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?

I'm one of 3 and DP is one of 5.

My sis and Bro have 5 and 4 children respectively (all same parents, no step kids - not that it makes a difference of course). I often feel embarrassed to tell people how many nieces and nephews I have.

My sister (and her DH) and brother (and his partner) live in council housing and claim the benefits they are entitled too. They all work the mothers albeit parttime but are low income families [think shop-worker / TA / labourer]

I think yes they've had more kids than their means but they try. They are decent, honest, hardworking people who forgo luxuries. I think it's just societal perceptions that make me a bit funny about saying how many kids my siblings have.

My DP has about 50 first cousins!!! His folks have a ridiculous family.

I did once come across someone (he would be in his 60's now) who was one of 20 children.

And if your argument is "the biggest problem we have is our ageing population and we need more young people to support them" - so fast forward 80 or 90 years ...

How about 2nd marriages? I already had 4 but dh had none, did he not have a right to procreate too?

Cz, first I am very sorry you have not been able to have children when you do want them. Have you consideed IVF either with your egg, a relative's egg or an egg donor using a surrogate perhaps in India? Have you considered adopting?

As for why do people like I am who earn a lot have a lot of chidlren we support, it's for lots of different reasons depending on the person. I have planned a large family since I was mid teens and started fairly young. I don't agree it is immoral. I certainly accept the planet will be better off when humans are no longer on it (we are onl on it for a link of an eye anyway and will be gone soon enough in historical terms) but does it matter if we are on it for 6 seconds rather than 7?

The effects in the UK of my breeding lots of well educated higher rate taying very good citizens is probably pretty positive by all measures and I suspect those of usd with a lot of children do get better at bringing them up and probably get the experience of being a parent more than a parent of one so we tend to be the better parents too. From a UK point of view we need more higher tax payers to keep all the OAPs on 30 years of state pension.

WHY - i think for me it was about creating something Ive never had, I have no family, neither does Ex Dh so now we have one which is nice.

Just an interesting talk on supposed overpopulation m.youtube.com/watch?v=FACK2knC08E

(I am involuntarily childless) so please don't be too harsh, but it's something I struggle with ideologically as well as emotionally.

So basically you asks for us to be nice to you as you couldn't have kids. But now you're saying you're not sure you wanted any?

This thread is goady as fuck.

Right I have had 11 three of them homegrown and we have gone on to adopt 8 all with special needs sadly 3 died but when we go out I do feel some people are judging us and I refuse to enlighten them.
My cousin has adopted 10, theyare brilliant children who have brilliant parents.
All our children are clean, well dressed and very well behaved.

I have loved having a large family as has my cousin!

Thanks everyone. It was really very interesting to read everybody's responses and, on balance, I didn't feel too got-at.

As several people have said, being childless (or undergoing fertility treatment) does make you look at these things differently and forces you to consider deeply the implications of, e.g., medical intervention / adoption. People make judgments for all sorts of reasons, including to rationalise their own position, whatever that may be.

And FWIW I wouldn't necessarily have had children as some have assumed, but it would certainly have been nice to have had the option.

It's not overpopulation, it's overconsumption. Nobody in the West is helping by having lots of children.

I think there should be a lifelong benefits pool. You want to have 10 kids, fine, but you get a correspondingly small pension. Let people truly pay their way.

We have 4. We've had 5.

Eldest dd died shortly after birth. I could go on and have a million children and it would never be enough to complete the family because its never going to be complete. I always feel this massive, massive urge to have another baby, then another baby, then another baby and it took having 4 children for me to get to a point where I could sort of tame that urge a little.

Had dd1 lived she would have been severely disabled and probably more of a financial drain on society than all 4 of my subsequent children put together.

People assume those with large families don't have enough time to give each child enough attention - what about parents who both work long hours and are not physically present for more than a couple of hours a day, should they not have children because they don't spend "enough" time with them? There are plenty of parents who don't spend enough quality time with their children, it has nothing to do with how many they have, so it makes no sense to assume those with larger families don't give them enough attention.

The expression "breed like rabbits" is offensive and the assumption that people have "large" families because they love babies is also pretty daft, you're committing to another human being for life!

Op I think your post comes across as very emotional and this is what people react to.

I have 4. I have 4 as that was a number dh and I felt was a good number. He was one of 4 and loved it I was one of 3 and didn't like it that much (I was the middle child felt very left out) So we agreed we wanted a even number of 4 as we did not feel 2 was quite where we wanted to go we felt it was a small family.

I would have liked a 5th I adore being a mother and I love my family. DH was not keen hence we stuck with 4.

Does this explain to you why we chose to do this?

