Search This Blog

Thursday, January 12, 2023

The rise of 'one-and-done' parenting

 When Jen Dalton got pregnant in 2018, she made a spreadsheet. Taking into account maternity leave, family-spacing health recommendations and even potential family holidays, she planned out when to have each of the four kids she thought she wanted. "I look at it once in a while and I giggle at how naïve I was," says Dalton, 31.

That’s because, just two months after her daughter's birth, she and her husband decided they were 'one and done'. Part of it was their struggle with sleep deprivation and mental health; Dalton dealt with a traumatic birth, postnatal depression (PND) and postpartum anxiety (PPA). But even when life became easier, the decision felt right.

It wasn't only that Ontario, Canada-based Dalton and her husband didn't want to risk her – and their family's – wellbeing by going through it all again. It was also that they knew there wasn't anything "wrong" with not "giving" their child a sibling. "I'm an only child, and I'm very happy," says Dalton. "I'm so close with my parents."

Then, in 2022, Dalton had a wobble. She and her husband moved into their "forever home". Close friends had a new-born, who reminded them of their daughter. She felt if she had PPD or PPA again, she'd have more tools to manage it. And social-media algorithms kept pushing content showcasing big, beautiful families. "It really made us think like, 'Yeah, we could do it again'," she says.

It's not surprising that Dalton started to question her decision. Even though, in many countries, only children are becoming the norm, pressure to have more than one remains. Stereotypes about only children being spoilt or lonely persist, despite consistent debunking. Parents say they feel pressure to have more kids from everyone from family members to perfect strangers. On social media, mothers post adorable moments of their broods with captions like, "This is your sign, give them the younger sibling" and "I never met a mama who regretted having that one more"

Even as deciding to be one-and-done becomes more common, this background noise means parents who make this choice often find themselves having to convince other people – and even themselves – that they've done the right thing.

31-year-old Jen Dalton has considered having a second child – but has ultimately decided against it (Credit: Courtesy of Jen Dalton)

31-year-old Jen Dalton has considered having a second child – but has ultimately decided against it (Credit: Courtesy of Jen Dalton)

More common, but still judged

Particularly after the contraceptive revolution of the mid-20th Century, which gave many women some real control over fertility, the choice of how many children to have has been personal. But there have been clear social and cultural trends, too. 

In many countries, those trends are shifting towards fewer kids. In the EU, the largest proportion of all families with children – 49% – have one child. In Canada, only-child families make up the largest group, ticking up from 37% in 2001 to 45% in 2021. And looking at mothers near the end of their childbearing years – arguably a better way to measure the popularity of only children, since census data gives only a moment-in-time snapshot – 18% of US women in 2015 had one child, up from 10% in 1976.

The fact that women are having children later is a significant piece. But there's also an element of choice involved, says investigative journalist Lauren Sandler, author of One and Only: The Freedom of Having an Only Child, and the Joy of Being One. "There are a lot of people who will say, no-one wants to have just one kid – that [the rise in only-child families is] all because of delayed fertility," she says. "Well, that is a way of making this choice, too, right? You're saying, 'There are all of these other things that are really important to me as well, and I am going to prioritise them, and hopefully I'll get there.' Instead of, 'Those things don't matter and what comes first is my motherhood'." 

Widespread ideas about the ideal number of children are also changing. For millennia, the preference to have more than one child made sense. Even just two centuries ago, more than four in 10 children died before their fifth birthday. Having multiple children helped the family with the many tasks required to survive. And, of course, in the absence of reliable contraception, and with women getting married at far younger ages, having just one child wasn't just undesirable. It often wasn't feasible.


Today, however, in many cultures (though not all), the picture is rather different.

Portugal, where 59% of families with kids have just one, is a good example: while the age of first-time mothers rose from 26.6 to 29.9 years from 2001 to 2019, almost one in five women also say today that one child is the ideal family size. Before the 1970s in the US, meanwhile, only 1% of poll respondents thought having just one child was best. While still a fraction of the total, that proportion has tripled. (There is, of course, still a big discrepancy between what people say is the ideal, versus how many kids they're actually having – but some of it has to do with how these data were collected. For both the Portugal and US numbers, for example, respondents were as young as 15 years old in Portugal and 18 in the US, and not necessarily parents themselves; like Dalton, many people change their mind once they become older or start their own families. For the US data, respondents were also answering what they thought the ideal was in general, not necessarily what an ideal size would be for them, personally.)

