Talk:Voluntary childlessness/Source analysis
Note: "ID" is the reference's numeric reference ID, as appearing in the reference table as of this revision: [1]
| ID | Publication | Publisher | Title | Date | URL/location | Claim(s) supported | Reliability | Independence | Support for claim | Opinion? | Comments | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Social Choice and Welfare | Springer | "Childlessness, Childfreeness and Compensation" | 30 November 2021 | [2] | "Childfreeness" as alternate name | No immediate knowledge of this journal's reliability. | Yes | Title seems to indicate "yes", but need to get access to the full text (paywalled). | Likely not, but see previous. | May be unnecessary; the next sentence has a source confirming use of the "childfree" term, and this probably doesn't need two sources in any case. | |
| 2a | Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research | Stockholm University Press | "Childfreeness, parenthood and adulthood" | 3 January 2013 | [3] | "Childfreeness" as alternate name | Material published by a reputable university press is generally considered reliable. | Yes | States in footnote that childfreeness has been "promoted" as an alternate term, but doesn't discuss commonality in actual use. | No | Probably sufficient for inclusion of the term as an alternate; likely renders 1 unnecessary since 1 doesn't confirm anything else in the article. | |
| 2b | Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research | Stockholm University Press | "Childfreeness, parenthood and adulthood" | 3 January 2013 | [4] | "Some people carry genetic disorders" | Material published by a reputable university press is generally considered reliable. | Yes | Does note that some people have genetic disorders; that's a near WP:BLUESKY claim anyway. | No | Why are there four midsentence references for such an obviously true statement as "Some people carry genetic disorders"? | |
| 3 | Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary | Merriam-Webster | "Definition of CHILD-FREE" | Undated | [5] | "The word childfree first appeared sometime before 1901" | Merriam-Webster would generally be reliable for material on language and its use. | Yes | Source states that the first known use was in 1901, not before it. We can't extrapolate use "before" from that. | No | Edited to correct mismatch between source and article text.[6] | |
| 4 | BBC News (listed as "BBC Future"?) | BBC | "The adults celebrating child-free lives" | 14 February 2023 | [7] | "Use of the word "childfree" was first recorded in 1901[3] and entered common usage among feminists during the 1970s." | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Yes | No | One source is probably sufficient for this claim. Nothing in the source article indicates it's called "BBC Future". | |
| 5 | Psychology Today (blog) | Psychology Today | "Childfree Trend on the Rise: Four Reasons Why!" | 19 January 2014 | [8] | "Use of the word "childfree" was first recorded in 1901[3] and entered common usage among feminists during the 1970s." | No, blogs are generally unreliable. | Yes | No, does not even mention the 1970s. | Yes | Removed.[9] There's already a much more reliable source for this claim (which actually confirms it), so there's no need for a blog post which doesn't even talk about it in addition to that. Possibly added as WP:REFSPAM. | |
| 6 | Oxford English Dictionary | Oxford University Press | No title provided | 1971 | Print source, p.343 | "The meaning of the term childfree extends to encompass the children of others (in addition to one's own children), and this distinguishes it further from the more usual term childless, which is traditionally used to express the idea of having no children, whether by choice or by circumstance." | If it actually does support the claim, yes. | Yes | I don't have immediate access to the OED, but will have to see if it directly compares these two terms and supports the claim. I suspect it does not. | No | Pending verification that the source actually supports the claim. Also, it's unclear what "extends to encompass the children of others" even means. If the source does say something about this, it will be necessary to clarify that based upon what's actually in it. | |
| 7 | Australian Institute for Family Studies | Australian government | "Diversity and change in Australian families" | April 2004 | [10] | "In the research literature, the term child-free or childfree has also been used to refer to parents currently not living with their children, for example because they have already grown up and moved out." | An Australian government agency is a reasonably reliable source for this type of information. | Yes | No. The term "research literature" does not appear anywhere in this source, and is rather weaselly in any case (which research literature?). Without a page number, it is impossible to determine where in the 320-page source support for this claim purportedly is. | No | Tagged as failing verification.[11] Will need removal unless a source specifically supporting this claim can be provided. | |
| 8a | Boston Globe | Boston Globe Media | "Would you pay more to be on a plane without children? A majority of Americans want adult-only flights." | 16 March 2023 | [12] | "In common usage, childfree might be used in the context of venues or activities wherein (young) children are excluded even if the people involved may be parents, such as a childfree flight" | The Boston Globe has generally been held to be a reliable newspaper. | Yes | No. The term "childfree" or "child free" is not even used, let alone discussed, at all in this article. | No | Tagged as failing verification.[13] | |
