Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Large Families

686 replies

Czerny88 · 10/09/2016 17:56

I'm trying to understand the psychology behind people having large families (by which I mean anything over three children, I guess). NB I'm thinking about people in the 21st century, in the West, with access to contraception and low infant mortality, who don't belong to a culture where it is particularly encouraged to have a large number of children, such as Judaism. And obviously there are circumstances such as multiple births which don't apply.

My visceral feeling is that it is often wrong on many levels. In attempting to enunciate why, I would say people should not have more children than they can afford, than they have time to care for, than can fit comfortably in their living accommodation.

And even in the case where the parents are very wealthy, have a huge house and extra support such as a nanny, there is still the hugely important issue of over-population. It feels like we are at capacity already, without room to increase the population by the amount would result by every couple having even three children.

I'm trying not to be too goady or right-wing, and I have personal reasons for the way I feel (I am involuntarily childless) so please don't be too harsh, but it's something I struggle with ideologically as well as emotionally.

So... AIBU to think that people should be more responsible about how many children they produce and not act solely on their own desires regardless of the potential effects on others? Or is that an unrealistic, draconian expectation?

OP posts:
slug · 16/09/2016 15:12

I don't think my parents "had failings" when it came to raising a large family, they did the best they could. It's simply an illustration of what commonly happens in large families. There was a thread here on Mumsnet about a year ago when members of large families described their experience. Mine was pretty common.

I get on with some of my siblings, but the fact that I am related to them in no way makes them special. I would argue that my DD has had a far better better experience than I did simply because she can rely on on her parents having the time to talk to her.

LogicallyLost · 16/09/2016 15:14

Ellen You and I have quite obviously have very differing views about being an only child. I have no regrets and a great childhood. My parents made a conscious choice to have just 1.

I don't envy the experiences, relayed to me by friends, of direct consequence of having siblings : parents struggling financially, not given enough individual time, the jealousy between them which degenerates into animosity. And with every single one in adulthood when an elderly relative requires care there is no united sibling support, one alone was left to take the primary support.

I have stated the negative above which makes me thankful for being an only child, but obviously I have heard some positive experiences too just not enough for me to wish otherwise. Certainly nothing that would make me consider that the previous statement i "commented" on be anything other than personally offensive to me.

However this is my personal experience, based wholly on my experiences and anecdotal evidence. Wink

There are articles online that quote research where only children excel (especially academically) because of their environment, and judging from your very articulate posts i would hypothesis that you have benefited from being one.

FluffyWuffyFuckYou · 16/09/2016 15:44

Whereas some find large families concerning because if more of us went down that road our own children could face real problems in the futurE

If you find large families concerning, don't have one.

It really is as simple as that.

EllenDegenerate · 16/09/2016 19:14

I don't think my parents "had failings" when it came to raising a large family, they did the best they could. It's simply an illustration of what commonly happens in large families.

With respect Slug I hardly suppose that you can equate your parents' best efforts with those of other parents purely on the basis of family size. I'm certain that socioeconomics, parental temperament, birth spacing, the availability of extended family members, intellectual and cultural capital of the parents are all arguably more deterministic than sheer number of children.
I have not heard that it is common for parents of multiple children not to be familiar with the educational achievement/proclivity of their children.
In my opinion this is neglectful parenting and not something which is at all common in families of any size of my acquaintance.
As I mentioned previously my DP is the eldest of six, my mother is the seventh of eleven. They have never intimated to me that their parents were anything less than adequately involved in their educational and social attainment.

Having said all of that it should be expected that annecdata will differ.
It is mere conjecture and validates neither of our opinions to the other I would assume although entirely willing to be proven otherwise.Smile

Logically similarly our differing experiences of life as a singleton are hardly about to cause a volte face in the others opinion of the relative benefits of our shared position.

I'm genuinely pleased that you had a more positive experience than I, I would in fact hate to imagine that my experience is universal in light of the burgeoning trend in one child families.

I very much hope that as only children become increasingly common it becomes a markedly less lonely and viscerally isolating experience for them. It is my hope that as their numbers increase they will find solace in each other when the inevitable death or infirmity of one or both parents occurs.
I know that when my own father died tragically and suddenly shortly before my twenty seventh birthday and my mother was both physically and psychologically eviscerated that it would have been inordinately beneficial for me to have had, if not a sibling then a contemporary whose own family circumstances were not so far aligned from my own.
In short somebody with a modicum of understanding of what the experience must have been like for me.
My friends were wonderfully sympathetic but couldn't understand how I felt being as they all had two healthy parents and at least one sibling.

