Should people struggling with mental illness have children?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It sounds like you have insight and don’t have anosognosia. To me, that’s the line between being able to manage mental illness as a parent and having a high likelihood of catastrophic failure. And I say this as a person who has battled OCD and anxiety since six and a child of a parent with bipolar and anosognosia. |
Anonymous
|
Eugenics is a venerable American tradition, but I am against it.
What an asinine question. |
Anonymous
|
There is a huge spectrum of mental illness diagnoses, impairment and ability to parent. So there’s no blanket answer.
My sister in law has well managed ocd and anxiety. She is very high functioning and successful. Two of their kids also have bad anxiety and one also has ocd which the parents caught early and are treating. Someone I dated had a lot of mental illness in the family and it didn’t seem like the parents or kids had it under control. That was unsettling. |
Anonymous
|
Yes, we need more neurodivergence to achieve interesting things in this world. Autism almost always comes with significant social anxiety and attention issues. My autistic husband has an MD and a PhD and has contributed to research on cardiovascular disease, cancer and autoimmune diseases. Our autistic kids are highly intelligent and will also do some good in this world, despite the social, anxiety and focus issues that come with their brain difference.
|
Anonymous
| Only people who enjoy their mental illness should have children |
dony898
Member Offline
Member Offline
Mental illness alone shouldn’t disqualify someone from having children. What matters is whether the person recognizes their condition, seeks treatment, and can provide a stable and safe environment. Many people manage mental health conditions well and are thoughtful, attentive parents, while untreated or unsupported illness is the bigger risk, not the diagnosis itself. |
Anonymous
I disagree. Genetic screening technology is getting better everyday there are company’s that offer polygenic embryo screening to reduce the risk that your children will have mental illnesses now. Assuming one of the parent has schizophrenia, you can reduce your kids risk of getting schizophrenia by 40% (on average) if you pick the best out of 5 embryos. The average risk reduction is 52% for best out of 10 embryos and 60% for best out of 20 embryos. As long as you can afford to do IVF and genetic screening, a family history of mental illnesses should not be a a deterrent. My spouse has a hereditary genetic disease and we are very fortunate to have beautiful children that don’t have this disease thanks to IVF and PGD. We were fortunate to be able to afford this procedure out of pocket. However, many people cannot and insurance often refuses to pay for IVF if people are requesting due to the risk of passing on a genetic disease to your kids. |
Anonymous
I can't believe it took 5 pages to see a response like this, but it is a 100% the only correct response. |
Anonymous
|
It depends?
What is the illness, how severe is it, how is it managed, who is available to step in when needed, etc, etc. |
Anonymous
|
As a child of mentally ill people… ideally no. But we live in a free society that does not limit procreation as it is viewed as a basic human right.
Also, most “mentally ill” people don’t really think about it when they are starting a family. I have anxiety, and I also have two kids. I honestly wasn’t sure if my anxiety is genetic or environmental or combination of the two. My youngest also suffers from anxiety even though he has had a “normal” childhood. If we as a society decide to start restricting procreation, where is the line? Is it only blonde hair blue eyed people with an IQ over 125, income over $500k and no genetic diseases? |
Anonymous
This is not eugenics in the traditional sense. They are not saying people should be forced not to have kids, just a general question of whether someone thinks it’s a good idea or not. The reality is that life is unfair, genetic heritability is real and family history matters. This is just one factor among many people should ideally consider when they decide whether to have kids and how many kids to have. |
Anonymous
It one thousand percent is eugenics. Should we also test the IQ of people before we determine whether they are smart enough to have children? Should we only have tall people reproduce? See how it's a slippery slope? You don't want people who are imperfect in a million different ways reproducing. You want perfect robots. It's sick. |
Anonymous
First off, OP was not specific. You are interpreting OP's question one way but you could also interpret it as whether we, as a society, should allow people with mental illness to have children. We don't actually know what OP meant. A number of the responses have definitely leaned toward eugenics, and I've actually found it shocking how many people seem to think that even relatively mild or well managed mental illness means you shouldn't have kids. Like the suggestion that a woman who experiences PPD shouldn't have any additional kids. PPD is insanely common! It's estimated that somewhere between 1 in 10 to 1 in 5 new moms has PPD symptoms. To say that none of those women should ever have a second child is bizarre to me, and I think also a real misunderstanding of what PPD is and how it works (and the degree to which it can be mitigated by simple things like supporting new moms and providing them basic mental healthcare). Also it's all just absurd because I challenge you to find me a person who doesn't have ANY genetic predispositions for ANY mental health issues. Everyone has people in their family tree with mental health problems. Some mental health problems may not even be illness, so to speak, but could be normal presdispositions that have become maladaptive as society has changed (for instance anxiety may stem from survival instincts that helped prior generations of a family survive wars or mass migration or other dangerous conditions, but are ill-suited to a soft life with little physical danger). It's just very complex and making blanket statements absolutely leads you in the direction of eugenics. |
Anonymous
To me the weirdest thing about this instinct is the belief that there are people with "perfect" genetics. Who? Who are these people? Do you know anyone whose family truly has no issues anywhere in the family tree? Because I definitely don't. Especially not when you introduce the question of mental illness. There are family lines that seem to be physically healthier than others, or where the genetics lean towards physical strength, height, etc. But a family line with no mental illness? I don't believe it. It's too common. You find mental illness, propensity for addiction, etc., in families that are rich and poor, in good looking people and strange looking people, in tall people and short people, in people of all races and ethnicities. Mental illness is actually this great equalizer, revealing the fundamental vulnerability of being human. Humans have these complex brains that are capable of doing things that other animals can't do. We can figure out how to build skyscrapers and make medicine. We also invented guns, bombs, and chemical weapons. The human brain came up with slavery and genocide. We also invented art and literature. Some of the people who have created some of the most beautiful and enduring pieces of art in the world were afflicted by severe mental illness. Some of the people who have committed the worst atrocities in human history appeared to many to be perfectly sane. The idea that we could somehow perfect the human experience by just figuring out who is "mentally ill" and how is not and then not letting the mentally procreate demonstrates a bizarre misunderstanding of history and human nature. Good luck with that. |
Anonymous
| You say struggling. No. They should get their mental health sorted and maintained. |