Hadi Wijaya
The discourse surrounding the "childfree" lifestyle has resurfaced as a primary subject of public debate in Indonesia, ignited by recent social media commentary from prominent influencer and YouTuber Gita Savitri, also known as Gitasav. The controversy gained significant momentum after Gitasav linked the decision to remain childless with maintaining a youthful appearance, a statement that resonated across various digital platforms and drew sharp criticism from religious scholars and traditionalists alike. In response to this burgeoning trend, Ustazah Tria Meriza, the founder of @sekolahmuslimah.bahagia, has articulated a comprehensive theological critique of the childfree ideology, asserting that the adoption of such a lifestyle is considered "haram" (forbidden) for Muslim couples based on several foundational Islamic principles.
According to Ustazah Tria, the childfree movement is not merely a personal lifestyle choice but is rooted in ideological frameworks that stand in direct opposition to Islamic teachings. Her critique, shared via her Instagram platform, outlines four primary reasons why the childfree concept is incompatible with the faith. First and foremost, she argues that the ideology originates from Western secularism, which seeks to decouple religious guidance from the domestic and private spheres of life. In a secular framework, decisions are often made based on the principle of individual utility or perceived benefit rather than adherence to divine law regarding what is permissible (halal) and what is prohibited (haram). This shift toward pure utilitarianism, she suggests, undermines the spiritual foundation of the Muslim family unit.
The second pillar of Ustazah Tria’s argument addresses the economic anxieties that frequently drive the decision to remain childfree. Many proponents of the movement cite the rising cost of living and the potential for financial instability as primary reasons for avoiding parenthood. However, Ustazah Tria emphasizes that this perspective contradicts the core Islamic tenet of "aqidah" (creed), specifically the belief in Allah SWT as "Ar-Razzaq" (The Provider). Islamic doctrine holds that every living creature is guaranteed its sustenance by the Creator. Therefore, fearing poverty due to the presence of children is viewed as a lack of faith in divine providence.
Thirdly, the childfree ideology is seen as a direct contradiction to the "syariat" (Islamic law) regarding the primary purpose of marriage. Within the Islamic tradition, the institution of marriage is inextricably linked to the preservation of the human race and the establishment of a lineage. Ustazah Tria points to Surah an-Nahl, verse 72, of the Holy Quran, which states that Allah has made for believers spouses from among themselves and has granted them children and grandchildren. This scriptural evidence suggests that the natural and intended outcome of a marital union in Islam is the procreation and nurturing of a new generation.
Finally, Ustazah Tria highlights that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) explicitly encouraged his followers to marry and have many children. She cites a "sahih" (authentic) hadith recorded by Abu Daud, an-Nasa’i, and Ahmad, in which the Prophet expressed his desire to be proud of the large number of his "ummah" (community) on the Day of Judgment compared to other nations. By choosing a childfree life, a couple is viewed as opting out of this prophetic aspiration and the collective strength of the Muslim community. "We must be careful in accepting ideas that contradict Islamic law," Ustazah Tria warned, adding that "having many children is a source of joy."
The Historical and Global Context of the Childfree Movement
The term "childfree," as distinguished from "childless," emerged in the late 20th century, primarily in Western nations such as the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. While "childless" often refers to an involuntary state due to biological or situational constraints, "childfree" signifies a voluntary and intentional choice to live without children. According to historical data, the movement gained organized visibility in the 1970s with the formation of the National Organization for Non-Parents in the United States, which sought to challenge the societal expectation that parenthood is a mandatory milestone for adulthood.
The motivations behind the childfree choice are multifaceted and vary across different socio-economic landscapes. In many developed nations, the decision is often linked to the pursuit of career advancement, the desire for personal autonomy, and the preservation of financial resources for leisure and travel. In more recent years, "eco-anxiety" has also become a significant factor, with some individuals choosing not to have children due to concerns about overpopulation and the environmental impact of a growing human footprint on a planet facing climate change. Additionally, psychological factors, such as the fear of being an inadequate parent or the desire to avoid the "intergenerational trauma" of one’s own upbringing, play a role in the decision-making process.
