Thanks for posting Annie.

While I can't speak to whether kids brings a couple closer together, research continually proves that it brings additional stress to your life. I guess the fundamental question is do the benefits outweigh the stress, which is difficult to answer, as the same couple cannot know what it's like to have kids and to not have kids at the same point in their life.

A lot of the quotes here do resonate with where we are as a couple. This one seems to sum up what DINKlife is all about, whether your are just taking your time as a couple before having kids, or not having them at all...

"Though a couple without children may feel lost and that they do not belong at first, it may also open up a myriad of possibilities of who they can become as a couple."

Ugh... why can't the bond be your love, and commitment to the other?

The great thing about being married without kids is that you're more accountable to each other. If both partners have a job, then there's no dependence, and if one half isn't holding up its end of the bargain, the other can leave much easier then if the relationship produced children.

Chris.

All relationships require some sort of glue that holds them together. For some that's religion, others kids, and others common interest, etc. Why is there always a default assumption that children are some sort of love cement? Kids can destroy a marriage when the dynamics are not right. If we had been foolish enough to have them I can guarantee we would not still be married- it just would not jive with us.

Another thing of note, think of how many people stay married and divorce after 25-30 years when the kids are gone because all there ever was to keep them married was their children. How sad that must be to realize one day that all those years together were by default.

I think a successful relationship is often about commitment to growth, individually and as a couple. Having a common glue is very important; but, if you can't grow (and support your partner's growth), then that glue can become more like a prison. One of the great benefits of being child free is that it is possible to allow your partner (and yourself) more room to explore and develop. Of course, that is not to say that those with children must lack that element; but, I think it is much harder to maintain when so much focus and energy must be diverted to raising kids..

Thanks for the post Annie.

I agree that couples need something to keep them together, but I do not think that it needs to be a child. I believe that their primary bond should be purely between the two of them; children should not become the core relationship bond because they are transitory - passing through the household. While children can either strengthen (or weaken) an existing bond depending on the relationship, they should never be expected to provide the glue. A couple should be confident in who they are independently and strengthened by who they are as a couple. Regardless of children, an active friendship should sit at the core of a good relationship, and that friendship is made up of a myriad of possibilities and opportunities....

Wow. I just can't disagree with the blog author more. I would think kids would add a huge amount of stress to the marriage. My husband and I married later in life (I was 38, and he was 40), but we have one of the most stress-free marriages I know of. We have stable jobs, and love many of the same hobbies. Our lives run almost seamlessly as we enjoy our hobbies, travels, and adventures together. A child would add not only financial stress, but would hinder most of our activities. Plus, I'm sure we would have some different philosophies (looking at our families) on how to raise a child.

I couldn't disagree more. We are happily married 20 yrs this year without kids. We support each other's goals and accomplishments. We have money to eat out, travel and do the things that we want, not what the children need.

My uncle and his wife almost made it to 50 years being married, but she passed away last year do to bone cancer - they didn't have children.

So I know married couples can have a good marriage that lasts without children in the picture. I also know more people who are single parents because their marriage couldn't stand the test of time with the kids, and a few that only stayed together because of the kids and once the kids where off to university or collage the parents split because they felt they didn't have to hold it together any longer.

So great to be married to someone for 21 years who is with me by choice, not bc he has to be!!!

I live in a country where having kids is deemed a social, national, and familial duty. Men are also known for 'wandering'. Visiting a prostitute hasn't traditionally constituted 'cheating' because it's a business exchange. When it became clear that we weren't going to have kids, women took me aside and warned that without kids, it would be easy for my husband to 'wander'. How many sad, sad women are there in this country who know that their husbands are sleeping around, yet are powerless to do anything about it for the kids' sake? (Women still don't have comparatively much power here, and the job prospects of women with children are more limited. Re-entering the job market is difficult, and women are often pushed out of work when it becomes known that they are pregnant.) No, kids are not glue. If they do form a temporary kind of glue for some people, it has an expiration date. If it forms a permanent glue for some people, then (to me) that's just sad. I would not want my husband to stay married to me out of a sense of duty. If he decides he cannot be happy with me, I don't see how staying is good for either of us.