Den tidigare termen frivilligt barnlös har idag ersatts med den nya benämningen barnfri, vilket innebär att man aktivt väljer bort  föräldraskapet. På grund av en fortsatt stigmatisering behöver ämnet lyftas för att påvisa hur genomtänkt ett barnfritt val är. Men finns det skillnader i hur kvinnor resonerar i sin barnfrihet? Är det skillnad mellan kvinnor som är födda i två årtionden i deras motiv ur ett mikro- och makroperspektiv? Genom en kvalitativ studie med semistrukturerade frågor intervjuades åtta svenska kvinnor, tre födda 1970-1979, samt fem födda 1980-1989, för att jämföra deras främsta skäl till att välja ett barnfritt liv. Resultatet visar att den primära orsaken för alla utom en av deltagarnas barnfrihet grundar sig i mikroperspektivet såsom frihet, spontanitet och av hänsyn till sin egna kropp. Bidragande orsaker kunde ses utifrån makroperspektivet som klimat, överpopulation och psykisk ohälsa. Den yngre gruppen uttryckte en större oro inför klimat, överpopulation och framtidsutsikter i jämförelse med den äldre gruppen. Sammanfattningsvis har den här studien visat hur genomtänkt valet är att leva som barnfri / The former term “voluntary childless” has today been replaced with the new term “child-free”, which means actively choose not to parent. Due to continued stigmatization, the topic needs to be explored to show how well thought-out the choice to remain child-free is. Are there differences in how women resonate around their child freedom? Are there any differences between women who were born in two different decades in their motives from a micro- and macro perspective? Through a qualitative study with semi-structured questions, eight Swedish women, three born 1970-1979, and five born 1980-1989, were interviewed to compare their main reasons for choosing a child-free life. The results show that the primary cause of all but one interviewees' childfreeness is based on the micro-perspective such as freedom, spontaneity and for the sake of their own body. Contributing causes could be seen from the macro perspective such as climate, overpopulation and mental ill health. The younger group expressed greater concern about climate, overpopulation and worse prospects compared to the older group. In summary, this study has shown how well thought-out the choice is to live as a child-free.

This qualitative research focuses on the decision to stay childfree as a specific individual strategy for coping with the effects of climate crisis. The purpose of this study is to show ways in which the climate crisis is internalized and stressed within the decision to stay childfree. Data for this research were created through semi-structured interviews with 12 informants coming from all around the world. These informants were divided into two different categories. First of them, the kinnovators, perceive their decision to stay childfree as a way to erase the boundary between human and non-human worlds and therefore, similarly to Donna J. Haraway (2016), they perceive their childfreeness as an alternative to the popularly held belief of genalogical view on human kinship. These informants experience a great amount of environmental grief (Kevorkian, 2004) based on the values of antispeciesism and they see the main causes of climate crisis in the epoch of Anthropocene and therefore in the problems connected to human society - such as overpopulation (e.g. Ehrlich, 1986, compared to Haraway, 2016) or consumerism (Bell, 2004). Kinnovators perceive their decision to stay childfree as their individual responsibility and as a way to mitigate climate crisis, as well as a means to maintain their integrity....