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?

Hi czerny

I'm sorry to hear that infertility has struck, it is a grief for sure. I have struggled to conceive my 2 dd's. I lost my ds at 20 weeks and would have a third Dc if I could (but unlikely). However, having said that and trying to give my dd's time and attention, I'm not sure I could stretch myself further to meet their needs. Financially it would be o.k, enough space, no problem but it would be more about me then them if I had another. I understand why people have more than one or two, however, I have to agree, I think there is an element of selfishness involved, especially when money and time is lacking to care for these children. There is no fairness to this at all - some people who can't afford financially in time and money have lots of dc's and others who have everything to provide for dc's may not be able to have any.

sooooo.. you don't want people to roast you because of your lifestyle, but your whole thread is about roasting other people ? :-S
I have five children, we'll probably round it off to six. Our children make us happy and we are able to provide a good life for them. If you do not have one child then you can't really understand or imagine why people would have lots of children, because you have no idea.
I do however, think that if you aren't paying for themselves then you shouldn't be able to keep pumping them out!
We don't receive any money from the government, including child benefit due to my OH's high income. I don't work so my children aren't farmed out to nurseries etc and always have me for drop off's and pick up's and any school events.
I do feel for you, I don't really get your post (though when I see some of the stressed looking sweary chain smoking mums screaming down the street at their brood I do wonder why they keep having more)! I can't imagine how it would feel to not be able to have children, even having five i would be devastated to be told for some reason that I couldn't have more, that the option was taken out of my hands.
I guess I've had lots because I was one of four and we speak with each other as adults everyday, I had a wonderful childhood and I probably wanted to recreate it. I had lots of different jobs but none of it was as fulfilling (to me) than being at home and watching my children grow and change and love each other.
However, it's not for everyone, i have family members and friends who loathe being mothers!

Yanbu.

for them yourself *

I have 6. I have my own reasons for having them, I care for them well and only last week the head teacher at school said that I have a wonderful family. I am very proud of them.

I am also very aware that one of them is currently paying tax, another will be as soon as she qualifies and will very likely end up a higher rate tax payer if she continues to follow that career. If the others all do the same then there will be 6 more people paying into a system that more and more people will take out of as there is and will continue to be, an explosion in the amount of older retired people.

The fact is, that whatever you feel about the population, we are heading for a situation where there will not be enough young people to take all the jobs that need doing. Not enough nurses, carers, teachers, etc....

When pensions were introduced in the early 1900s there were 22 people of working age in Britain for every retired person. In 2024 there will be less than three.
(Source: Office of National Statistics)

taken from news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/if/3493352.stm which is a very interesting read.

If we are over populated, and I am not sure that we are, its because we are dying later and not because people are having more babies, in fact the birth rate has been steadily dropping.

We planned 3. I am from a very happy family of 3 and wanted the same partly because of my own experience and also because I know SO many families with 2 children where attention is focused more on one child than the other. Never happened with us as the other 2 would join forces to point out any hint of preferential treatment. We remain very close as adults despite being geographically far away and I really wanted similar for my children.

We were very lucky to have our 3 and family was complete. Last year I found out I was pregnant with DC4 (contraceptive failure - it happens quite often, you know) and my life turned upside down. I had the most anxious pregnancy ever - convinced I couldn't cope, worrying about us being too old, and the impact upon the other DC. I looked into a termination but couldn't bring myself to do so even though it might have been a 'sensible' decision - although now that I have walked in those shoes i would never judge anyone who did (and get unbelievable angry at anyone who did). The positive of the pregnancy was how excited my other DC were.

Anyway, DC4 turns 1 soon. He has been an absolute blessing upon our family although it's not exactly been an easy year but my children seem happy enough. Maybe they won't be in due course but so far so good. And, FWIW, while I appreciate we use state funded services, we don't take any cash in any other way and are entirely self funded. And hopefully bringing up 4 little taxpayers..

So in answer, more than 2 because we felt it would be better for the children. More than 3 because you can't control everything in life - I always love that saying 'God laughs when man makes plans'z

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.

So people you really, really offended are out of order here?

Nice.

September I'm not sure that infertility can really be described as a "lifestyle". But you're quite right that I don't understand why people would want lots of children - that's a big part of why I asked the question! And from what you wrote later in your post it sounds like you understand exactly what I'm getting at.

I don't think I want to be quite so judgemental of others, but on a personal level some of the reasons you mention were certainly part of our rationale at stopping at three. We are lucky and could most likely have afforded one or two more in terms of bald finances and housing and support. But despite absolutely loving having kids, we stopped at three so that we could cope very comfortably, give them everything we would wish to, have some slack in case of unexpected events. And most importantly, I didn't feel I had enough time to adequately parent more than three. It was, however, a very deliberate decision to have three as I hated being an only myself and my husband loved being one of three. I take your point about global over-crowding and agree we were a little selfish to go for three but hope very much it will be mitigated a little by raising decent, contributing members of society-which isn't no excuse ideologically!

