To have a 5th child

[Flowerflow]

I have 4 children ages 13, 9, 8 and 4 (5 in a few days), recently DP and I have been discussing have another child, he completely up for it but I'm still a little unsure. I have a few concerns like we currently live in a 4 bedroom house, oldest two share and youngest two have their own bedrooms. 8 year old is the only boy and if were to have another boy they would probably share but there would be a big age gap and DS wouldn't be impressed. That or we move to a bigger house which we might not be able to afford where we currently but would be able to if we move slightly further away. Another concern would be there'll be 5/6 between them and our current youngest so new baby might feel left out or the odd one out although not all our children are very close in age. I'm also unsure about going through pregnancy again, I've never really enjoyed it, baby, toddler stage and so I'll happily go through again but pregnancy I'm willing to go through not exactly happily though. On the other hand I'd love to have a fifth child and these concerns and problems can be worked through

Maybe you could adopt or foster a child that already exists OP? And get your DC a puppy if they want something small and cute to play with for a while rather than another person because they'd like one. My DC would like to drink coke and eat crisps all day, doesn't mean its a good idea!

CrushedVelvet

I suspect as much also.

The one child policy in China was a disaster. Unless abandoned female babies, a male heavy generation and illegal second children brought up in secrecy sounds appealing to you?

Oh yes “a puppy” is EXACTLY like a younger sibling

No!

Identify you seen to have an agenda to paint larger families as some oppressed minority- hardly.

IdentifyasTired

This is a serious subject

I'm being serious. There is nothing wrong with the phrase 'excessively procreate'. It's not offensive at all, I'm not sure how you think it could be.

There have been far worse things said on this thread.

“Excessively procreate” is a bit like sub fertile people calling those who have children “breeders”. Unnecessary.

Um, it's not. At all.

But that shit needs calling out. I used Taco's phrase as more throwaway example of the wider discourse.

To excessively procreate means to have more children than necessary. That in no way implies anything about forced sterilisation.

I haven't said larger families are an oppressed minority now although I suspect in the near future they may be so.

I have a larger family. I have 4 children. I object to being spoken of in derogatory terms. As has happened. On this thread.

Okay, so here is a link to a the most recent, balanced analysis of the human population issue.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4246304/

It is a very interesting read. In short though, if reducing global fertility rates was going to be the way to resolve the impending climate crisis, we needed to have been actively encouraging smaller families from the end of world war 2. Of course, we did the opposite, because...capitalism. Even when they factor in a disaster that leads to 2 billion additional deaths, we still end up fucked. (Throwung my Logan's Run idea right out the window. Shame). The immediate solution required then, is a technological one, in order to save us from the abyss. Fertility rate reduction is a much longer term goal that will lead to a global population of 2 billion (you read thst right) a few 100 years from now. Apparently.

I have a larger family. I have 4 children. I object to being spoken of in derogatory terms. As has happened. On this thread.

I think your defensiveness because you don't want to think about how much your decisions are polluting the planet is blinding you to what I am actually saying. Saying 'excessively procreate' is in no way rude, it is a shorter way of saying 'having more children than necessary'.

I'm hearing you all saying 'think of the planet' but why is it OK for you to have 2 children and be so judgemental about people who have more. Why is 2 OK? Is it OK because that's what you've got and where you've drawn YOUR line? You can eat vegan and drink plant milk all you like, but I bet you hop on a plane to go on holiday (realistically voiding an entire lifetime of veganism). There's your line again. Trouble is, rather than educating others, you just sound judgy and hypocritical. Think our planet is over-populated? Don't have any children then, rather than insisting you are right and 2 is absolutely fine. It's still 2 too many. Live by example if yiu want to change the world. Yes, we need to pull together to save this planet but stop drawing your own lines of what is acceptable to suit yourself and judging others. Teamwork that does not make.

I think it is taco, it’s intended to other and sneer in the guise of being factual.

"To excessively procreate means to have more children than necessary."

Who dictates the 'necessary' number?

Itwouldtakemuchmorethanthis my puppy suggestion was sarcastic because I found OPs "my DC would like a younger sibling" comment ridiculous.

As I said I quoted you as an aside. It wasn't the focus of the point I was making. And you apparently wrote it in good faith. It didn't come across that way. But clearly I was wrong.

I am not defensive about the damage my choices cause. I am aware of the impact my lifestyle has. And I take responsibility for it and do what I can to mitigate it. As I am sure you also are aware of the damage your lifestyle causes.

Not all things which are more than neccessary are necessarily excessive, so on balance I see where Identifyas is coming from.

I believe the use of hyperbole was intended as an insult.
I have a large family and unlike identifyas I don't much care for the turn of phrase either, however as previously mentioned I am sufficiently aware that there are other reasons at play rather than the environment as to why large families are quite so derided.

Whosaystwoisokbutmoreisnot

Who dictates the 'necessary' number

It's basic maths. 2 children replace a mother and a father.

Duh.

Crackerjackerknacker OP was responding to the suggestion her children might not like it, just as saying she liked babies and toddlers was in response to someone suggesting she should move on happily from having that age group in the house.

2 children is a relevant number because it takes 2 adults to make a child. 2 children they're not 'adding' more in that generation. 3,4,5 etc they are more than replacing themselves.

Guess 2 kids is seen as acceptable as it’s replacement of parents and means the children have a sibling. Anecdotally this is the most common number in my circles by far. That said my sisters mil doesn’t think you are a “proper” family unless you have 3 kids

Surely “necessary” would be reducing the population not maintaining by that logic?

Whosaystwoisokbutmoreisnot

Who dictates the 'necessary' number

It's basic maths. 2 children replace a mother and a father.

Duh.

Mature.

Two children = replacing two parents when the parents die. One is better for the planet. Three is worse.

There is no divine rule saying two children is the right number to have, but it goes without saying that having 5 children has significantly more environmental impact than having two.

Those people bleating on about flying on holiday etc can’t in all seriousness believe that yearly holiday flights is comparable to the environmental burden of adding an entire extra person to the world, so let’s not dignify anyone pretending to believe this abject idiocy with a counter argument.

Whosaystwoisokbutmoreisnot

Well, you did ask.