Yet the stigma against parents who consciously choose to have one child persists. When Sandler became a mother in 2008, she says, "I found myself with this kid who I was crazy about". But she also loved other elements of her life, like her career. Well aware of issues like the 'motherhood penalty', having one child seemed like the best way to have it 'all' – or as close to it as possible.

"I felt very excited by what it would mean to be able to love and raise this kid in a dynamic where I was also true to myself," she says. "And yet all of this cultural noise kept creeping in. I'd be accosted by people on the subway and in the supermarket saying things like, 'When will you have another one?' And I would say, very plainly, 'I'm not planning to'. And it would be all of a sudden like I was an abuser – like, call the Department of Social Services on this person. It felt to me, like, what is this calculation? … Why is the world telling you that, if you make this choice, you're a terrible parent, and you're a terrible woman?"

It's not just parents who face judgement. Only children have been stigmatised as 'weird' – or, as the researcher behind one 1896 study put it, "peculiar and exceptional" – for more than a century. Some of that stigma has persisted well into the 2000s, even in pop culture. Sandler references the popular TV show Glee, pointing out that despite the show's efforts to break down stereotypes, one main character that goes unexamined is that of the "spoiled, annoying" only child. 

"I've had a lot of comments like, 'Oh, he's going to have only-child syndrome. He is going to be unable to share. He's going to be spoiled," says Victoria Fahey, 25, in Calgary, Canada. "I know plenty of people who have siblings who are spoiled and rude and entitled. To say that's just because of being an only child, not circumstances – that's crazy." (There is, in fact, no evidence that only children are any less well-adjusted or successful than those with siblings).


An intentional decision

These social pressures mean that, often, parents who are one-and-done by choice are "very conscientious" of their decision, says Dalton. "It's not just an auto-pilot approach."

Their reasons range from financial constraints to feeling like their family is already complete. But what many one-and-done-by-choice families have in common is that they feel, in contrast to what society often tells them, that being one and done isn't just best for them. It's best for their children, too.

While many people see a sibling as a 'gift' to a child, one-and-done parents point out that there is no guarantee children will get along. For some, it was their own experiences of growing up in larger families that made them consider having only one.

Fahey was the youngest of five. "The sibling rivalry was intense, to say the least. It really turned me off," she says. She sees introducing a new family member as a 'roll of the dice' with family dynamics. And, like many other one-and-done parents, she wants to make sure she and her husband can give their child everything they can. 

One-and-done parents also worry that more children would divide their attention. "I see moms of two or more being torn in different directions, especially as kids get older," says Cristina Zaldivar, 44, of Miami, Florida. "Even at parent night at school, moms had to choose which child's teacher's presentations to sit through. I don't ever want to have to choose."

Because they have more patience and energy to draw on, many one-and-done families also say they feel like they can be more intentional parents. In Poland, Gosia Klimowicz, 39, grew up as the eldest of three. She says it's crucial to her that she can raise her family differently. "It is really important to me to have a calm and nurturing environment," she says. "And just to be able to control myself and my emotions, and make sure that I don't lose it" – aspects she feels like her overstretched parents couldn't manage.


Wanting to offer one child more also extends to other resources, including finances. Raising children today is expensive: one study showed raising two children in the US costs, on average, $310,605 (£255,369), not including college tuition. In the UK, one child is estimated to cost nearly £160,000 ($194,607) for a couple. In Australia, it costs almost AU$160,000 ($107,442, £88,307) or, by another estimate, nearly AU$550,000. Struggling to pay these bills, many families are falling further and further behind. 

Indeed, compared to past generations, says Sandler, millennials are growing up forced to be more hard-nosed about life's challenges. "We haven't decided to make higher education affordable, or change our tax system so that there's a middle class again, or put a cap on inflated housing costs, or do any of the things that make a viable life possible," she says. "How on Earth do I bring a kid into that mix? And how on Earth do I then bring two kids into that mix?"