Fundamentally, nobody should disagree with you OP, the planet is overcrowded and that is a fact but this is a subject that some cannot think rationally about.

I personally think two or three children is enough. I don't think you'll get agreement on the points you make though because inherently, we are selfish. We want children purely because we want them (forced childbirth excepted, of course). We have them because we want them, without thought or regard for anything or anybody else.

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.

We should just cull everyone at 70 then!

Op I agree.
I've have had 6 pregnancies to have 2 living children. I consider myself extremely lucky to have my two.
I can't fathom 11. I just don't understand the hormonal urge to have baby after baby after baby.
I'm one of 6, parents did their best but I hated it and it's only now as an adult that I've come to enjoy my siblings. There was no one on one time, no family trips, no help with homework because there was always a new baby or dinner or cleaning. I saw my mums life and I was/am determined it would not be mine. It was never going to be my sole purpose to be on this planet to pro create.

I agree op but you're never going to convince people that they shouldn't have had their children.

find myself thinking how can you know that when posters say l can afford 3, 4 dc etc

How can I know that? Well because I know how much money we have coming in. If for whatever reason something changed and we no longer had enough money we would have to cut back wouldn't we and that would be our problem not yours.

I honestly can't see how it bothers anyone else what sort of family others have.

Who set the magic number at 3 then?

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 had my DC very close together therefore I when one left primary the other two followed the year after and the youngest the year after that. Yes they all got various illnesses from each other but it was part and parcel of having kids really. They ate what I put on the table but I tended to do various separate bowls of things so there was always something they liked. I never expected or asked my eldest to help with the younger siblings. It's not something I agree with tbh and don't find that fair. DH and I managed the after school activities between us and with the help of MIL. The only time I really worried was when all 4 buggered off to Thailand/Cambodia backpacking one summer I never slept for 6 weeks

See, what I love about MN is that I get to hear/read/understand (or not) other people's lives and perspectives. I truly believe I am a more tolerant rounded person from reading many threads about what people think and do.

I have 1. I am very very very happy to have 1. Sometimes i get a pang when my friends /family announce a pregnancy, but or me and DH 1 is perfect, and I thank my lucky stars every day.

I have no problem with however many children people have - Provided they are able to support them.

We should just cull everyone at 70 then!

Should we leave them to rot with no caregivers, no taxpayers, no working population to keep things going? No-one to wipe their arses, no-one to feed them, no-one to hold their hand, no-one to hand them their last sip of water. No-one to pay for it all. FFS

I'm not the one whining about population control. Maybe we should have the slaughter of the firstborn again. Or maybe we should all stop being disingenuous dickheads.

The reason why totalitarian politics has a bad name is precisely because it misses the nuances that define humans.

The planet's resources are stretched - but why are you singling out the 4 child family who camp on holidays and cook fresh local food versus the 1 child family who fly aboard every summer and eat luxurious imported food? And this is not an artificial example - because fewer kids does often mean more money to spend on planet-destroying consumer fripperies.

At below-replacement birth rate, the ratio of working age population to pension-needing elderly people will increasingly become an upside down pyramid. Obviously 'paying into your pension' isn't actually a savings account - you rely on the productivity of the generation that comes after you.

But most of all - the question is a toxic one - because it does feed into a culture of judgemetalism towards other families. Our children are a common resource. We do not live in a culture where children are legally or even morally expected to particularly provide for their parents when they are grown. They are expected to grow up and work to pay tax and generally contribute to society as a whole.

Or we could consider the possibility that someone doesn't actually think the population should be culled at age 70...

I have 7 children, 2 adopted.
I never claimed any benefits, not even child benefit most of the time as was working in overseas aid.
They got plenty of attention, good education and now as adults are a happy supportive family.
Three work in the caring professions.
I feel that I have contributed by producing children who can give something to the world.
Yes I did think about overpopulation and decided that having children who would be brought up to be valuable members of society was positive not negative.

So people you really, really offended are out of order here?

Anybody really, really offended by the OP needs professional help.

I don't think I could cope with more than 1!

Or we could consider the possibility that someone doesn't actually think the population should be culled at age 70

So why make a twatty joke about it? I didn't say there were too many old people, I said that the OP saying that I display toddler like selfishness for having 1 more than the magic 3 children is being simplistic in terms of population number rather than population demographics. There is no need for you to wade in in your size nines and imply I'm proposing a cull. An inpatient died alone in my waiting area last week because the ward couldn't spare a carer to sit with her. It's fucking shit.