Both have a point, yet both, from my perspective, do more harm than good when they argue that either voluntary childlessness or voluntary parenting is, in some general sense , better. This idea is simply out of touch with historical reality. Most past societies have had a significant minority of voluntarily childless adults. Finally, many people can contribute much more fully to society without carrying the burdens that parenting often imposes. As Figure 3 illustrates, even worldwide complete childlessness would not avert the collapse to which business as usual is taking us.
Society needs good parents and well-raised children.
In the US this is already illustrated by the great rise during the 1980s in the percentage of children living below the poverty line. In other parts of the world the same attitude is dramatically illustrated by the systematic killing of street children in Brazil, and much more broadly, by the low priority given to the needs of mothers and children. Ironically, low status for women and high death rates for children are two of the key factors driving the population explosion. The question itself is, I believe, wrong. There is no general answer.