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

The British aren't super fussed about kids exam results compared to people further East. It is all very laidback 'whatever makes you happy, just as long as you can support yourself' - be it a trolley pusher or doctor. If life isn't working out, there's minimal welfare to fall back on. So earlier generations plodded along this far....until recently! Now it's food banks, homeless and people on edges of society seeping more into national consciousness. Globalization forcing pushback via Brexit vote.

Now we have to worry about tuition fees, deterioriating quality of secondary education. British universities trying not to buckle under new 'managerialism'. I worry a lot about housing shortgage too unless there's dramatic change to 1948 Land act, it seems only people with large inheritances or cushy jobs that can get on housing ladder these days. My eldest seems to be too laidback to know anything about having to work hard and competitions per jobs are larger than ever.

Looking at USA - it's reached end of civilization cycle for everyone apart from elite. UK seems to be catching up.

(all not directed at OP, who's probably all wtf by now))))

Webuilt you keep making bizarre reductio ad absurdum arguments.

Of course culling people is different from culling animals. Of course birth control is different from murdering the elderly.

It seems strange that you are so willing to catastrophise everything except environmental collapse.

If anything is going to lead to "the hunger games" it is the scarcity of resources caused by climate change. Not a few people mentioning online that having five kids might be a little excessive given the current environmental crisis.

It isn't necessary a murdering of the elderly. I would never agree with culling the elderly or murder.
I do agree euthanasia should be legalised as it gives people the choice on their end of life plan, if the elderly choose to do, it is available.

We ARE reproducing at roughly one child per adult in the west though. It’s in Asia and Africa that family sizes are still very high

I'm not sure It's Asia.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46118103
Tawain, South Korea, Thailand and Japan are alll in 10 lowest birth rate countries

Even China which has already stopped it's one child policy now it's fertlity rates are low now 1.5 in 2017. There's suggestion of them starting to think about promoting three child families.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-45124502

The top 10 countries for birth rates were: Niger 7.1, Chad 6.7, Somalia 6.1, Mali 6, Afghanistan 6, South Sudan 5.9, Burkina Faso 5.4, Burundi 5.3, Uganda 5.2 and Angola 5.1

Prof Christopher Murray, the director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, told the BBC: "We've reached this watershed where half of countries have fertility rates below the replacement level, so if nothing happens the populations will decline in those countries.

Webuilt you keep making bizarre reductio ad absurdum arguments.

I was just originally agreeing with the PP who said they thought that euthanasia would be made legal at some stage. I'm not saying that controlling family size and responsible consumption aren't important.

If we're told that we're on a precipice, I can see the thinking going that we might not actually have another 30 years to wait before drastically reducing population.

I am not in favour of euthanasia, as it's a slippery slope, and I do not believe at all that we should be 'culling' or otherwise trying to encourage the elderly or seriously ill people to choose euthanasia (you were the one calling it murder and going from an assumption of its being compulsory and/or not the ultimate decision for the person involved)

I think we'd probably better agree to disagree - I'm going to leave that strand of discussion there.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=2LyzBoHo5EI

bikeKiteFlying thanks I’ll have a look at those.
I think this explains the reality quite well. (And incidentally covers the kill the oldies idea in passing too).

The impact of a child born in the West is many, many times that of a child born in somewhere like Bangladesh (saw a study, can't remember what it was called now). The Western child will likely need its own car, will fly long-haul, will eat land-expensive cattle (compared with the same acreage used to grow beans/pulses) and be a massive consumer of goods in comparison. So people in poor countries having large families does not compare with Western large families in terms of impact. Yet.

NotVeryChattySchoolMum Yes, it’s all those born again Christians and their McMansions who are to blame 😂

I don’t think that’s correct @Miranda I think China is number one and certainly India and the US surely?

Just don't be ridiculous.

www.independent.co.uk/environment/children-carbon-footprint-climate-change-damage-having-kids-research-a7837961.html

Why do you 'need' 5 kids? Madness.

People are selfish it really frustrates me. Having another child is selfish.

The current human population is far too numerous and our nature is too selfish. We will not respond to the approaching depletion of hydrocarbons (a one-off 'gift' of easy energy and very useful chemicals / materials) in anything like an orderly manner.

In every age and in every state in which man has existed, or does now exist, the increase of population is necessarily limited by the means of subsistence. Population invariably increases when the means of subsistence increases and the superior power of population is repressed, and the actual population kept equal to the means of subsistence, by misery and vice.

Thomas Malthus said this in 1798, when our population was less than 1 billion.

Still applies. The 'means of subsistence' is due to plummet.

An interesting poll on another forum -

I think people should start dying instead of trying to cure every illness going, that is a large problem. We quickly like to target procreation as an issue forgetting the fact everyone is living far longer. We cure or avoid everything and wonder why the population levels rise.