| 8b | Boston Globe | Boston Globe Media | "Would you pay more to be on a plane without children? A majority of Americans want adult-only flights." | 16 March 2023 | [14] | "While the idea of a childfree flight has become popular in the 2020s, with individuals even willing to pay extra, it is unlikely to be instituted by a major airline for reasons of public relations, regulations, and profit." | The Boston Globe has generally been held to be a reliable newspaper. | Yes | Yes | No | ||
| 9a | National Post | Postmedia Network | "Demand for child-free zones grows as more adults opt out of parenthood" | 19 October 2012 | [15] | "In common usage, childfree might be used in the context of venues or activities wherein (young) children are excluded even if the people involved may be parents, such as a childfree flight[8] or a childfree restaurant." | No RSP entry. Feedback on RSN is generally positive as to reliability with some caveats, but seems quite sufficient for this claim. | Yes | Marginal at best. It uses the term a couple of times, but doesn't discuss how widely or frequently it's used in that way. | No | ||
| 9b | National Post | Postmedia Network | "Demand for child-free zones grows as more adults opt out of parenthood" | 19 October 2012 | [16] | "On the other hand, this (public relations, regulations, and profit, from prior sentence) is not an issue for certain other venues, such as restaurants." | No RSP entry. Feedback on RSN is generally positive as to reliability with some caveats, but seems quite sufficient for this claim. | Yes | No. While the source confirms that some restaurants have instituted such policies, it also discusses issues they've had with it, with both public relations and regulations. It contradicts that it is "not an issue" and explicitly describes how it has been one. | No | Tagged as failing verification.[17] | |
| 9c | National Post | Postmedia Network | "Demand for child-free zones grows as more adults opt out of parenthood" | 19 October 2012 | [18] | "In Canada, childfree venues are growing in popularity, including among parents who, despite loving their children, would like to spend some time away from them on occasions." | No RSP entry. Feedback on RSN is generally positive as to reliability with some caveats, but seems quite sufficient for this claim. | Yes | Not really. A couple of anecdotes quoted in the story somewhat support it, but the source does not support this as a broad and sweeping claim. | No | Tagged as failing verification.[19] | |
| 10a | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [20] | "The availability of reliable birth control (which has severed the link between sexuality and reproduction)," | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Yes | No | Though BBC is a reliable source, it's still a news source. 10 citations to a single news article is a lot, especially in an area with quite a lot of academic and scholarly work, so there may be better and more comprehensive material available for some of these. This source is also fourteen years old, so in some cases a more up to date reference may be preferable. | |
| 10b | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [21] | "However, childfree individuals are unlikely to have the fear of missing out on the alleged benefits of parenthood[20][25] because there are parents who regret having children,[26] leaving the childfree to deem the decision to "just try" to have children irresponsible." | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | No. While the BBC article includes some particular anecdotes, it does not support these more globally applicable claims. | No | This particular source fails verification in this instance, but other sources are present, so will hold off tagging based upon those. The other sources may support the claim, in which case this one just needs to be removed in this case. | |
| 10c | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [22] | "For some, it is sufficient to spend time with their nephews, nieces or stepchildren,[15] or to provide childcare and babysitting services as part of an extended family or godparent,[10][39]" | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Yes, but trivially so, since the claim is weasel worded with "some". | No | The claim will need to be worded more specifically, based upon what the cited sources actually support. Tagged as weasel wording.[23] | |
| 10d | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [24] | "People who express the fact that they have voluntarily chosen to remain childfree are frequently subjected to several forms of discrimination." | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | No, the article talks about some rude comments such people receive, but not discrimination. The source does not use the word "discrimination", nor describe anything which would be widely recognized as illegal discrimination. | No | Tagged as failing verification.[25] | |
| 10e | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [26] | "The decision not to have children has been derided as "unnatural" or attributed to insanity, and frequently childfree people are subjected to unsolicited questioning by friends, family, colleagues, acquaintances and even strangers who attempt to force them to justify and change their decision" | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Yes | No | Scare quotes need removed. | |
| 10f | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [27] | "Some women have argued that revealing their decision to not have children was akin to coming out as gay in the mid-20th century whereas others who chosen to avoid such conversations to avoid social pressure to change their decision." | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Trivially, with weasel wording of "some". Based upon a single anecdote, support for "some" isn't much. | No | Tagged as weasel wording.[28] If stronger support for this can't be found, the claim probably will need to be removed. | |