This has factored into Fahey's calculation, too. "If my son wants to do soccer and hockey and music, I want to be able to give him all of those things, not say, 'Oh no, your brother wants to do hockey, so you can only choose soccer'," says Fahey. "I want him to have all the opportunities to become who he wants to become, without any hindrance." 

Some one-and-done parents also cite their concern over the kind of future their children will inherit."The planet is dying and there's not seemed to be as big of a push as needed to clean that up," says Fahey. "For those future generations, we're kind of leaving them to sort it out. I think it's really scary. There could be a struggle for resources – I don't want my kid to ever worry where he's going to get water."

Given that each new person is another consumer and another producer of carbon emissions, stopping at one seems to be the responsible, more selfless choice, says Berlin-based Vicky Allan, 33. (It’s worth noting not everyone agrees). "A long time ago, I heard that one of the best things you can do for the environment is to have one less kid, and this has always stuck in my mind," she says. "Bringing another human onto the planet is not a decision that should be taken lightly."

Victoria Fahey, 25, is the youngest of five children, and says sibling rivalry was "intense" growing up (Credit: Courtesy of Victoria Fahey)

Victoria Fahey, 25, is the youngest of five children, and says sibling rivalry was "intense" growing up (Credit: Courtesy of Victoria Fahey)

The happiness factor

Part of many one-and-done parents' contentment is the impact their decision has on other parts of their lives, such as careers, hobbies and interests. "There's the question of what you want an adulthood to look like," says Sandler. "Like, what does it take to go to the movies? What does it take to go out to dinner? What does it take to have adult friendships where you actually get to have an uninterrupted conversation?"

It is also, of course, potentially easier to maintain one's health. Pregnancy, labour and the postpartum period all carry risks, including for fathers. Particularly for women older than 35, those giving birth to a second or later child, rather than their first, are at increased risk of pregnancy complications like eclampsia, gestational hypertension and preterm labour.

For women in particular, careers, too, take a hit the more children they have. In Europe, each child is associated with an average drop in wages of 3.6% – although this varies from no wage disadvantage in Nordic countries to a 6% decline per child in Germany and the Netherlands. In the US, one study showed that, even accounting for differences in education or experience, the wage gaps between mothers of one or two children versus childless women are roughly the same, around 13%. But the decline falls to 17.5% at three children.

There are longer-term considerations, too. Dalton often hears that, even if it's hard to raise multiple children, you'll reap the benefits of a "full table" when they're adults. "It's rude to put that onto your children," she says, adding that she doesn't want her daughter to ever feel guilted by these kinds of expectations. And there are, she points out, no guarantees: "You could have another one and your children could hate each other. Or you could have another child that is disabled and may need care beyond 18 years old." 


Having one child also makes it easier to be a better partner, believes Laura Bennett, 33, in Cornwall, England. As it is, she says, she's able to take time for herself, going to festivals or away for weekends with friends. As a result, she feels no resentment when her partner goes surfing or out for a pint. She's not sure how they'd achieve that balance with another. 

All of this might be part of why research has showed that, while having one child is associated with a gain in happiness, having a second is associated with a drop in happiness for mothers. (That study found no effect of a second child on fathers). Other research has showed that while parents are happier in the lead-up and first year after having their first child, there are diminishing returns: the boost of happiness for the second child is half that of the first, and by the third, there's no boost at all. "Globally, happiness decreases with the number of children parents have," one analysis across 86 countries put it. 

It also depends on culture. Parenthood usually has a neutral or negative effect on wellbeing for US and Canadian parents, while it's the opposite for families in Northwest Europe – a possible result of how social policies in Nordic countries help parents balance the stressors of family life. 

The impact on partnerships isn't imagined, either. One analysis found that more than six in 10 men and five in 10 women experienced a significant change in their relationship satisfaction after their first child, usually for the worse. After a second child, it was even higher, particularly among men.

