the trend will eventually reverse.
      There will be scars, sure, but at least, we are closing the bleeding wounds.

    11. Re:I don't care by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if you do like kids, bringing them to the world we have today isn't exactly a gift to them...

      Yeah, bringing kids into a world where they can expect to live to near 90, with almost no chance of dying in a war or plague or starving to death would really suck.

      Plus there's the whole "we can communicate with almost anyone, anywhere, in Real Time" thing. Can't imagine wanting to subject kids to that (an example: when I was a kid, my Dad spent a year in Vietnam. We got letters, occasionally (he wasn't much for writing). Today, if your father is in the middle of a warzone half a world away, you can video-conference with him using any number of internet tools).

      Much better to have had kids back in the Civil War, right? Or WW1 or 2? Or maybe back in the halcyon days of the Black Plague? Or hell, any random famine year during the last 5K years....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    12. Re: I don't care by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't understand. Were you born an adult?

      This is Slashdot. Many here were born knowing everything already..

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    13. Re:I don't care by swillden · · Score: 2

      compared to the 70's, the environment has been fixed

      Yes and no. Air and water quality is dramatically better. Many threatened species have recovered. Our roads, forests and parks are much cleaner. Younger slashdotters probably don't remember the amount of garbage we used to have lying around all over on the sides of roads, etc.; anti-littering advertising and enforcement, and adopt-a-road programs have made it much better. I recall a time in the 70s where I could make $2 ($9 in 2017 dollars) per hour walking down the highway collecting aluminum cans for recycling. It was good money for a kid. Partly that was because the price of aluminum was relatively high, but mostly it was because I could easily fill many large garbage bags with cans every hour, they were so thick on the ground.

      So, locally, where it's fairly easy, the environment has been fixed.

      On the other hand, global warming's effects are likely to be significant, and reversing that trend is much more difficult both because the causes are global and the problem has been most of a century in the making. You don't turn a supertanker on a dime, no matter how much you want to. Heavy metal levels in fish stocks are a local-ish problem, but one that's widespread and very hard to combat since even if we managed to stop all release into the water, the already-released metals will continue cycling through the ecosystem for a long time. Aquifer depletion is another local-ish problem that was created over a decades and will not be corrected quickly or easily, since the aquifers may take millenia to refill. Most likely we'll just have to stop relying on well water in many areas and find alternative sources.

      I don't think we're facing anything remotely close to an insoluble problem, though. Some stuff we'll have to work around or adapt to, other stuff we'll find ways to fix.

      The global population problem is well on its way to being solved -- annual global births per year has been declining for a while now, so while we're still experiencing population growth due to the "filling out" of the age brackets (the global population still skews quite young), unless something happens to change current trends we should never have to deal with more than about 10B people, and it's quite clear that we can feed and house that many with existing technology, much less the improvements coming. And since it seems to be wealth and education that is causing the declining birth rate, and both of those are trending upward globally, it's more likely that the current trends will accelerate, not reverse.

      The coming wave of automation promises to make the human race as a whole dramatically wealthier, and at the same time we're learning how to apply that wealth to enable a high standard of living with less resource consumption and lower environmental impact. The same automation may pose serious challenges to our economic structures, but the rising tide lifting all boats will serve to offset a lot of it, and with some judicious reallocation (e.g. Universal Basic Income) we should be able to address the most severe of the problems.

      Honestly, I think there's no more -- and probably much less -- value to the notion that bringing kids into the world is a bad idea than there was in the 70s. I understand that people whose own lives are not going well feel that way, and I understand that my own relatively privileged position (making decent money, doing what I love, living where I want -- though I have my share of challenges, too, mostly related to my kids) and my naturally optimistic disposition makes me feel quite differently. Still, on balance, and trying to be as coldly analytical and data-based as possible, I really think the world is as good a place for humans as it has ever been, and expect it to continue improving. It'll even survive Trump, I think, and he'll teach us some important lessons.

      I, personally, will not be bringing any more children into the world. I'm expecting to become a grandfather this summer, t

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    14. Re:I don't care by strikethree · · Score: 2

      Today, as an average, children are healthier, more likely to have food they need, will be exposed to less crime, have more protections, they're living in an age of more social acceptance, less likely to die in combat (sure, there are always wars, but this is an era of relative peace- over the last several decades globally wars are declining).

