I think we don't hear much about the people that hated having children because is not culturally accepted in society to expose that view.
I have the feeling this is a type of logical fallacy but I can't pinpoint which
> I saw that had an unexpected child after many years are very happy about having them.
It can be genuine happiness. But also it could be what they tell themselves. Because, what would be the other option? Not like they can backtrack. So better to tell themselves that they are happy with kids rather than suffer the cognitive dissonance.
This is hard to prove anyway, but is not unheard of that people lie to themselves to feel better with their past decisions.
Although not a logical fallacy, "choice-supportive bias" might do:) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias
People report they gained from having to 'move up a level', without kids you are someone's son or daughter and that's it. Having kid(s) you become someone's father or mother as well which changes you hopefully for the better.
Someone has to pop the next generation out. They will look much like whoever did that. They won't look or think like the ones who decided to sit it out.
Put a different way, the widespread phenomenon of the behavior you just demonstrated, is what is being pleaded against (unsuccessfully in your case). Perhaps that helps you to understand why "but children are great" is missing the point they were trying to make.
The person isn't asking "should I have children?", ask yourself, (and everyone else who responded like that) why you responded as if they did.
So what, probably our sample is not representative.
My pet peeve is when parents tell me (or other people who can't actually have children), that "you'll never know until you haven't experienced it". I grew to think this is the most toxic behavior, triggering FOMO, overstepping boundaries and so on.
Now that I saw these failed parenthoods, I understand that this toxicity comes from their own misery, to justify their life choices. Well, they'll never know how it is to explore the world and be happy and content on your own in your thirties-forties until they'll experi... Oh wait, they won't.
And don't even get me started with the "at least you have a choice to adopt" line, which, since it's not YOUR BLOOD, doesn't count. All those looks on their faces... Sigh.
I think becoming a parent has helped me a lot in a million ways. You actually have a reason to advance, a reason to do stuff for others. It helps that there's just no way out. Plus I've been part of layoffs twice in about 20 years. Most things in life can and will collapse, including work, your social group at work (amongst other reasons because employers have somehow convinced employees of the "need" to keep secrets, resulting in a tension that will always be there when I work for one company and they work for another). Family doesn't collapse half as easily. The only friends I kept over 20 years I got in high school or at the latest university, and even that group is slowly bleeding dry.
Again, some people figured how to live a life with fulfilment, being content, having a purpose, but without a kid. In fact, what worries me a lot that some people think the kid is the ultimate solution. And that is really, really bad and unfair to many involved (family, partner, and eventually the kid themselves)
> Family doesn't collapse half as easily
You'd be surprised. Mine did, and in the region I'm from, did many, too. In fact, the modern invention of a nuclear family is more brittle than some want to accept.
With truly a lot of sympathy, I encourage you too, to try to think outside your bubble. I am happy for each one of those around me who manage a life with their babies and new family.
But this "you'll never know until" mentality is very toxic and the ones repeating it don't realize it's true vice versa.
- - -
All the other issues you mention (jobs, friends come and go) are also generalization, and certainly didn't apply to me or many others, thus, not a proof of anything.
I get it. Some families fail. People get really angry about that, and I understand why. That doesn't mean it will never succeed (and frankly, a failed family is imho, in quite a few ways, still better than no family at all).
I'm pretty damn sure the "mass families", or however you want to call it, so big that kids only really had other kids as parents, that came before were a LOT worse than a nuclear family.
My main point is that there's a strong motivation to keep a family going. And that is a huge part of what keeps me stable. I think it's a necessary part of keeping me stable.