to think that it's completely bonkers to want a large family?

[slightlystunned]

I read a recent thread where a mom is contemplating having a 4th child and the responses were largely (and cautiously) supportive.

If she had asked the same question to someone from my country, she would have been considered a freak.

I come from a country that is struggling with over-population and poverty and a large % of crime and thus a lot of orphans / abandoned children. I am also enough of an environmental nut to realise that 2+ children or 4+ humans per household means more consumption of natural and artificial resources.

And, face it, in the western culture the child leaves home at 18. The rude behavior and ingratitude and f&ck off attitude starts well before that, around 13, 14 years? So I genuinely don't understand why one would sacrifice their best years & money for that relatively short period of time (13+years), to bring up 3+ children, who may or may not stay together, or keep in touch with you, or worse, hurt you. I have lived extensively in US and Europe, and ALL the families I know see their children only during holidays, about once a year. In fact, one of my British-born, Caucasian friends is in deep emotional and financial crisis and none of her 5 siblings have time to spend with her, they are all well off and can help her, but they politely looking the other way while she a single mom is struggling with a day job.

This is not just a one-time observation, even the people in my acquaintances who have good relationship with their siblings or parents do not help out, saying that "I can't be involved, I have my own life to lead". So if large families do not teach other to help each other, what else is the purpose?

In my grandmother's generation, it was common to have 6 or 8 or even 10 children every household. More children was sign of ""manliness" and ""fertility"

In my mother's generation, 2 and 3 were common. 4 was considered slightly overdose.

In my generation, just one or at the most, 2 seems to be enough. And the trend right now in my country is to have one ""womb" child and one "heart" child (adopted). Which is fairly a good idea, considering the number of orphans and destitute children in the world.

So my two questions are: 1. is this what it is in the West - a trend, a statement to say that "I am a domestic goddess" and have a large family? Do people actually realise the social, financial and emotional consequences of having a large family in today's world?

1. If there is any other valid reason, why this craze to have children from own "blood"? If a person is lucky enough to have financial security and the means to raise another child, why not share it with a child from "outside" who is not so fortunate?

I don't wish to hurt any one, I have been plagued by these questions for many years. I just want some perspective. I am not married, nor do I have children.

If all we are looking at is efficient use of resources then it's probably best if we have a smaller number of very big families and lots of childless people. That isn't how it all works though, there are many more factors.

I am a member of a large nuclear family, whom come from large nuclear families also.

I am one of 5, my dad one of 5, my mum one of 4.

All are decent well rounded humans, few to many no excluding myself left home at 18. I left home at 18 because i was a mother myself. My close family see each other weekly with the exception of my eldest sister whom we monthly due to where she lives. We are all polite, well articulated, well educated. My mother loves us all equal and had us all because she loves us and wanted us.

I want a big family, i have loved growing up in a big family, i never want ds to be lonely due to being an only child, i want him to feel the love i have felt for the last 20 years.

mrsdevere maybe they grow in the heart not the womb?

and as for bringing up infanticide, if you are going to be as rude and insulting as you are in your op you should expect us to bring up questionable practises from your home country by questionable i mean bloody disgusting and sickening

For what its worth, I think the UK is a nice country. Beautiful place, shitty climate, polite and friendly adults, awesome universities, really awful teenagers!

That's the sum of my experience in the past 4 months. I am sure it will change in the next 2 years. For better or worse, remains to be seen (from what I have seen by some of the replies in this thread, it's veering towards the latter)

I too would like to know what you meant by "near-autistic".

Are you going to answer any questions op

I have lived extensively in US and Europe, and ALL the families I know see their children only during holidays, about once a year

How strange, I have lived in Europe all my life and don't know a single family like this. On the contrary, the increase in house prices in the UK means that many 'children' have to stay at home - or return home following uni - well into their twenties or beyond.

Perhaps you need to get out more and shake off your stereotypes of western culture

Before anybody assassinates me for using the word Autism, I have the tests to prove that I can say that without meaning any disrespect

Excellent

But how are you going to show them to us?

I find this whole thread ridiculous, stereotypical, anti British and quite bigoted.

Are you making this all up op.
Is this one of those 'holiday threads'

'I don't remember mentioning female infanticide at all in my OP. '

The OP of a thread doesn't get to control how posters are allowed to discuss what they've written.

It's a legitimate topic though given the judgements you've hoiked yourself over with Britain.

But as somebody's brought it up, what do you think of female infanticide in India OP?

