To be jealous of people with 3 children

[LovingLife0]

I have a 3 and 2 year old and DP and I have recently decided that we won't be having a third child. We have been talking about it for the past year but have made our decision primarily on environmental reasons.

Since making this decision I have become OBSESSED with families with 3+ children. For example I can't stop thinking how Kim Kardashian has 4 children and how many her children will have and all the carbon footprint. I also follow a few 'eco' families on insta who have as many as six children. As you can see I'm irrationally obsessed!! I KNOW everyone is entitled to their own choice and it's none of my business but I guess I'm just jealous!

I suppose I'm looking for advice on how I can move on from our decision to stop at 2 while not being jealous of people who go on to have large families?

If my health was good I'd be rooting hard for foster kids.

Hey OP, I think you are great for planning your family on the grounds of concern for the environment. Thank you! And I get that you are feeling a sense of loss for what you wish you could have had, if circumstances were not as dire as they are. That is painful to sit with. I also think you may already be bearing the experience of this longed-for third child in mind when reflecting on the state of the environment and his or her future in an increasingly perilous and precarious world. That is the humane thing to do. Will my future child love-love-love growing up watching rapid extinction of species, food shortages, severe weather events, climate refugees, global reduction of habitable landmass etc? Do I wish upon them a life-time of fire-fighting measures, trying to keep a bad situation from getting worse? Because that is likely what is in store.
The science is unequivocal; reducing the number of children we have is the single most impactful thing we can do for the planet. Then comes eating a plant-based diet and avoiding flying.
It is wilfully ignorant, self-serving and delusional to think that it is possible to somehow 'off-set' the inevitable carbon mother lode which is a baby, by doing any number of worthy, well-intentioned things such as recycling, walking, using washable sanpro, buying less stuff or having meat-free Mondays. These things are also incredibly important, and I am so grateful to all who do them, but they do not cancel out baby-carbon.
I have two DC, and if I had known then what I know now about what the future most likely holds for them, I cannot say for sure that I would have pro-created, despite loving them and my journey with them more than life itself. We have, and are continuing to, let future generations down in the most unforgivable way. When you voice this stuff people look at you like you have two heads, but it doesn't change the facts.

Im one and done.
I see families of 2 or more and think, damn your crazy. Jealous never even comes close to entering my brain
Environment is no factor, I simply would not cope being pregnant or having a newborn/toddler again

By 2050 most of the Middle East will be uninhabitable to humans, so there’s will be millions of climate refugees (guardian article, August 2017), the uk soil has enough nutrients for another 60-ish years of crops, so will have to find another way to feed the huge horde of humans occupying it. The future is going to be apocalyptic, at this point it’s fine to disregard ‘aww but babies! You want a baby you have babies! Babieees!’ 240,000 more consumers (net) are bred every day, it isn’t unsustainable, even at replacement rate parents and their two offspring are living and consuming at the same time for about 50 years. People really need to start thinking about their kids futures and not a fantasy of ‘it’ll be ok’.

**Interestingly, to keep the birth rate at replacement level, you need an average of 2.1 children per woman. Two to replace the parents, 0.1 because not everyone makes it to reproductive age or reproduces if they do.

Now, obviously you can't have 0.1 children, but the point is, if every family has only 2 children the population will decline.**

Shit happens.
I shudder hearing the saying "have one for mum, one for dad and one for the country" which an Aussie politician trotted out.
One is more than enough for me

Note that I said "average". Not everyone needs to (or in some cases should) procreate. This is why you need an average of 2.1.

the uk soil has enough nutrients for another 60-ish years of crops, so will have to find another way to feed the huge horde of humans occupying it.

I'm not quite sure on what you base the 60 years of nutrients on, have we now forgotten everything we learnt since the agricultural revolution? But anyway it has been a long time since Britain has been self sufficient in food so Britain is not the place to come to when there is apocalyptic climate change.

Not everyone needs to (or in some cases should) procreate

And yet for those who shouldn't procreate, or who don't want to procreate, certain parts of the world are in a rush to limit reproductive freedoms by removing access to safe abortions.

I think you’ve made a great decision. Unfortunately as you know we need to start making difficult personal decisions to save this planet. Having one less child is the best thing we can do. I look at people with 3 or more as being v selfish and hypocritical if they start going on about the environment.

It is wilfully ignorant, self-serving and delusional to think that it is possible to somehow 'off-set' the inevitable carbon mother lode which is a baby, by doing any number of worthy, well-intentioned things such as recycling, walking, using washable sanpro, buying less stuff or having meat-free Mondays. These things are also incredibly important, and I am so grateful to all who do them, but they do not cancel out baby-carbon.

Worth repeating.

The problem with the 'baby-carbon' calculations is that they do not account for adulthood i.e. reproduction - they are dangerously understated.