Gosia Klimowicz, 39, says she's cognisant of not being overstretched as a parent with multiple children (Image: Courtesy of Gosia Klimowicz)

Gosia Klimowicz, 39, says she's cognisant of not being overstretched as a parent with multiple children (Image: Courtesy of Gosia Klimowicz)

Living with your choice

No matter how carefully they've made their decisions, many one-and-done parents say they still experience pressure. Melissa Urban, CEO of the diet programme Whole30, is the mother of an only child – and the author of a book on boundaries. She's seen many parents in her Utah community receive unwanted comments, she says, she included scripts in the book for how to respond.

"Many people find the question uncomfortable, but just hint that it's unwelcomed. They'll laugh it off, or say, 'You know, we just aren't ready for another one.' But that's not setting a boundary, and it's likely to keep coming up," she says. Instead, she suggests having some phrases ready – like "Please don't ask, that's not something I want to talk about" – and practising them so they feel natural.

As only children become more common, these kinds of questions are likely to become rarer. Even so, for many families, becoming one-and-done remains a difficult decision – one to which they give a great deal of thought and, at times, may even doubt.

In Dalton’s case, it was seeing idealised images of siblings everywhere that began to make her question herself. By then, she’d been content in her decision for most of her daughter's life, and had even, in 2020, started a community supporting parents who felt the same, an Instagram page called @oneanddoneparenting. 

She and her husband decided to do regular check-ins to figure out whether they really wanted a second child or were just internalising outside messages. At the end of every day, they'd ask each other if they would have liked to have had another child with them. Would they have preferred doing day-care drop-off, then school drop-off? Or going to the Science Museum with a four-year-old and a new-born? The answer, every evening, was no. 

Dalton also took a step back from social media. "Truthfully, I thought I'd probably be away for, like, six months, because I thought it would take a really long time to make this decision," she says. Instead, within days she was asking herself, "What the heck was I thinking?", she says. 

"Happy only child raising an only child", her @oneanddone bio now reads. She's happy, she says, for it to stay that way.


https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20230110-only-child-or-siblings-one-and-done

Aging can be reversed in mice. Are people next?

 In Boston labs, old, blind mice have regained their eyesight, developed smarter, younger brains and built healthier muscle and kidney tissue. On the flip side, young mice have prematurely aged, with devastating results to nearly every tissue in their bodies.

The experiments show aging is a reversible process, capable of being driven “forwards and backwards at will,” said anti-aging expert David Sinclair, a professor of genetics in the Blavatnik Institute at Harvard Medical School and codirector of the Paul F. Glenn Center for Biology of Aging Research.

Our bodies hold a backup copy of our youth that can be triggered to regenerate, said Sinclair, the senior author of a new paper showcasing the work of his lab and international scientists.

The combined experiments, published for the first time Thursday in the journal Cell, challenge the scientific belief aging is the result of genetic mutations that undermine our DNA, creating a junkyard of damaged cellular tissue that can lead to deterioration, disease and death.

“It’s not junk, it’s not damage that causes us to get old,” said Sinclair, who described the work last year at Life Itself, a health and wellness event presented in partnership with CNN.

“We believe it’s a loss of information — a loss in the cell’s ability to read its original DNA so it forgets how to function — in much the same way an old computer may develop corrupted software. I call it the information theory of aging.”

Jae-Hyun Yang, a genetics research fellow in the Sinclair Lab who coauthored the paper, said he expects the findings “will transform the way we view the process of aging and the way we approach the treatment of diseases associated with aging.”

Epigenetic changes control aging

While DNA can be viewed as the body’s hardware, the epigenome is the software. Epigenes are proteins and chemicals that sit like freckles on each gene, waiting to tell the gene “what to do, where to do it, and when to do it,” according to the National Human Genome Research Institute.

The epigenome literally turns genes on and off. That process can be triggered by pollution, environmental toxins and human behaviors such as smoking, eating an inflammatory diet or suffering a chronic lack of sleep. And just like a computer, the cellular process becomes corrupted as more DNA is broken or damaged, Sinclair said.

“The cell panics, and proteins that normally would control the genes get distracted by having to go and repair the DNA,” he explained. “Then they don’t all find their way back to where they started, so over time it’s like a Ping-Pong match, where the balls end up all over the floor.”