      That is great. Wonderful even; however, kids today have no path to making a living for themselves.

      In the past, I would teach my son how to hunt and gather food. Today, all I can do is send him off to school and hope that he will find a job afterwards. The thinking is, "Nobody owes you a job", which is ultimately true, but then you straitjacketed my son and do not allow him to hunt and gather. How then is he supposed eat?

      No. The ENTIRE reason modern society is such a terrible place to bring children into is because all of the resources are owned. Naturally, owned by someone else. The only way for my son to live is to either accept that his life depends on the whims of someone who owns the resources (slavery with or without chains) or take those resources from the putative owners. The entire situation is a LOT more complex than this simplistic narrative but then we get into "regulations and corruption" when trying to take those resources legally.

      So yeah, you are 100% correct that many of the less important, but still extremely important, things are MUCH better nowadays. What you are missing is that the single most important thing, the ability to survive on their own, has been taken.

      Tell me again how it is a good idea to bring children into this world.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    15. Re:I don't care by flacco · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "New study shows that 18-30 years of hell on earth will extend your lifespan by up to two years."

      Nah I'm good.

      > I'll never have kids, ever. They can fuck off.

      Stay strong. They will say "You'll change your mind someday." That's not true for everyone - I haven't, and don't regret it.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    16. Re: I don't care by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      I think fewer people grow up themselves, and so should not have kids.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    17. Re:I don't care by micahraleigh · · Score: 2

      People with world views carry the weight of the world.

      People with life views are full of life.

  2. As always by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At the age of 60, men who had children had almost two years more on their remaining life expectancy than those without, at 20.2 and 18.4 years respectively.

    Correlation isn't causation.

    Also, many of those who gain 2 years in life expectancy lose many more years of piece and quiet having to raise their brats.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:As always by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also, many of those who gain 2 years in life expectancy lose many more years of piece and quiet having to raise their brats.

      This. You gain 1.8 years, lose 18.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re:As always by Ogive17 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know I fight a losing battle each time I defend being a parent on /. but I don't agree with your assessment.

      I was 33 when my son (only child) was born, so I had a good decade of "freedom".. I enjoyed my 20s but wouldn't say I miss them.

      Now my kid is 4, there are frustrating moments but also experiences I would never trade. Best thing is that I now have a great excuse to play with toys again. When I'm at home, I feel younger because of my son.

      I don't go out with friends nearly as much but to say you lose 18 years, that's ridiculous.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    3. Re: As always by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      You know this because you were a shitty kid? Or a shitty parent?

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    4. Re: As always by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      First stage is denial. You've got about 7 good years left, then you will be deemed not cool and he'll rebel the next 7 years. Then he'll be right back after you cover his huge college bill and need you a good deal longer.

      My oldest child is 24 and my youngest 15, so I've been through all of that, and in fact much more parental challenge than is normal... and I still agree with Ogive17. Being a parent is awesome. Hard, absolutely, occasionally heartrending and frustrating, but those who skip it aren't gaining 18 years, they're losing the richest experiences life offers.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re: As always by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      Hard, absolutely, occasionally heartrending and frustrating, but those who skip it aren't gaining 18 years, they're losing the richest experiences life offers.

      Right - every successful parent I know feels that rearing children is a chance to reevaluate most of life's choices, learn everything anew with improved understanding, and to realize what it is to be part of this thing called Life, and by extension Society. Sure, fewer books get read, fewer vacations are taken, and the Netflix queue only ever grows in length, but it's important to note that most parents don't lament those delays and most deathbed regrets are devoid about notions of game release dates.

      People who revel in "their 18 years" (ha, they forget that most people have 2+ children) almost always insist that the experience of people who have reared children does not exist or that it does not have really have deep and important meaning. Because apparently parents don't actually understand something unique that wouldn't be obvious without 18+ years of experience.

      But, frankly the most surprising aspect of this research is that the stress of childrearing doesn't seem to take years off one's life!

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re: As always by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      Especially since the toys they have now are the ones I wanted to exist when I was a kid.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  3. Common cause by Pascal+Sartoretti · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You need to be in good health to have children. You need to be in good health to live longer.