Anyway, that debate aside. You don’t want another child so don’t have one, solved.

The top 10 countries for birth rates were: Niger 7.1, Chad 6.7, Somalia 6.1, Mali 6, Afghanistan 6, South Sudan 5.9, Burkina Faso 5.4, Burundi 5.3, Uganda 5.2 and Angola 5.1

A lot of these countries also have a high mortality rate before the age of 60, Lots of kids lost in war, and very simple type of living that doesn’t require too much consumerism and exhausting the environment.

So makes sense for them to multiply as originally our biology were designed to do.

Bringing life into this earth is one of the most amazing, blessed things you can do and as a women you were made to do just that.

Oh for Christ's sake. I'm surprised you didn't preface this twaddle with "As a mother..."

Yes there are practical issues but I have the firm believe that the more children there are, the closer they will all become.

Bollocks. On what are you basing this "believe"?

I also do not think that children should have their own rooms, they are children and how are they supposed to bond to grow up to love each other if they have their own room.

Eh?

I understand boy or girls needing their own room by a certain age (16) and that boys and girls of that age cannot share but this should not be your major concern with getting pregnant again.

16?? By which time the girl has started her periods and the boy is wanking five times daily.

Mumsnet at its finest...

We quickly like to target procreation as an issue forgetting the fact everyone is living far longer.

Um yes, because it's obvious to sane people that it's better to stop making new humans than to let existing ones die horribly so certain people can keep pushing out babies

It's also a demographic fallacy that people living longer does much for the long term population size. Reducing mortality at ages below reproductive age has an effect but 65 year olds living to 80 instead of 70 doesn't affect the intrinsic growth rate at all. Fertility is absolutely key unless you're suggesting letting babies die

5 kids sounds amazing and chaotic at the same time

I would say go for it!

I don't see how far the point of comparing Western child CO2 consumption vs Bangladeshi child can get?

Which Bangladeshi child - child of educated middle class Bangladeshi family living in high rise Dhaka flat? Burgeoing middle class exists there too. Or more familiar poignant example - poor factory-working child?

There's going to be a big consumption difference between them.

Anyhow what's wrong with investing in a child, to make sure a child is comfortable and well-fed, gets invested in so it's not about survival but making good impact on the world? It is already well documented that fertility amongst the educated with good healthcare does drop whenever there's a squeeze in resources/more competition.

Heck, even in Bangladesh poor women have only 2-3 children on average too, half of what their mothers did generation ago. That's without draconian China-style population control policies involved. So much for shaming OP who's already in a minority for not being entirely horrified at thought of having 5th child...for bringing imminent eco apocalypse via overpopulation.

Over-consumption - is it resolvable by 'just don't have a child!' topic for another thread I suppose.

I wouldn’t. You don’t know that the fifth child is going to be completely healthy. What if they have additional needs? You say you’re able to give your current children enough attention, throw in a child with additional needs and this is unlikely to be the case. Your relationship may suffer. Your relationship with your current children may suffer.

My parents had my brother when I was 10 and he has cerebral palsy and whole host of other conditions. The impact on my parent’s marriage and the rest of my childhood was huge and that was when there was only one other child to consider. Not all children with additional needs are the same and my brother is an extreme case. But you do need to consider all the possibilities.

I would also consider whether you would really be able to give all of your children the time and attention they need if you have another. The teenage years are often when they need you the most. If you’re managing now, great. I wouldn’t rock the boat.

If I’m being totally honest, those factors would weigh much more heavily on my decision than any environmental concerns.

I hope legalised euthanasia does happen and in the not too distant future. My dad is in his 90's and really doesn't want to still be alive. I don't want to get old ne be incapable of doing most things and just literally be waiting and hoping to die

You don’t know that the fifth child is going to be completely healthy. What if they have additional needs? You say you’re able to give your current children enough attention, throw in a child with additional needs and this is unlikely to be the case. Your relationship may suffer. Your relationship with your current children may suffer.
This is the case for ANY child you bring into the world.

And while I do understand you are speaking from your own experience. Disability is not the blight on life you portray for everyone.

I’d say the gap between new baby and your current youngest would be too big now. I had a five year gap between two of mine and it didn’t work well - and that’s assuming you get pregnant straight away, the gap could be six or more by time baby was born.

It won’t be long either before you start getting the fun of life with all older children. Becomes much easier then!

Forgot to add onto my post when I wrote it
My mum had 6 of us there was a 16 year age gap between me and my first sister, she then had another girl born on my 20th birthday we shared our 21st and 1st birthday together. I am closest to my youngest sister out of all of us, however we all get on well and look after each other take each other out etc, my Mum then had another son born two weeks before my first daughter. It's nice my daughter and my brother weird saying that! Are best friends.