Large Families

[Czerny88]

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?

Wow, I haven't RTFT as I'm. So angry I had to reply. I have 4 children because I wanted them! DH wanted 2 but knew how much I wanted 4 so that is what we had. DH works full time, I don't work through choice and all 4 kids are in school. They each have there own bedrooms, play musical instruments, play sports etc, have trust funds, uni funds etc and we enjoy a great lifestyle. Certainly wouldn't of had 4 kids if we couldn't afford them, I cannot believe someone would think that! We are currently sat in Budapest on Holiday, we spend 2 weeks in August on Zante, weekend days out, concert trips & theatre trip yearly (next up chilli peppers for us parents and 2 eldest kids in Oct & Lion King in the West for us all in Nov, then panto In Dec, then trip to Berlin in New year). I'm about to book next year's trips and so far May half term in Tenerife, August 3wks in Zante as DH can have longer holiday next year, various festivals and weekends to Cornwall. To say I've had my kids when I cat afford them I'd utterly offensive and completely wrong! Awful attitude to have, no one is in a position to judge another

Oh, and because I had fraternal twins, my dd's stand a higher chance of having multiples due to family history. I ovulated 2 eggs. So my dd's are also highly likely to. Identical twins make no difference to hereditary twins and neither does the male line.

Won't someone please think of the children?! Almost every post disagreeing has focused on how no one should judge what "I" wanted. I did also refer in my OP to the issue of having the time, energy and money to care for each child in a large family. Shouldn't people planning a large family consider this in advance?

Sarcasm An individual's effect on the population is roughly the same as an individual's effect on a situation where voting is involved. Except everyone who is eligible is limited to only one vote.

I am not purporting to be perfect myself, but it's almost naïve not to think about these issues, surely?

Saggy nails the root cause. We are animals with a very strong drive to procreate. Through intelligence and opposable thumbs we have reduced our own mortality rate massively but our instinct (on average- not for everyone) has not kept pace with this development, and as a result we're about the only species on earth whose population has kept increasing (except some domestic species whose population levels are controlled by humans not nature).

I find your post OP amusing you are right that we are over populated not by people having large families necessarily. The biggest population we have in the UK is actually the elderly due to them living longer. They are the biggest group that takes a large chuck of resources due to deteriorating health requiring care. We actually need more younger people.

I do think large families are considerably a lot less than they once were due to available contraception which was considerably new on the NHS in the 1960's we have more contraception available on a lot since then. We have also welcomed many different cultures who maybe likely to have larger families.

It is an individuals human right to have as many children as they can, obviously whether or not that right is not really up to people judge it doesn't mean you are given the right to judge them on their choices and ability to care for them because of your own situation. I'm sorry to hear of your problems but it doesn't give you the right to be so judgemental

^
Wow, I haven't RTFT as I'm. So angry I had to reply. I have 4 children because I wanted them! DH wanted 2 but knew how much I wanted 4 so that is what we had. DH works full time, I don't work through choice and all 4 kids are in school. They each have there own bedrooms, play musical instruments, play sports etc, have trust funds, uni funds etc and we enjoy a great lifestyle. Certainly wouldn't of had 4 kids if we couldn't afford them, I cannot believe someone would think that! We are currently sat in Budapest on Holiday, we spend 2 weeks in August on Zante, weekend days out, concert trips & theatre trip yearly (next up chilli peppers for us parents and 2 eldest kids in Oct & Lion King in the West for us all in Nov, then panto In Dec, then trip to Berlin in New year). I'm about to book next year's trips and so far May half term in Tenerife, August 3wks in Zante as DH can have longer holiday next year, various festivals and weekends to Cornwall. To say I've had my kids when I cat afford them I'd utterly offensive and completely wrong! Awful attitude to have, no one is in a position to judge another^

Um. Well done ?

So yeah there is lots going on behind the scenes that drive us what is a selfish decision - some choose to have zero, some choose to have 6+ but we are all inherently selfish.

I think this is a very fair point. I also think it is an interesting question to ask.

I grew up in Ireland in the 1970s and most of my friends came from big families. 4 was small enough, ordinary family, 6 plus normal, 8 or 10 not unknown at all. My best friend is one of 10. This wasn't really a choice - contraception was almost non existent. My mother, a daily mass-goer, used to talk about her friends having baby after baby and how ridiculous the ban on contraception was. At least now it is more likely that people having big families really want to have them.

I often find that women who have chosen to have very large families always trot out the line that the kids love it, one big happy family, runs like clockwork, they all get on great and love sharing bedrooms blah blah....

But then again, they would say that, wouldn't they? Because the alternative is to say 'Yeah, my decisions have been a bit shit for my kids really, it's overcrowded and chaotic and I don't have much time for them 1-1. They hate it actually, but it's too late now to change it now....'