In other words, the cellular pieces lose their way home, much like a person with Alzheimer’s.

“The astonishing finding is that there’s a backup copy of the software in the body that you can reset,” Sinclair said. “We’re showing why that software gets corrupted and how we can reboot the system by tapping into a reset switch that restores the cell’s ability to read the genome correctly again, as if it was young.”

It doesn’t matter if the body is 50 or 75, healthy or wracked with disease, Sinclair said. Once that process has been triggered, “the body will then remember how to regenerate and will be young again, even if you’re already old and have an illness. Now, what that software is, we don’t know yet. At this point, we just know that we can flip the switch.”

Years of research

The hunt for the switch began when Sinclair was a graduate student, part of a team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology that discovered the existence of genes to control aging in yeast. That gene exists in all creatures, so there should be a way to do the same in people, he surmised.

To test the theory, he began trying to fast-forward aging in mice without causing mutations or cancer.

“We started making that mouse when I was 39 years old. I’m now 53, and we’ve been studying that mouse ever since,” he said. “If the theory of information aging was wrong, then we would get either a dead mouse, a normal mouse, an aging mouse or a mouse that had cancer. We got aging.”

With the help of other scientists, Sinclair and his Harvard team have been able to age tissues in the brain, eyes, muscle, skin and kidneys of mice.

To do this, Sinclair’s team developed ICE, short for inducible changes to the epigenome. Instead of altering the coding sections of the mice’s DNA that can trigger mutations, ICE alters the way DNA is folded. The temporary, fast-healing cuts made by ICE mimic the daily damage from chemicals, sunlight and the like that contribute to aging.

ICE mice at one year looked and acted twice their age.

Becoming young again

Now it was time to reverse the process. Sinclair Lab geneticist Yuancheng Lu created a mixture of three of four “Yamanaka factors,” human adult skin cells that have been reprogrammed to behave like embryonic or pluripotent stem cells, capable of developing into any cell in the body.

The cocktail was injected into damaged retinal ganglion cells at the back of the eyes of blind mice and switched on by feeding mice antibiotics.

“The antibiotic is just a tool. It could be any chemical really, just a way to be sure the three genes are switched on,” Sinclair told CNN previously. “Normally they are only on in very young, developing embryos and then turn off as we age.”

The mice regained most of their eyesight.

Next, the team tackled brain, muscle and kidney cells, and restored those to much younger levels, according to the study.

“One of our breakthroughs was to realize that if you use this particular set of three pluripotent stem cells, the mice don’t go back to age zero, which would cause cancer or worse,” Sinclair said. “Instead, the cells go back to between 50% and 75% of the original age, and they stop and don’t get any younger, which is lucky. How the cells know to do that, we don’t yet understand.”

Today, Sinclair’s team is trying to find a way to deliver the genetic switch evenly to each cell, thus rejuvenating the entire mouse at once.

“Delivery is a technical hurdle, but other groups seem to have done well,” Sinclair said, pointing to two unpublished studies that appear to have overcome the problem.

“One uses the same system we developed to treat very old mice, the equivalent of an 80-year-old human. And they still got the mice to live longer, which is remarkable. So they’ve kind of beaten us to the punch in that experiment,” he said.

“But that says to me the rejuvenation is not just affecting a few organs, it’s able to rejuvenate the whole mouse because they’re living longer,” he added. “The results are a gift and confirmation of what our paper is saying.”

What’s next? Billions of dollars are being poured into anti-aging, funding all sorts of methods to turn back the clock.

In his lab, Sinclair said his team has reset the cells in mice multiple times, showing that aging can be reversed more than once, and he is currently testing the genetic reset in primates. But decades could pass before any anti-aging clinical trials in humans begin, get analyzed and, if safe and successful, scaled to the mass needed for federal approval.

But just as damaging factors can disrupt the epigenome, healthy behaviors can repair it, Sinclair said.

“We know this is probably true because people who have lived a healthy lifestyle have less biological age than those who have done the opposite,” he said.