| 10g | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [29] | "They might be told to first have a child before deciding whether or not they do not want one" | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Trivially; "they" is referring back to the "some women" weasel wording from 10f. Again, a single anecdote, so very weak support. | No | Weasel wording will need to be better supported and specified, or removed. | |
| 10h | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [30] | "They might be told to first have a child before deciding whether or not they do not want one," | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Trivially; again, this is based upon anecdotes and refers back to the "some women" weasel wording. | No | Weasel wording will need to be better supported and specified, or removed. | |
| 10i | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [31] | "Some childfree people are accused of hating all children instead of just not wanting any themselves even though these people might still be willing to help others rear their children." | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Not even trivially, even with the weasel wording. The source specifies such comments as jokes, not accusations, and gives no support for the "Butbutbut" portion of the sentence. | No | Tagged as failing verification.[32] | |
| 10j | BBC News | BBC | "The women who choose not to be mothers" | 29 July 2010 | [33] | "In 2010, around half of Canadian women without children in their 40s had decided to not have any from an early age" | BBC is a generally reliable source. | Yes | Poorly. The BBC article qualifies the claim with "An early study in Canada years ago found...", while the article states this as fact with no such qualification, so we're making the claim a lot more strongly than the source does. The article material would need to either be altered to include the same caveat as the source, or, better yet, see if the actual study can be found. | No | Needs better support, qualification, or removal. | |
| 11 | Print book | Black Dog & Leventhal | The Story of Sex: A Graphic History Through the Ages | 2017 | Chapter 11, no page number given | "The availability of reliable birth control (which has severed the link between sexuality and reproduction)," | Unclear; unfamiliar with that publisher. | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | We surely don't need two sources to confirm that birth control has severed the link between sexuality and reproduction (again, pretty BLUESKY), and this one also feels like ref spamming. Removed.[34] | |
| 12a | Financial Times | Financial Times | "Why family-friendly policies don’t boost birth rates" | 29 March 2024 | [35] | "In most societies and for most of human history, choosing not to have children was both difficult and socially undesirable, except for celibate individuals. The availability of reliable birth control (which has severed the link between sexuality and reproduction),[10][11] more opportunities for financial security (especially for women)[12]," | Not for this claim | Yes | No, opinion piece used for factual claim. | Yes | Opinion articles can only be used as sources of opinions, not as support for statements of fact. I have a recent issue of The Economist with an article about similar issues to this which is not an opinion piece; that may be able to serve as better support for what this reference currently does. | |
| 12b | Financial Times | Financial Times | "Why family-friendly policies don’t boost birth rates" | 29 March 2024 | [36] | "Whereas in the past, a woman typically had to get married and bear children in order to ensure her own survival,[53][12]" | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | Citing a source once midsentence, and then again at the end of the sentence, is about the definition of citation overkill. Removed in favor of end of sentence citation.[37] | |
| 12c | Financial Times | Financial Times | "Why family-friendly policies don’t boost birth rates" | 29 March 2024 | [38] | "Whereas in the past, a woman typically had to get married and bear children in order to ensure her own survival,[53][12] in a modern society, people—including women—have more choices, and they are increasing aware that reproduction is an option, and not an obligation.[12][33][54]" | Not for this claim | Yes | No, opinion piece used for factual claim. | Yes | Opinion articles can only be used as sources of opinions, not as support for statements of fact. I have a recent issue of The Economist with an article about similar issues to this which is not an opinion piece; that may be able to serve as better support for what this reference currently does. This statement is also a bit editorializing/persuasive essay style, so probably will need rephrasing even if supported by other sources. | |
| 12d | Financial Times | Financial Times | "Why family-friendly policies don’t boost birth rates" | 29 March 2024 | [39] | "Consequently, people who choose to have children tend to have fewer of them, and an increasing number prefer to be childfree." | Not for this claim | Yes | No, opinion piece used for factual claim. | Yes | Opinion articles can only be used as sources of opinions, not as support for statements of fact. I have a recent issue of The Economist with an article about similar issues to this which is not an opinion piece; that may be able to serve as better support for what this reference currently does. | |
| 12e | Financial Times | Financial Times | "Why family-friendly policies don’t boost birth rates" | 29 March 2024 | [40] | "But the cost of raising a child is, for most, not as important as the desire for personal growth and fulfillment." | Not for this claim | Yes | No, opinion piece used for factual claim. | Yes | Opinion articles can only be used as sources of opinions, not as support for statements of fact. This is also a very strong claim of "most", which is both weasel wording and a strong assertion, and this source does not come anywhere near supporting it. As this is the only source, tagged as failing verification.[41] | |