I don't mean do you think it's 'bad', but rather what do you make of it overall given that you know the country so well.

'I have an unusually thick skin'. Yes indeed and possibly not only your skin that is unusually thick?

I have lived extensively in US and Europe, and ALL the families I know see their children only during holidays, about once a year

Only families i know like this are ones whom send their kids to boarding school because theyre to busy with whatever they do.

In my previous post it was meant to say 'few to maybe none, excluding myself left home at 18'

What is a holiday thread? I am posting for the first time here in MN.

Just because I have a honest (or atrocious, in some of your minds) question and am not afraid to seek answers, this thread is to be considered a fake one?

I happen to know lot of families who don't see their children more than one a year. Some of you may know families who see each other all the time. I am sure both of us are saying the truth. I can only present my argument based on my own experience.

I too have an honest question.

What did you mean by "near-autistic"?

Grown children slightlystunned, or ackshewel children.

How odd
I thought my posts were invisible yet you seem to have seen that one

It's OK to discuss the differences you can see between India and Britain OP, and it is possible to do that without making every observation a damning stereotype of the country and its people as a whole.

It's just unusual for someone to be so blinkered and not balance out their view with any positives.

What other kinds of things (apart from the benefit system, which you have said you think is a good thing) have you noticed that you like about Britain?

My question about female infanticide in India was missed too MrsD.

I'm pushing my luck in my last post asking an additional one aren't I?

I'm the last of four children in our family, we had a great childhood. The eldest is my bro and only 5 years older than me with 2 wonderful sisters in between. Oh, there were hard times and much bickering but we always stood together when needed. We now holiday together with our own DCs, we also help each other out emotionally and financially when needed. I am personally a bit gutted that I will only have 2 children (started a little late in life). Large families, when reared well, are just great!

OP, I think you have a blighted view of teenagers in the UK. I work with them and agree that in groups they could appear to be unpleasant. They really aren't, they're just learning to get to grips with the world, and sometimes go along with stuff that isn't what they would do if they were alone. I truely believe that on a one-to-one you would enjoy the company of 99% (maybe more) of UK teenagers, I know I do

Answer the questions op!!!

We have a large family (6 dc's) with a large age ranges-so we could afford them (although a few were unexpected bonus's ). Many people assume that we have so many due to my husbands ethnicity. We know a few other large families and they are all, like ours, very close and supportive of each other, the image you suggest is alien to me and I think is more to do with the dynamics of the families than their size. I have never heard of this 'heart' child thing in India, is it new? Are Brahman and other higher Castes families adopting lower caste children or are they taking in their own caste/family? We are biologically driven to pass on our genes, as is every other species on the planet, that is why some people have children they cannot logically afford, or sometimes there is a change of circumstances, or an unplanned for event and termination is not a choice they wish to make. Like many I find the images of children, alone, vulnerable and in unimaginable poverty extremely disturbing, what is the answer? I would be (pleasantly) surprised if the idea of 'heart' children were well spread in India, sadly I know childless couples there who will remain childless rather than adopt. I read your post to my dh and his first comment was about the corruption and how hard it was to really make a difference

I've reported this thread, because quite frankly op, you sound like a twunt.

A thread about a thread is rude, the sweeping generalisations are bizarre, and the whole thing sounds like a weird fact finding thing for a newspaper.

Female infanticide USED to be practiced in small Indian villages by the ignorant and the impoverished. In India, it is the parents' duty to pay for a daughter's wedding and also give a considerable dowry. You can imagine the state of a family when there are 2+ daughters to be married and the daily income is less than £1. This is the only major reason which had driven men and women to practice FI.

I am sure you all read about suicides and murders because of debt or bas choices in life. Female infanticide is also a crime of stupid traditions and ignorant people.

I am also sure the question will arise - why can't the daughters learn and earn their dowry money? If only it was that easy. If only education was free. If only people were broad-minded enough to send their daughters to school.

The problem is largely solved because there is a new scheme in place where the government ""adopts" unwanted girl babies. While this by itself is an extremely sad solution, at least the killings have largely stopped.

Also, in a country of over a billion people, the % of those who commit this crime is very, very small. Because of the very atrocity of the crime, it is blown completely out of proportion in western media. I imagine this is true for any "sensational" news worth selling.

In Indian cities and big towns, female infanticide is largely non-existant. Now and then, there is a family that will abort an unwanted child, but that is a different issue altogether.