Too many kids

[OoerBlah]

So I've just watched Cathy Come Hone, the Ken Loach play from 1965. It's heartbreaking, no doubt about that. But it made me wonder if there is ever a situation where people might think that having kids if you can't afford them is just, well, don't do it?

I know accidents happen and not all kids are planned. I also know that life is complicated and consequences can't be foretold. But particularly in this day and age of so many finding it difficult to find homes and provide for themselves let alone children - is there ever a time when we should say if you can't afford kids, don't have them?

God also created humans with a brain. This also includes the ablity to control our own population by not breeding like rabbits. Unlike rabbits humans have no natural predators. We also live longer and have less infant mortality than the ancient biblical people. Go forth increase and multiply might have been applicable after the great flood, but did God really mean that advice to be for all time?

We have a benefits system that encourages a total lack of responsiblity.

I don't see why it's a selfish decision to have no kids. Being childless doesn't hurt anyone. In fact if more people across the planet were childless there would be less pressure on resources for the rest of us. However we need to look after the elderly childless people better. We need to meet their emotional as well as physical needs.

Interesting that the people talking about how terrible it is for the planet that there are so many people (which is a view I have some sympathy with - humans are the worst thing to happen to Earth by a long way) never think that the answer is to top themselves. It's always all those other people including children who are to blame.

God didn't create Earth because God doesn't exist.

Interesting that the people talking about how terrible it is for the planet that there are so many people (which is a view I have some sympathy with - humans are the worst thing to happen to Earth by a long way) never think that the answer is to top themselves. It's always all those other people including children who are to blame.

I'm very interested in improving the quality of life for existing people on the planet, while preventing population growth. See the difference?

Meh. You're part of a too populous group. We all are.

<a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/about-ons/business-transparency/ad-hoc-data/pre-june-2012/socio-economic-group-by-number-of-children.xls" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/about-ons/business-transparency/ad-hoc-data/pre-june-2012/socio-economic-group-by-number-of-children.xls

Here are some facts for you:
Those who have never worked are more likely to have 4+ children.

Actually that group is pretty diverse. It doesn't just say "never worked" but "never worked, unemployed and not otherwise classified" with no breakdown of those three groups within the 65,000 figure.

Meh. You're part of a too populous group. We all are.

Exactly that.

As a species there are too many of us.
Pointing fingers at individuals is rude and irrelevant to the debate, frankly.

Almost any number of, say, African children will use less of the earth's resources in their life times than one Western European/American child.
There are resource issues, but they are far bigger than individual family planning choices.

That being said, provided we have the number of children we wanted (whether none or 18 ), any decision is a selfish one, of course it is.

Bes thing we could do for Mother Earth would be to kill off 5 in 6 of us unfortunately.

^Almost any number of, say, African children will use less of the earth's resources in their life times than one Western European/American child.
There are resource issues, but they are far bigger than individual family planning choices.^

It's true in the past that we could easily lay the majority of environmental degradation at it the feet of the west. However, this becomes less relevant with each year that passes because of exponential growth in poor countries and decreasing poverty globally. A high-consumption but slow-growing/stable minority will quickly be outstripped by a low-consumption but exponentially growing majority.

herds and shining so presumably then that includes sahm's who don't work cos they have 6 kids but hubby pays all the bills and the cleaner does all the washing!

I think anyone is entitled to have as many children as they want - provided they are willing to work to support them, without relying on the British taxpayer to fund their lifestyle.

A high-consumption but slow-growing/stable minority will quickly be outstripped by a low-consumption but exponentially growing majority.

True.
See my post several days ago about contraception. Oh, and a whole social revolution that allows women control over their reproduction and values a small number of children AND values a child free life. In many many societies being 'barren' is social suicide.

Like I said, it goes well beyond personal preferences wrt desired family size.

See my post several days ago about contraception. Oh, and a whole social revolution that allows women control over their reproduction and values a small number of children AND values a child free life. In many many societies being 'barren' is social suicide.

Fair enough, but In principle I object to the notion that brown women in the third world should be educated out of their childbearing mindset, whereas white women in the west get a free pass because they're not the real culprits. I disagree that an extra person in the UK is less of a burden on the planet than an extra person in say, India.

Whatever wide, open spaces remain on the planet shouldn't lull us into a false sense of security.

And while you're at it, you might wonder why it's OK to target third-world women but not the UK's poorly educated (or just plain poor) women. Or lower-class women, or minorities, or those who are particularly religious. All of whom have higher than average birth rates.

Western women can't get a free pass without some fundamentally racist underpinnings. Sorry.

Today 21:10 hazeimcgee

herds and shining so presumably then that includes sahm's who don't work cos they have 6 kids but hubby pays all the bills and the cleaner does all the washing!

No, because the title is the job of the head of the household who has dependants. So if hubby is paying all the bills then it's his job that it is referring to.

You're pretty delicate for one who's wandered onto a thread titled too many kids? If you don't want to know what people think about your choices, don't click on it
Ah, so I'm supposed to just leave you alone to pontificate about MY reproductive choices without anyone to tell you what a dick you are sounding like?
There may be too many people on the planet. Perhaps someone should have told your parents that YOU shouldn't have been born?

Western women can't get a free pass without some fundamentally racist underpinnings. Sorry

Then how about you keep your nose out of ALL womens uterus', not matter what colour they are? The racist underpinnings are yours.

herds fair enough, it wouldn't doenload on my phone. Still curious what is included in unclassifieds

Hedda it isn't just all about you. Do you really think the human race can carry on with its current reproductive rates? Do you want to see the population here in Britain expand any more? Are you happy to see people die in the degradation and squalor that already exists in many parts of the world due to insufficient resources? Are you happy for that to spread here, along with increased wars as availability of resources contracts?

There may be too many people on the planet. Perhaps someone should have told your parents that YOU shouldn't have been born?

Well, that would be sad (and strange because they very sensibly had only 2 even in the 70s). They used birth control as far as I know, so I suppose there are at least 7 or 8 siblings I've missed out on. What a pity.

Most white working class in the UK don't have a lot of children - it's a myth that they do.
Most cultures of large families in a couple of generations when they move to the UK cut down to about 2 children too. Not all the Orthodox jews and some Chrsitian groups who have a baby a year don't but most of those who move here do.
It is interesting that whereas Germany needs many many more young people the UK is having a fair few babies at present but it comes and goes. Apparently next year there will be fewer 18 year olds to get university places (good news for my lot as less competition).

Growth is good is a controversial statement. Obviously financially for a nation and in terms of individual incomes it is good but not for the planet. One reason China has done so well is because of its one child policy.

"One reason China has done so well is because of its one child policy"

Depends what your definition of done well is. Babies being abandined in the streets to die, little girls and disabled boys living in sub par orphanges because rhey are less valued than boys. "Abortions" performed at 30+ weeks. Not my definition of doing well at all

Depends what your definition of done well is. Babies being abandined in the streets to die, little girls and disabled boys living in sub par orphanges because rhey are less valued than boys. "Abortions" performed at 30+ weeks. Not my definition of doing well at all

China's 1-child policy was a humanitarian nightmare. That said, I don't think anyone on this thread could argue that another 400 million people on the planet would be a good thing. It's one example of how people react to dwindling resources in the face of overpopulation.

China's 1-child policy was a humanitarian nightmare. That said, I don't think anyone on this thread could argue that another 400 million people on the planet would be a good thing. It's one example of how people react to dwindling resources in the face of overpopulation

So, it was a humanitarian nightmare, but justified because you think the people that weren't born or died because of it would be worse for the planet?
I guess you're a fan of the Holocaust too, then?