Socio-Demographic Implications in Indonesia
The debate in Indonesia arrives at a critical demographic juncture. While the global North struggles with rapidly aging populations and shrinking workforces, Indonesia is currently navigating a "demographic bonus"—a period where the productive-age population outnumbers the non-productive population. However, the National Population and Family Planning Board (BKKBN) has noted a steady decline in the country’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR). In the 1970s, the TFR was approximately 5.6 children per woman; by 2022, that number had dropped to approximately 2.18, hovering just above the replacement level of 2.1.
Dr. Hasto Wardoyo, the head of BKKBN, has previously commented on the shifting attitudes toward family size. While the government’s "Dua Anak Cukup" (Two Children is Enough) campaign was once the cornerstone of national policy to curb overpopulation, the current focus has shifted toward the quality of the family rather than just the quantity. Nevertheless, the rise of the childfree movement presents a potential long-term challenge to Indonesia’s demographic stability. If the trend gains significant traction among the urban middle class, the country could eventually face the same "silver tsunami" (an aging population crisis) currently seen in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore, where birth rates have fallen far below replacement levels.
Reactions from the Public and Digital Sphere
The comments made by Gitasav regarding the "anti-aging" benefits of a childfree life triggered a massive wave of reactions from Indonesian netizens, influencers, and public figures. Many mothers took to social media to post photos and videos of their children, arguing that the joy and fulfillment of motherhood provide a "glow" that no lack of stress could replicate. Conversely, some younger Indonesians defended the right to choose, arguing that the economic realities of 2024 are vastly different from those of previous generations and that the pressure to procreate should not be weaponized against individual autonomy.
Theologically, the response has been largely unified among mainstream Islamic organizations. Representatives from the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) have echoed sentiments similar to those of Ustazah Tria, noting that while the timing of having children can be managed through permissible family planning (tanzim al-nasl), the total rejection of children (tahdid al-nasl) without a valid medical or urgent reason is generally discouraged or forbidden in Islam. They argue that children are "amanah" (a trust from God) and a means of "sadaqah jariyah" (continuous charity), as the prayers of a righteous child continue to benefit parents even after death.
Analysis of the Cultural Conflict
The childfree debate in Indonesia serves as a microcosm of a larger cultural tension between traditional communal values and modern individualism. In traditional Indonesian society, children are often viewed as the "central pillar" of the family and a safety net for parents in their old age. The phrase "banyak anak, banyak rezeki" (many children, many blessings) reflects a deeply ingrained cultural optimism.
However, the rapid urbanization and digitalization of Indonesian society have exposed the younger generation to global discourses on body autonomy and self-actualization. For many, the decision to be childfree is a reaction to the "sandwich generation" phenomenon, where young adults find themselves financially responsible for both their aging parents and their own children. By opting out of parenthood, some feel they can break the cycle of financial strain.
Despite these modern pressures, the theological arguments presented by figures like Ustazah Tria Meriza remain highly influential in a country where religion plays a central role in public and private life. Her critique highlights that for a significant portion of the population, the childfree movement is not just a lifestyle debate but a fundamental question of religious identity and obedience to divine mandates.
Conclusion and Future Outlook
As the childfree movement continues to be a point of contention in digital and academic spaces, it is clear that the discussion transcends simple lifestyle preferences. It touches upon the core of Indonesia’s social contract, its demographic future, and its religious foundations. While influencers like Gitasav may represent a shift toward individualistic choices, the robust theological rebuttals from scholars like Ustazah Tria Meriza suggest that the traditional family model, rooted in the desire for progeny and faith in divine provision, remains the dominant cultural and religious paradigm in Indonesia.
The long-term impact of this discourse will likely depend on how the state and religious institutions address the underlying anxieties—economic, psychological, and social—that make the childfree lifestyle attractive to some. Moving forward, the conversation may shift from the "permissibility" of the choice to how society can better support parents, thereby making the prospect of raising a family less daunting in an increasingly complex world. For now, the stance of religious leaders remains firm: the call to build a family and raise the next generation is not just a social expectation, but a sacred duty.
