>

Yes you can.  If your actions leads to the death of your children and the death or sterilization of yourself.
This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
Rule-breaking posts may result in bans. >

I believe the rule is if you do something stupid to remove yourself from the gene pool... so theoretically... in a very tragic situation... a person can have kids and then do something stupid enough that the kids die too... >

You went dark with it >

It’s true. The person that posted this likely speaks before thinking frequently. >

Which is literally what a shower thought is, in essence, so it fits the subreddit fine. >

That is not at all what showerthought means. >

People who drive drunk with their kids in the car would beg to differ. >

What if you die, win the award, but you've frozen some if your sperm and later it gets used. >

Award revoked, unless the kid proves non-viable, or otherwise dies before itself reproducing.  Then you get your award back. >

post posthumously >

You can actually get a Darvin Award if you have Kids. 
On the official website it says: 'The existence of offspring, though potentially deleterious to the gene pool, does not disqualify a nominee.' >

I'll have a child in secret before getting sterlized and reveal it on my death bed to clown on them. >

You gotta die to get one..... >

No you just have to remove yourself from the genepool with a very stupid action. Making yourself unable to reproduce + having no (longer) kids (which can reproduce) qualifies for nomination. >

Not true. If you kill your kids before they can reproduce, you can still collect. >

Or your kids and grandchildren, before those grandchildren reproduce, or.. >

Wait a second u don’t mean to say humanity as a whole will end someday? >

That for sure, but I don't think you win that Darwin award unless you personally, actively, contributed to the death of your lineage, ideally by something very dumb. (Killing all of humanity works, but is rather excessive). >

Try sitting in a bath with the whole family and introduce a toaster to the mix. >

I think they use an "honorable mention" designation in some of these cases. >

At this point anyone who buys a Tesla wins by default >

By this logic you couldn't win it if you had siblings either >

If I recall. There is the 'Uncle's Principle'. If you are male and your brother has 4 kids, that approximates to one full you, genetically speaking.
By a certain logic, you could also lose it if your sibling has 4 kids. (Each Niece/Nephew = 25% shared DNA)
Personally, I think of it on a person to person basis. So you and your siblings/offspring are individually rated. 
Your family can only maintain a streak.
Everyone here is from a long line of 'losers'. >

Aye but more simply you are as genetically related to your child as to your sibling. >

Exactly! A sibling shares 50% your DNA. 
Having 4 kids negates your contribution to your parent's success, given you haven't reproduced. >

The couple that drove themselves and all their kids off the cliff into the Pacific Ocean on purpose won the award. >

If I'm not mistaken, weren't the kids adopted? >

Could have been. >

Of course, not having kids also removes you from the gene pool.
Is there an honorary award for that? >

The award is for removing harmful genes from the gene pool.
Not having kids might be the single best thing a person can do for the survival of humans/the planet. So no, no Darwin award! >

whoever downvoted you must be a selfish breeder
take my upvote! >

Never was that interested in darwin awards. They're just an excuse that irony lovers use to label people for one reason or another. >

I know how it’s used today, but shouldn’t it be the other way around? Shouldn’t you win the Darwin Award by managing to survive long enough to procreate? >

In environmental science that is defined as 'success'.
If you have one offspring to survive and reproduce, you have a success rating of 1.
Two kids? Success rating of 2.
Have one kid that hasn't reproduced? Success rating of 0.5