Hadi Wijaya
The discourse surrounding the "childfree" lifestyle—a conscious decision by individuals or couples to remain childless—has surged to the forefront of public debate in Indonesia, following controversial remarks by social media influencer and YouTuber Gita Savitri Devi, commonly known as Gitasav. The controversy reached a fever pitch when Gitasav suggested that not having children acts as a "natural anti-aging" remedy, allowing for better sleep and less stress. This statement sparked a massive backlash across Indonesian social media platforms, prompting religious leaders and scholars to weigh in on the compatibility of such a lifestyle with Islamic teachings. Among the most prominent voices is Ustazah Tria Meriza, the founder of @sekolahmuslimah.bahagia, who has publicly condemned the childfree ideology as being fundamentally "haram" (forbidden) for Muslim couples based on several theological and ideological grounds.
Ustazah Tria Meriza’s critique centers on the origin and intent of the childfree movement, which she argues is rooted in Western secularism rather than Islamic values. According to Tria, the adoption of a childfree lifestyle by Muslims is problematic because it prioritizes individual benefit and materialistic comfort over the spiritual and communal obligations outlined in the Quran and Sunnah. Her assessment, shared via her social media platforms in February 2023, outlines four primary reasons why the childfree concept is viewed as a violation of Islamic principles. These reasons encompass ideological origins, economic anxieties, the primary purpose of marriage, and the prophetic tradition of expanding the Muslim community.
The first pillar of Tria’s argument addresses the philosophical roots of the childfree movement. She asserts that the concept emerged from Western societal structures characterized by secularism—the strict separation of religious guidance from public and private life. In this worldview, decisions regarding family planning are often made through the lens of utilitarianism, where the primary consideration is the perceived benefit or "utility" to the individual’s lifestyle. Tria argues that for a Muslim, every life choice must be weighed against the standards of "halal" (permissible) and "haram" (forbidden), rather than personal convenience. By adopting a childfree stance solely for the sake of lifestyle preservation, Tria suggests that couples are inadvertently subscribing to a secular ideology that marginalizes God’s role in family dynamics.
The second point of contention involves the role of financial anxiety in the decision to remain childless. A common justification for the childfree lifestyle is the rising cost of living and the fear that children will impose an insurmountable financial burden. However, Tria emphasizes that such fears directly contradict the Islamic "aqidah" (creed). In Islamic theology, Allah is recognized as Ar-Razzaq (The Provider), and the Quran explicitly assures believers that the sustenance of every creature is guaranteed by the Creator. Tria’s perspective aligns with Surah Al-Isra (17:31), which warns believers not to kill their children for fear of poverty, asserting that God provides for both the parents and the children. From a scholarly perspective, choosing childlessness due to economic fear is seen as a lack of "tawakkul" (trust in God’s providence).
Thirdly, the childfree ideology is viewed as being in direct opposition to the fundamental purpose of marriage in Islam. Ustazah Tria points to the Sharia principle that marriage is an institution designed for procreation and the continuation of the human race. She cites Surah An-Nahl (16:72), which states: "And Allah has made for you from yourselves mates and has made for you from your mates sons and grandchildren and has provided for you from the good things." This verse is often interpreted by exegetes to mean that children are not just a biological byproduct of marriage but a divine blessing and a core objective of the marital union. To intentionally and permanently reject this blessing is seen by many scholars as a rejection of the natural order (fitrah) established by God.
The fourth reason provided by Tria is rooted in the "Sunnah," or the traditions and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. There is a strong emphasis in Islamic tradition on marrying those who are fertile and affectionate to ensure the growth of the Muslim "Ummah" (community). Tria references a well-known Sahih Hadith (narrated by Abu Daud, an-Nasa’i, and Ahmad) where the Prophet Muhammad expressed that he would take pride in the large numbers of his followers on the Day of Judgment compared to other nations. By choosing a childfree life, Tria argues that couples are failing to contribute to this prophetic aspiration. She concludes her critique by reminding her audience that raising children, while challenging, is inherently rewarding and a source of immense joy and spiritual merit.
The controversy surrounding Gita Savitri’s comments provides the necessary context for understanding the intensity of this debate. Gitasav, an Indonesian influencer residing in Germany, has long been an advocate for childfree living. However, her recent interaction with a follower—where she attributed her youthful appearance to the absence of children—was perceived by many as an insult to mothers and a dismissal of the cultural and religious importance of childbearing in Indonesia. This incident was not merely a clash of opinions but a collision of worldviews: the modern, individualistic perspective of the "Global North" versus the traditional, communal, and religious values that remain dominant in Indonesia.
The childfree movement, as defined in sociological literature and referenced by Tria, refers to a voluntary choice to not have children, including biological, step, or adopted children. This distinguishes "childfree" individuals from those who are "childless" due to infertility or circumstance. Historically, the term gained traction in the late 20th century in Western nations such as the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. Data suggests that in these regions, declining birth rates are often linked to increased female participation in the workforce, the high cost of education, and a shift toward self-actualization over traditional family roles. In Indonesia, while the movement remains a minority, it has gained visibility among urban, educated youth who are increasingly vocal about mental health, financial stability, and the "sandwich generation" phenomenon—the burden of supporting both aging parents and young children simultaneously.
The reactions to the childfree debate in Indonesia have not been limited to religious scholars. Government bodies, such as the National Population and Family Planning Board (BKKBN), have also monitored the trend. While the BKKBN has historically focused on "Dua Anak Cukup" (Two Children is Enough) to control population growth, the rise of the childfree movement presents a different challenge: the potential for a "demographic winter" or an aging population crisis similar to those seen in Japan or South Korea. Dr. Hasto Wardoyo, head of the BKKBN, has noted that while the government respects individual choices, the long-term sustainability of the nation’s "Demographic Bonus" depends on a balanced birth rate. If a significant portion of the productive-age population chooses to be childfree, the dependency ratio—the number of elderly people supported by the working population—could shift unfavorably by the time Indonesia reaches its "Golden Era" in 2045.
Furthermore, sociologists argue that the childfree trend in Indonesia is a symptom of broader structural issues. Many young Indonesians cite the lack of affordable childcare, inadequate parental leave policies, and the intense pressure of the "hustle culture" as reasons to avoid parenthood. For many, the decision is not a rejection of religious values but a pragmatic response to an environment that they feel is not conducive to raising a child in a healthy and stable manner. This creates a complex tension between the religious idealism advocated by figures like Ustazah Tria Meriza and the material realities faced by the modern middle class.
The implications of this debate are far-reaching. On a cultural level, it highlights the growing gap between traditionalists and the "digital nomad" generation. On a religious level, it has prompted a deeper exploration of "Maqasid al-Shari’ah" (the objectives of Islamic law), specifically the objective of "Hifz an-Nasl" (protection of progeny). While some modernists argue that Islam allows for temporary birth control (azl), the consensus among traditional scholars remains that a permanent, ideological commitment to childlessness without a valid medical or urgent reason is inconsistent with Islamic ethics.
In conclusion, the critique offered by Ustazah Tria Meriza serves as a representative voice for the traditional Islamic perspective in Indonesia. By categorizing the childfree movement as a product of secular materialism and a contradiction of divine providence, she reinforces the societal expectation that family and procreation are central to a Muslim’s identity. However, as Indonesia continues to modernize and its youth grapple with global influences and economic pressures, the childfree debate is likely to remain a significant point of friction. The resolution of this tension will require more than just theological decrees; it will likely involve a broader societal conversation about how to support families in a changing world, ensuring that the "joy" of having many children, as Tria puts it, is matched by the socio-economic feasibility of raising them.