I have lots of friends with 1 or 2 children (and even a couple with no children) who has 2-5 cars.. Dh and I have only recently " graduated " to a 2 car family (dd1 is 18 and taking driving lessons this was what made us go for a 2nd) I feel that has a huge environmental effect comparative to my 4 children when families have that many cars and does alot of journeys with 1-2 people in the cars.

We used cloth nappies as I was concerned about the environment. I have friends with 2 children who used disposables.

We walk and cycle a lot. The only state benefit we ever had was child benefit until that became repayable over a certain amount of earnings.

I have concerns about the environment they are just different to your concerns. That is what this argument comes down to.

Personally I have never got who gets to decide that 3 is the " right" number why not 4? why not 5? Who decides that 4 is a lot? I know mine have had a lot of one on one attention. However they have not had as much as my niece who is a only child. Mine however can cope with not always being the center of mine or dh's attention something niece is not good atl. YES I generalize there however I think there is often a fair bit of truth in that.

Friend with 2 children has benefits and lives on credit a lot of the time. i know her children doesn't get a lot of 1 on 1 time. They have commented at times when they have been with mine and we have done stuff that " mum wouldn't do this" their dad is not a " involved dad" I mention this because it is not as clean cut as saying " you cant give those children 1 on 1 attention" Yes you can it depends on how much 1 on 1 you feel each child need. I do not think they needs as much as niece got for example. My sister clearly doesn't agree with me. Again it is about different opinions and priories.

In ending I have to say that YABU to claim people need to be more responsible about how many children they have. I was and have been very responsible about how many children I have. I just happen to have a different priority over what I see as environmentally important to what you do.

I never really understand the argument about the planet being better off without humans on it. I don't really see the point in 'saving the planet' to make it this place where no one lives.

I don't agree with using and abusing it willy nilly either, I think we should try to be responsible. But saving the planet by phasing out human life makes no sense to me.

Ragwort it really isn't hard. I found having 1 by far the hardest adjustment. Once your doing it for 1 it's not a huge step to do it for 2 and so on. With 1 I never got away with 1 bedtime story so it makes little difference now if I read to them individually or all together, we tend to do it all together and the big ones like to read to the little ones afterwards. Hearing reading is staggered due to age, by year 2 the eldest are both competent readers and don't require daily sitting down and listening to as they did in the first couple of years.
Extra curricular activities I'd decided with my first they'd do 1 music (at school and the instrument I can play best so help them with) the practice for that takes some time but again by the time the younger 2 are learning the older 2 won't need as much input, and 1 physical activity. Even with 4 sorting 1 each (so 4x a week, although luckily eldest 2 go together so currently only once) is perfectly doable.

MyVaginals I don't think it was excessively goady, although it certainly appears to have raised your hackles. Plenty of posters, including those who have undergone fertility treatment, and even those who have had a baby who has died, have felt able to give a measured, elucidating response, even if they didn't entirely agree with what I wrote.

I stated my personal situation as I thought it was relevant; it is partly why I am invested in the issue (although not the only reason) and it is not disingenuous to say that I would have liked to be able to have children, but do not know whether, in the event, I would have done so, or how many I would have had (I suspect no more than two, but of course that is easy to say) as I genuinely don't know.

I am not coming from a position of not understanding the desire to have a child - which is also relevant - and did not want to be called a child-hating witch by the, ahem, more vitriolic posters.

. 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.

Just because you don't have the capacity to care for more than a couple of children, doesn't mean others can't.

having passed the toddler stage, I have also grasped the concept of not always being able to have everything you want, especially if it has an adverse effect on others

A small percentage of the population having 4 dcs instead of 1 or 2 isn't 'having everything you want' and doesn't have an adverse affect of others when the number of births per woman is under 2.1. It's currently 1.9 in the UK.
I'm from China, where it's 1.5 and not having dcs is having an adverse affect on others. In fact its a fucking disaster. Japan has an even lower birthrate, but for different reasons, and the elderly are moving to the Philippines for nursing care.

Enkop That is very interesting, as I thought it was fairly dispassionate! I knew it was going to be contentious, but it was a genuine question and not simply a rant.

So what should we do with these large Muslim families arriving here....having 6/7/8 children?

I'd say, have as many as you want, as long as you don't expect someone else to pick up the tab and you're in a strong long-term relationship.

Refugee families? Who then send home for extra members to join them..... How many should we limit them to op?

I sometimes think that people who don't work in healthcare don't have a clue about the public health disaster that is avalanching towards us with a top heavy population. Not that they should, but the patronising, simplistic, smugness grates sometimes.