The dark side of the "double income, no kids" lifestyle

The term DINKs (Dual Income, No Kids) describes couples who use their paychecks to buy luxury items, travel, or plan for early retirement. They don't plan to have children, so they don't have to pay for childcare or education.

But DINKs are not as flashy as they appear.

For those who are happy to be childless, that is, actively pursuing DINKs, they still feel isolated in a society that values ​​parenthood. And for others, DINKs are not a choice but a necessity.

There are Americans who would love to become parents but cannot financially support the birth of a child. As such, they are described as “childless” rather than those who have chosen not to have children. There are no exact statistics on this group, but those who choose not to have children make up about 20% of the adult population in the United States.

Survey ofNerdWalletandHarris PollA survey of over 2,000 people in December 2023 found that 56% of couples surveyed said they had no plans to have children, with 31% citing the high cost of raising a child as the reason.

And what’s happening to DINKs shows a duality. Some are happy to choose not to have children. The number of children is deciding to do so because there is no choice. It is estimated that by early 2024, American parents could spend up to $26,000 to raise a child.

Falling birth rates but rising housing, childcare and healthcare costs will keep many people stuck with DINKs for the long haul.

Larry Bienz, 38, a social worker in Chicago, said he could become a father in another country with the right policies and infrastructure. But not in the United States. "People's first priority is to have a job. Everything else has to come later," Bienz said.

The 38-year-old man had imagined life with children many times, but soon realized that it was not sustainable. He thought that if parents had to struggle to make a living, do housework and take care of their children's meals and sleep, there would be no time for other recreational activities, or even for integrating into the community.

Bienz also noted that where he lives, there is a low minimum wage, a lack of paid leave, and an economic health care law, while in other countries, parents are entitled to up to a year of paid parental leave.

Amelia, 37, and Kevin, 43, have always wanted children. They have been on a journey to find a child for 18 months, even buying a larger house in a high-class residential area to prepare for the arrival of children. But there is still no good news.

Living in a place where reproductive health care services are scarce and health insurance only covers a portion of treatment, Amelia and her husband had to figure out how much they would spend on having a baby.

"We have the ideal conditions to live happily together because we have good jobs and are well-educated. But infertility is the feeling of having to attend classes and do final exams every month but the results are not as expected," said the 37-year-old woman.

The couple has not sought medical intervention such as artificial insemination. They have spent more than $1,000 on treatments, therapies and doctor visits. Intensive treatments will not be covered by insurance.

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine estimates the average cost of an IVF cycle is $12,400 to $25,000. Adoption in the U.S. costs $20,000 to $50,000, according to the U.S. Children's Bureau.

Meanwhile, the average household income in the US is nearly $75,000, meaning it would cost more than a third of their income to have a child using unnatural methods. Also in the surveyNerdWalletOf those who chose not to have children, 11% of respondents said it was because of the high cost of infertility treatment, and 10% said the cost of adoption was also too high.

As a Millennial, Priscilla Davies, 41, has seen the ups and downs of the economic crisis. He chooses to stay single and childless, partly because he worries that marriage places a heavy burden on women.

"Society sees our choice as killing the traditional family, they see it as selfish. In fact, they have mislabeled the problem, just like seeing the serious problem right in front of them but avoiding discussing it. We all know that the new economic system has problems," Davies said.

Today, many young couples admit that the idea of ​​sending their children to grandparents for care has become impossible because of rising living costs and high rents that keep older people working. This has lost the safe third space for children and their parents to gather. Without the help of relatives, parenting becomes more difficult.

Stories today still feature two types of DINKs: those who choose to live happily or those who are forced into it by force—two sides of the same coin. But in the end, they both want a choice.

For DINKs who volunteer. They need to gain respect from those around them for establishing a family structure that goes beyond the norm: no children but still happy.

As for the passive DINKs, they are on the path to becoming parents, despite their poor financial situation.