Interestingly, to keep the birth rate at replacement level, you need an average of 2.1 children per woman. Two to replace the parents, 0.1 because not everyon e makes it to reproductive age or reproduces if they do

The argument that the UK is below replacement rate has always struck me as xenophobic at best, and actively racist at worst. Sure, the UK is declining but the population in developing countries is exploding. Do non westerners not count? And do you think that massive overpopulation in drought ridden areas of Africa will not drive huge immigration (and conflict) in any case?

Oh dear god no!!

We’re just back from a family event - the couple with 2 were tag teaming all weekend.

The couple with 3 were pulled every which way.

The couple with 4 didn’t care anymore and were schulling wine (and had an OOH trip for a split eyebrow).

We have 1, much loved but hard enough work, and I am quite happy with our decision.

The argument that the UK is below replacement rate has always struck me as xenophobic at best, and actively racist at worst. Sure, the UK is declining but the population in developing countries is exploding. Do non westerners not count? And do you think that massive overpopulation in drought ridden areas of Africa will not drive huge immigration (and conflict) in any case?

Totally agree, it's such a careless bit of logic.

One of the most poignant casualties of climate change is the the polar bear, and virtually no one lives there - the issue of overpopulation is a global one. An extra person in the UK is no better than an extra person in Mumbai (in fact, on balance, it's worse).

I’m jealous of anyone with children, hope that helps!

Thank you for taking this hard decision OP, you are doing the right thing.

As the environmental situation gets worse life will become much harder and more expensive for your current children so having more resources to split between them will be helpful for them too.

I've got a 2 and a 3 year old, I thought of another one fills me with fear!!

Sounds like you are being a bit of a martyr. If you want another, have another.

Ugh this thread has sent me into turmoil 😄 I posted earlier saying that I almost posted this exact thread last week. I thought we’d decided to go for a third but I just don’t know if I can put the environmental issues to the back of my mind!! My SIL has a phd in the sciences and id be surprised if they don’t have a third. They also have plastic grass though and eat enough meat for a family of 10 though, so 🤷🏻‍♀️
My sister is also a phd in the sciences and while I’m sure they’ll stick at 2 she’s said we should go for a third if we want one.
A third would definitely be a heart over head decision but I don’t know if I can do it! I just love being pregnant and having babies and I wasn’t prepared to never have another. I’ll Probably regret forever not having 3, and be jealous of all those families for 3+ who didn’t consider the environment. Agh. We’re vegetarian, would drive the same amount as now with 2 kids, we’d fly the same amount or less. But that’s all just until the kids grow up and drive 3 cars of their own, isn’t it. Ugh. Sorry, thinking aloud! I wonder what OP is thinking after this thread!!?

I think being vegetarian or having a sil that says it’s all fine is bollocks frankly. Do it if you want but don’t expect the rest of us who stopped at 2 to applaud you for it. If you do it own it.

One thing that’s very clear is the selfishness of people is going to bring the end of the world. I think the only way to stop this would be carbon footprint rationing. Each adult/household given a certain amount of carbon credit say based on one average car doing average mileage, eating meat 3x per week, 2 kids and one short haul return flight per year. You could earn extra by having less than one child, lose them by having more. Everything we buy would have a carbon footprint value, primark clothes made of synthetic fibres might have a higher carbon value than say a hand knitted locally produced item, seasonal local fruit a lower value than a banana. Until people see the value of what they are doing in real hard terms a lot are too selfish to adjust their habits and understand that 99% of their needs are actually very discretionary wants.

An easier way of assigning carbon credits is making the price of everything reflect its actual production footprint. For starters, close the jet fuel tax loophole (the mind boggles).

And charging at the point of service for the NHS maternity provision.

How can we trust a government that is so fucking beholden to special interests that they can't tax jet fuel or even not arm the Saudis to actually oversee a carbon allocation programme?

We need to do something and if anything is clear this can’t be left to individuals. I mean, people saying if you want 3 kids go for it, not such whether they are selfish, stupid or both. Ideally we need a slow decline in population, averaging less than one child per adult across the world. In the non too distant future we will need to home people on a lot less land as areas and countries flood, farmland becomes more scarce. We need to start revolutionising how we live, the choices we make. A third child will make a difference. For the sake of your grandchildren, to make sure the children of your two living children have food to eat, air to breath and a planet to live on stick to the two.

Alaskan, unfortunately that allows rich people to buy their way out of responsibility. We need worldwide agreement on these issues but realise it’s unlikely, people are too busy chasing what they want they are destroying the things they need

Alaskan, unfortunately that allows rich people to buy their way out of responsibility.

That’s a strange way of interpreting ‘paying for environmental damage’ - we'll have to agree to disagree!

And charging at the point of service for the NHS maternity provision.

If you do this, there won't be fewer children, there will be more children born with disabilities and illnesses that would have been prevented if their mothers had had adequate care in pregnancy and labour. They don't have free maternity care in many of the areas of the world that are having the scariest rates of population growth currently, and it's causing human misery but it's doing fuck all for the environment.