    1. Re:Common cause by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Quite a few "parents" these days could have fooled me. When you see two blobs waddle to some all you can eat buffet with their little blobs, you really have to wonder.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. Re:It just feels that way. by KiloByte · · Score: 5, Insightful

    wants a bottle RIGHT THE HECK NOW

    Not a bottle, a tit. A tit that used to belong to you.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  5. Loneliness by bluegutang · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Loneliness is a significant health risk which causes a person's death risk to increase.

    Having kids gives you someone to care about, and someone who cares about you, and someone you see on a regular basis. That does a lot to decrease your loneliness.

    This explains why the effect is stronger for men than women (men tend to have fewer social contacts), and stronger for single than married men.

  6. Re: No, it does not by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Informative

    Healthier and richer people are likely to live longer, and also likely to be preferred for starting a family with

    Only it doesn't work that way: it's a well established fact that rich, usually educated people have fewer children than poor uneducated people.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  7. Uh, who's caring for whom again? by geekmux · · Score: 2

    "...researchers who believe the effect could be down to children helping with care and support...

    By helping with care and support, are you referring to all the twentysomethings who still live with their parents? Just curious how this study takes into account the fact that the young generation can hardly afford to take care of themselves today, much less care for aging parents.

    Also, having kids helps you live longer? Did they take into account the physical, mental, and financial strain that parenthood can bring? I'm willing to bet 99.999% of parents are scratching their heads over this one too.

  8. Perception is everything by fluffernutter · · Score: 3, Funny

    Are you sure it doesn't just feel longer?

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  9. Quality of life by Dorianny · · Score: 2

    Children often push their doctors and their elderly parents to go for a "everything and the kitchen sink" approach to healthcare, even when the odds of a good prognosis are minimal and the extended life comes at the coast of great pain and degrading condition. I wonder how much discrepency comes from childless people being free to choose "quality of life" instead of quantity

  10. Worse than it ever was, same as ever by XXongo · · Score: 2

    Even if you do like kids, bringing them to the world we have today isn't exactly a gift to them...

    My take also.

    I don't know of any time in history in which people didn't say exactly that same thing. Only which threat is looming changes: It's wrong to bring children into a world in which Nazi armies are taking over the world. It's wrong to bring children into a world in which the Communist monolith is spreading totalitarianism across the world. It's wrong to bring children into a world in which nuclear annihilation could occur at any moment...

    1. Re:Worse than it ever was, same as ever by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People lack historical perspective (in fact, most lack any kind of real perspective at all). Really. Pick any previous century and tell me how much better your life would have been. If there's anything wrong with our current society, it's that what people are whining about is mostly a joke compared to how things used to be. I'm not saying it's perfect - it's not, and it never will be; I'm saying things are always getting better, even if there's some bad that comes along with it. But we let the media and other whiners influence how we feel about society, and it's almost always negative.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:Worse than it ever was, same as ever by gfxguy · · Score: 2

      No, I'm saying anyone that thinks there was a time in history better than now to have kids is a delusional idiot, and I'm thankful that few people feel the way you do otherwise none of us would be here. If you really thought the world was too terrible to live in, you'd probably have rectified your situation by now.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  11. Nope nope nope by Notabadguy · · Score: 2

    So if I read this right...

    18-25 years of financial drain, emotional stress, and missing free time, MIGHT lead to an end-of-life benefit of ~2 year extension.

    No thanks. I'll keep those 18-25 years, my money, and my free time.

    Disclaimer: My wife and I didn't have kids, and now its too late - and we don't regret it.

  12. Re:As always - a crap shoot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Also, many of those who gain 2 years in life expectancy lose many more years of piece and quiet having to raise their brats.

    This. You gain 1.8 years, lose 18.

    Or you could gain 18 years + 1.8 years. I was uncertain about having kids, but went with my wife's wishes. Ended up with two Eagle Scouts who paid for their own college education via academic scholarships, one a National Merit Scholar. Their growing up was a delight punctuated only by fights over messy rooms. I now enjoy spoiling my grandchildren.

    It's a crap shoot, though. My neighbor's son stole three cars by the time he was 15 and is now a career criminal. I wish I could claim the difference was my superior parenting, but know better. I made my share of mistakes and then some. I just got lucky. YMMV, there are no guarantees.