His top tips? Focus on plants for food, eat less often, get sufficient sleep, lose your breath for 10 minutes three times a week by exercising to maintain your muscle mass, don’t sweat the small stuff and have a good social group.

“The message is every day counts,” Sinclair said. “How you live your life even when you’re in your teens and 20s really matters, even decades later, because every day your clock is ticking.”

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/12/health/reversing-aging-scn-wellness/index.html

UK Royal Mail hit by Russia-linked ransomware attack

 Severe disruption to Royal Mail's overseas deliveries has been caused by a Russia-linked ransomware attack, the BBC has been told.

The attack has affected the computer systems Royal Mail uses to despatch deliveries abroad.

Royal Mail has been warning customers since Wednesday of disruption due to a "cyber-incident".

Its latest advice is for people not to try to send international letters and parcels until the issue is resolved.


Ransomware is malicious computer software that encrypts data and locks up systems.

The ransomware used in the attack is "Lockbit", according to a source close to the investigation.

Computer security firms say the software has been developed and used by criminal gangs with links to Russia.

The BBC has seen a ransom note sent by the criminals to Royal Mail which reads: "Your data are stolen and encrypted'.

The ransom demand is expected to be in the millions, although sources close to the investigation say there are "workarounds" to get the system going again.

Ransomware attacks are a persistent threat to organisations around the world over with attacks happening on a nearly daily basis.

But this situation is highly significant, as Royal Mail is what is deemed "critical national infrastructure" - that is, it is critical to the UK economy.


The attack is not just affecting one company and its customers, but the communications and businesses of citizens at home and abroad.

Ransomware crews typically ramp up pressure on firms to transfer funds in a cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin to an anonymous digital wallet.

They will have a deadline and are likely to be threatening Royal Mail with the prospect of having potentially sensitive data published.

LockBit is thought to have strong Russian roots but the hacker that carried out the attack could be anywhere.

Last November a Canadian/Russian man was arrested for allegedly carrying out LockBit hacks from Canada.

A Royal Mail spokesman declined to comment on whether the attack was ransomware, but repeated warnings to customers that there is no end in sight to delivery disruption.

The firm is still unable to send letters and parcels overseas and says it is "working hard" to fix the issue.

There are also minor delays to post coming into the UK, but domestic deliveries are unaffected.

It said that some customers who had posted items abroad even before the "incident" might see delays.

A National Crime Agency spokesperson said it was "aware of an incident impacting Royal Mail" and was working alongside the National Cyber Security Centre - which is part of the UK's cyber intelligence agency GCHQ - to understand its impact.

The back office system that has been affected is used by Royal Mail to prepare mail for despatch abroad, and to track and trace overseas items.

It is in use at six sites, including Royal Mail's huge Heathrow distribution centre in Slough, as well as its Bristol site.

Royal Mail has faced a number of hurdles in recent months including delivery delays as postal workers strike over pay and conditions.


https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64244121

Alabama official indicted on voter fraud charges, accused of ballot stuffing in Dem primary

 The chairman of Alabama’s Perry County Commission has been indicted on felony and misdemeanor counts of voter fraud in connection with both the primary and general elections during the midterms, officials announced Wednesday. 

Albert Turner Jr. is accused of voting multiple times in the state’s primary elections last spring and of ballot harvesting during the midterm general elections in November, according to a release from Alabama’s secretary of state and Fourth Judicial Circuit District Attorney Michael Jackson. 

Turner has been charged with violating state law prohibiting the fraudulent filling out of other people’s absentee ballots, and is currently under ongoing investigation. 

Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill (R) declined at a press conference to weigh in on how big an impact Turner’s actions may have had on Alabama’s primary and general election results. 

The state has seen seven convictions of voter fraud within the last eight years, according to Merrill’s office.  

statement from a Facebook page for Turner said the commission chairman is “not concerned about Michael Jackson and his bogus change of ballot stuffing and mailing too many absentee ballots” and appeared to suggest the indictment was a political move from the district attorney. 

The statement also says Turner agrees that the ballot box was stuffed during the elections, but “not by him.” 

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3810727-alabama-official-indicted-on-voter-fraud-charges-accused-of-ballot-stuffing-in-democratic-primary/