Good suggestion, Naked Man. I hadn't thought of it that way, but since I also am not a parent I do agree. (Although saying "our" children could apply, as we could be refering to our collective children)
I didn't explain the problem with the original wording correctly, though, as I now notice. We wouldn't be implying that it is the children we are preserving, but that we are preserving the springs for our children as they(meaning our children) exist today. That is why the change in the order of the words makes it mean what we want.