I remember a thread a while back asking children of large families (5 or more) whether they'd gone on to have large families themselves and the vast majority had said no, because they'd hated it and would not inflict that on their own children.

Any children at all is done for selfish reasons. The OP who says she is involuntary childless would have had children..which is selfish.

Wow. Well thanks, MyVaginals. I always wondered whether I would have done, having known that I couldn't since before I was old enough to consider it. You obviously know me better than I know myself.

I don't have children and I'm an only child myself but do any parents find that having several children means that you are constantly worrying about what feels like loads of people at once? All trying to get through education, one starting secondary when another is starting primary, 4 or 5 goes at chicken pox and flu, 4 or 5 sets of after-school activities, cooking things they will all eat? Or, do you find the oldest help you support the youngest? Just wondering really.

I'm trying not to be too goady or right-wing

Massive fail then.

We have 4. I do feel a little bad about it from an overpopulation point of view, 4th was a contraception failure . I don't regret having her though. They all have their own bedroom ( not that I think that it is essential by any means )and get plenty of attention . We have very little other/ extended family so I am glad they have each other. We only claim child benefit which most people do so and can hopefully help them all with Uni etc. We both work around each other to pay for them.

Just to reiterate the population argument is a myth. I studied it at university and just about everywhere around the world family sizes are falling. Better infant mortality, female education, availability of contraception all seem to result in smaller families. It was just North Africa where these things are limited that hadn't seen family sizes drop.

I can definitely afford a large family, have enough space, have enough help and love them so much. I'm very keen on having another.

I'm right wing too, though I don't see why you think that is relevant.

Im sure when I was younger I only ever wanted 2 children. Well I had the two, then I realised that in ten years time I would probably regret not having another. So we did, who turned out to be twins.

We live in a large 3 bed house so two to a room and will probably move when the twins are a bit older, im a sahm so plenty time to devote to all 4, we have two or three holidays a year, we never have to scrimp and save. Why shouldnt we have 4?!

Op, seriously why don't you consider adoption? Our friends are also involuntary infertile and have adopted 2 dc who are the apple of their eyes. Plenty of children need adoptive families, consider it?

Wow, I haven't RTFT

You didn't even read the full first post, clearly.

Massive fail then

I think being goady is the default position for any OP on mumsnet, since everybody seems to be just dying to be goaded into unleashing their vitriol.

Tbf Czerny you did give the distinct impression that you would have DC if you could as you described yourself as 'involuntarily childless'

I don't understand the obsession with 1-1 time with DC, mine get some, not loads, and it's nice. But they don't appear to begrudge their siblings presence generally. Maybe they will in the future?

You might thing it's goady math so report, some of us are interested in reading the thread and the different viewpoints not having a go at the Op.

<a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_258607.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_258607.pdf

Its an increasing read

Think

I am one of five and never thought of it as a particularly big family - most people I knew growing up were one of three or four. We all thought people with only one sibling were a bit unusual, and in my entire school year of 200 children there were only two people who were only children.

Now, as a 40 something parent myself, I only have two, most of the kids at my kids school are from families of only two, there are dozens who are only children. And in top of that, about a fifth of the women I went to school with have never had children at all. So it always looks to me as if families are getting smaller, and therefore if every once in a while someone comes along who has five children, it probably doesn't make much difference overrall.

A poster near the start of the thread said that they do not have any respect for people who feel compelled to have large families due to their religion. I look at it differently in that I don't have any respect for the men. The women are unlikely to have much choice in the matter.

The response "I have x because I want it!" is just no kind of argument, is it?

We just simply love being parents!! Our four children all have private health care and have been educated privately so we are so far not a drain on the state!! In fact, we love raising kids so much (and believe we are really rather good at it) that now we have stopped reproducing we have opened up our doors (to help the state) and foster other people's now!! If that makes me selfish I'm happy to wear the badge with pride

I personally find it hard to understand why people want so many children - lots of the posters who have large families have said they can afford them and why shouldn't they have as many children as they want. But without sounding goady or judgemental I would love to really understand what people mean when they say they just love having a large family.

I admit I find being a parent hard (nothing to do with finance) - it's the emotional energy I find hard when bringing up children and I can't understand how people can cope emotionally with two or more children - how do you support their school work, hobbies, friendship issues, even listening to reading - allowing 10 minutes per day per child isn't much but would soon add up with a few children .

We are also strongly predisposed to justify our decisions after the fact - confirmation bias etc. So I feel good about caring so much about the environment when I'm sorting recycling cos it's easy but I close my mind to it when I'm buying meat, because I like meat and am too selfish to become vegetarian. If I think about it all my brain starts the whataboutery "crops get chemical sprays/at least meat isn't as bad as nuclear warfare/but it's organic". When really I just like meat.