| 13a | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [42] | "In most societies and for most of human history, choosing not to have children was both difficult and socially undesirable, except for celibate individuals. The availability of reliable birth control (which has severed the link between sexuality and reproduction),[10][11] more opportunities for financial security (especially for women),[12] better healthcare (which has extended human life expectancy), and elderly care financed by the government or by one's own savings rather than one's family has made childlessness a viable option," | No RSP entry or RSN discussion. Seems a reasonably well-reputed newspaper, so probably yes. | Yes | No. The article does not mention health care or elder care. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | Does not support the claim, and given the high availability of English sources available about this subject, there is probably no need to use non-English ones for general claims. There is another source, so will hold off failing the verification until that one. | |
| 13b | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [[43]] | "Supporters of this lifestyle cite various reasons for their view." | No RSP entry or RSN discussion. Seems a reasonably well-reputed newspaper, so probably yes. | Yes | Trivially, with the "various" weasel wording. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | This sentence could be removed entirely without any loss; the rest of the section makes that clear anyway. Also as 12a, with use of non-English sources. | |
| 13c | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [[44]] | "Indeed, fear is in general a major motivation for voluntary childlessness,[15] and some are also concerned with disabilities," | No RSP entry or RSN discussion. Seems a reasonably well-reputed newspaper, so probably yes. | Yes | No, not even with the "some" weasel wording. The source does not mention fear or concern with disabilities at all. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | Tagged as failing verification.[45] | |
| 13d | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [[46]] | "For some, it is sufficient to spend time with their nephews, nieces or stepchildren,[15] or to provide childcare and babysitting services as part of an extended family or godparent,[10][39] and to nourish (existing) friendships," | No RSP entry or RSN discussion. Seems a reasonably well-reputed newspaper, so probably yes. | Yes | No, not even with the "some" weasel wording. The source does not mention friendships. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | Tagged as failing verification.[47] | |
| 13e | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [[48]] | "In addition, one's partner might already have children from a previous relationship and is unable or unwilling to have more." | No RSP entry or RSN discussion. Seems a reasonably well-reputed newspaper, so probably yes. | Yes | No, this source does not confirm that. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | I suspect a source could be found that talks about this factor, but this one doesn't. Tagged as failing verification.[49] | |
| 13f | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [[50]] | "Some people carry genetic disorders," | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | One above source already supports this claim. Such an obviously true claim does not need four citations. | |
| 13g | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [[51]] | "But even among healthy couples, new parents are often sleep deprived." | No RSP entry or RSN discussion. Seems a reasonably well-reputed newspaper, so probably yes. | Yes | No, the source does not mention sleep deprivation. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | Since there are two other possible sources for this claim, removed.[52] | |
| 13h | Trouw | DPG Media | "Hoezo heb jij geen kinderen?" | 14 May 2020 | [[53]] | "A 2016 report confirmed those numbers: 20% of Dutch women were childless, of whom 60% voluntarily, so that 12% of all Dutch women could be considered childfree." | No RSP entry or RSN discussion. Seems a reasonably well-reputed newspaper, so probably yes. | Yes | The claim is too vague and poorly written to determine if the source supports it. It is not clear to what numbers "these numbers" refers. In any case, the source does not contain percentages, and if a report confirmed it, the actual report, not a newspaper article about it, should be the source. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | Removed the claim; it's impossible to know what it's even supposed to mean.[54] If another source has numbers on Dutch parents, that could be added again in a clearer way based upon what that source states. | |
| 14a | Quest | "Waarom hebben zoveel mensen een kinderwens?" | Hearst Netherlands | 14 May 2020 | [55] | "In most societies and for most of human history, choosing not to have children was both difficult and socially undesirable, except for celibate individuals. The availability of reliable birth control (which has severed the link between sexuality and reproduction),[10][11] more opportunities for financial security (especially for women),[12] better healthcare (which has extended human life expectancy), and elderly care financed by the government or by one's own savings rather than one's family has made childlessness a viable option,[13][14] " | No RSN or RSP discussion, but probably reasonably reliable. | Yes | No, the article does not mention health care or elder care. | Difficult to tell with machine translation, but probably not. | Second source, also doesn't confirm claim. Tagged as failing verification.[56] |
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Voluntary childlessness/Source analysis" page.
