A child-free boomer doesn't regret her choice despite the social pressure. She has financial freedom and can spend the rest of her life giving back.

• Ann Snyder, 70, has no regrets about living a child-free life.
• Her decision stems from concern about overpopulation and depleting resources.
• This has allowed her to travel and avoid being sandwiched between caregiving responsibilities.

Ann Snyder, 70, knew she never wanted to have children.

Snyder said she was convinced at a young age not to have children because of concerns about rapid population growth and depletion of the Earth's resources.

As a baby boomer, Snyder was ahead of her time with environmental concerns regarding reproduction. Today, only 6% of people aged 50 and older without children said environmental concerns were a major reason they didn't have kids or are unlikely to have them, according to a Pew Research Center report published on July 25. The report is based on surveys Pew conducted between April 29 and May 19 with 2,542 people 50 and older without kids and 770 people between the ages of 18 and 49 without kids and who say they are unlikely to have them.

Snyder is an example of an American who just didn't want to have children. That decision has afforded her financial freedom — she said she has enough savings to support herself in retirement until she's 110. What's more, she's avoided being sandwiched between caring for children and her parents. Snyder spent six years helping her mother, father, and stepmom transition into nursing homes.

"I didn't have children to worry about and pay for while I was caring for my parents in the nursing home, so I was just taking care of the older generation ahead of me, not sandwiched by the needs of the younger generation," Snyder said.

In her earlier life, Snyder married her late husband Phil in 1986, and they bought a small ranch in Beaverton, Oregon, where she still lives. She said they enjoyed a "wonderful marriage" with the freedom to spend their time together.

Snyder said not having kids allowed her and Phil to travel extensively in the US, camping across the Western part of the country and frequenting ski destinations like Mount Hood.

While the environment — not money — was the reason she didn't have children, Snyder said it allowed her and Phil more breathing room in their financial and social decisions.

"The fact that we had more disposable money gave us the freedom to do more things," she said.

For example, she and Phil were able to go out to dinner without concerns about finding and paying for childcare. Furthermore, they could spend money on things like season box seats at the Oregon Ballet Theater that they probably would have passed on if they had kids, she said.

The benefits of a child-free life

Growing up in Ohio, Snyder said she felt some social pressure from her family and friends to have children, though she was steadfast in her decision.

After graduating from the University of Iowa, Snyder moved to Oregon, where she began working in communications. Snyder worked for the Oregon Department of Transportation, Portland Public Schools, the Oregon Department of Human Services, and other employers.

Snyder saw the biggest benefit of not having kids as the time it allowed her and her husband to travel and indulge in hobbies together, like hiking and attending lectures.

Snyder said she's grateful for her financial freedom. She said she's seen many of her friends stuck in situations where they're helping to pay off their children's finances, such as education or housing.

"College costs more, houses cost more," Snyder said. "Parents are picking up the difference, and it seems to be, among people I know, an ongoing issue."

Snyder said as people feel the economy is more unaffordable, parents are on the hook for helping their children in ways they might not have anticipated.

Snyder said she respects people who have children and says those who choose to do so must make intentional decisions.

"More power to parents," she said. "They should be spending their time and their money on their kids. That's the whole point of raising a good kid."

To be sure, there are many people who'd like to have children but can't afford it. Business Insider has previously reported on DINKs — which stands for dual income, no kids — who can't financially swing expanding their families.

Avoiding being sandwiched between dependents

Over time, Snyder noticed another benefit of being a child-free American: She said many of her friends have had to care for their parents while raising their children, leaving them sandwiched between the two.

The "sandwich generation" describes people who are either raising a child under the age of 18 or supporting a grown child, along with having at least one living parent over the age of 65, according to the Pew Research Center.

While caring for her parents in the nursing home, she said she was grateful not to be sandwiched between dependents.

"It was very tiring, very exhausting, and that's just half of the sandwich," Snyder said.

Snyder said growing up, she heard people tell her she'd want kids to take care of her when she's older. Yet, now, Snyder said she's not concerned about needing that.

"I've been in nursing homes a lot, and there are a lot of people no one comes to visit," she said. "So kids aren't a guarantee that anyone's going to take care of you."

She said she organizes her life around principles that the first third of your life is learning, the second third is earning, and the final third is returning.

"When I retired a couple of years ago, the first thing I started doing was looking around for volunteer opportunities to do the returning portion of my life," she said. "I've organized my life along those principles for a number of years."

Today, Snyder spends her time volunteering and caring for others — including her beloved foster dogs.

Are you sandwiched between caring for your parents and raising your children? How are you managing it financially? This reporter wants to hear from you. Send your story to jtowfighi@businessinsider.com.