Don’t Blame the Babies
“Don’t start a family — it’s bad for the planet.” The latest bad take on climate change forgets one little thing: whether or not you have a kid, the fossil fuel industry will still be there.

A woman sits in a nursery, feeding her newborn baby from a bottle as a nurse assists, circa 1955. Hulton Archive / Getty
Narrated by a pale, conflicted, millennial woman, a recent video on Fast Company’s website makes several reckless claims, including its title, “Why Having Kids is the Worst thing You Can Do For the Planet,” and its summary, “the best way to keep the planet from burning is not to start a family.”
The video details the carbon impact of each new arrival, noting that each child might also have children. Adding another human to our poor old planet is a big deal, our anguished narrator frets, even worse than driving a car or failing to eat a plant-based diet. I don’t doubt her data. But why does each human have such a huge carbon footprint? It’s not inherent to your (possibly quite charming) baby.
It’s the fossil fuel industry’s hold on the way we organize our society, and the capitalist incentives to put profits over the planet. A Zambian has nowhere near the environmental impact of an American; even though her nation has a much higher birth rate, her society isn’t nearly as carbon-intensive. The problem, then, isn’t kids. It’s the carbon dependence of our society, which is set up to ensure that we drive, fly, heat, cool, shop, and eat in all the most polluting ways possible.