That was wonderfully self indulgent I suppose but it serves to elucidate from where I draw my opinions and conclusions regarding the relative life long disadvantages of being an only child.

And yes as I have mentioned I did have a comparatively privileged childhood and have performed well academically.
I would personally trade my IQ for a sibling in the proverbial heartbeat.

To paraphrase an old cliche, academia/intellect won't make you happy and it isn't a valid reason to have an only child, in my opinion of course.

There are citations all around the internet that only children suffer poorer mental health than their counterparts later in life.
It wouldn't surprise me if that were true purely due to the inevitable circumstances which will undoubtedly prevail as the child reaches an age at which the parents become ever more dependent.
Is it fair to cause a child to be outnumbered by their elderly parents with all the ensuing melee, when frequently it comes at a point in life when they have adolescent/small children, are at the peak of their careers and in all likelihood are attempting to earn enough money to guarantee themselves a decent retirement/provide an inheritance for their children?

I don't consider this to be fair and of course circumstances will prevail where those with siblings will find themselves in exactly the same situation, but at least they always had a chance that it would turn out differently; only children are consigned to the inevitability of their parents later years and death resting squarely on their shoulders.
That's if they are fortunate enough for their parents to reach their dotage in the first instance.

Admittedly I have rambled on more than is surely strictly necessary;
It is just so very seldomly that I ever have the opportunity to voice this opinion, let alone provide my (wholly subjective) rationale for it.

The fact very much remains that it is exactly that; wholly subjective.
As are the opinions railing against the validity of the larger family.
Nobody has the answers, none of us are the oracle, we're all just going about our business trying to fuck our children up slightly less than our parents managed to fuck us up.

Perhaps in thirty years or so we'll be able to tell whether or not we made a less monumental cock up than our predecessors, perhaps my children will be on mumsnet bemoaning that they shared a bedroom or were driven around in an MPV or only had a foreign holiday every other year.

Perhaps those of you with only children will have ungrateful brats like myself eschewing their private education and parentally funded university education because they hankered after a sibling.

Who knows?
Does it really matter?
Is it worth making each other feel shit over?

I hope not.

KERALA1 · 17/09/2016 00:11

All the long words in the world won't bring me round from my view that having a larger family, in today's over populated world, is at all justifiable.

squoosh · 17/09/2016 00:16

Someone is awfully fond of a bit of purple prose.

mathanxiety · 17/09/2016 00:22

The NHS is unable to function thanks to governments that have starved it of funds for quite a while.

They have run it into the ground so that they will at some point be able to sell off all its 'plant' to private healthcare consortiums, and those responsible for destroying it will end up with directorships on health insurance company boards.

Nothing to do with being overrun with customers.

LogicallyLost · 17/09/2016 01:08

Ellen it was an interesting read Smile

I am aware of the possible poorer mental health and with things like "markedly less lonely and viscerally isolating experience" you are representing your own argument. I really wish all the best for you as it makes me a little sad that the experience has had this impact on you. I hope this doesn't come across as sarcastic because that definitely isn't my intent.

For the record i also lost my father when i was 19 but my mother is thankfully extremely healthy (she's going to outlive me i swear).

Anyway, too much of a tangent. I have already admitted that my previous argument that the increasing population is due to birthrate was incorrect. It does look to be the increasing age of the population, so limiting family size will make little to no difference.... Going to go and watch Logans Run Grin

FluffyWuffyFuckYou · 18/09/2016 10:14

All the long words in the world won't bring me round from my view that having a larger family, in today's over populated world, is at all justifiable

We don't have to justify our existence to you, with either short or long words. Especially since you don't have the first clue what you are talking about.

IceBeing · 18/09/2016 14:52

math that much we can certainly agree on, NHS biggest problem is funding cuts.

northernshepherdess · 18/09/2016 22:18

It's already been agreed by tptb in this situation that the current birth rate will not provide for our generation.

But.. It sounds like a statement of jealousy that someone who believes they are infertile should come along stating how others should not have more than a certain number of children.
(Even though I sympathise with your situation, having had many miscarriages and having a degree of infertility)

New posts on this thread. Refresh page