To want a fourth child

[Tumti2]

I have just had a baby a week ago!

Just not sure I’m ready to say never again .

OH definately doesn’t want a fourth .

AIBU to think I could talk him round and go for it !

Have you ever done the same and had more babies than your OH wanted initially ?

Or is this a passing phase .

I do have everything I wanted from the babies I have had eg both sexes etc .

Initially only wanted at least two maybe three .

Population growth is less significant than our absurdly wasteful use of resources for those here already.

But more people means more absurdly wasteful use of resources I think that people who don't think the number of children they have is relevant to the climate change debate basically think it's their children who should pick up the shit in future. Thankfully, of the late twentysomethings that I know, the majority do take the issue seriously and are thinking of having either no children or only one because of the state of the planet. So your choice to have more kids might mean you don't have grandkids.

I thought it was funny and interesting on the Jonathon Ross show when David Tennant was discussing having five kids and JR made the comment that DT must be planting a lot of trees to offset them. Presumably JR had his three kids before the environment was considered an important issue but the comment suggested to me that a lot more people are taking on board the climate change/population link which I think is progress.

The birth rate is dropping in almost all countries. In 25 to 30 years the population is likely to stabilise and probably reduce. Through education and increasing living standards.

“ Can you please explain why you feel it’s immoral to ask people to reduce the amount of children they have to help ensure the continuation of the planet?”

How about because it’s a lie? There are plenty of good, common sense reasons for people to limit the number of children they have. As evidenced by the falling birth rate in most developed countries over the last 50 years.

"Am the opposite end of ‘absurdly wasteful’."

I didn't mean to make specific assumptions about you but rather to make the general point that to pick out number of children as somehow the defining factor in someone's planet-friendliness is ridiculous and likely hypocritical. So you have one child, others would say 'how irresponsible, it's outrageous to have ANY children given the state of the planet. And unless you are about to tell me that you are off-grid living off the land, you are absolutely not at the 'opposite end of absurdly wasteful'! Our western lifestyles are at fault from root to branch, and at an individual level it's pretty much impossible to opt out of the fact we are collectively killing the planet. We should make adjustments where we can but it's sanctimonious green wash to start nitpicking about the minor details of what remains at base an absurdly privileged and wasteful existence.

Everyone makes that call for themselves though and they are entitled to do so. You obviously have an agenda and need to make your peace with it I get that. But some of us respectfully disagree. Having more than 2 kids to me is unjustifiable so I didn’t do it and yes I admit I struggle to coo and say “how amazing” at larger families.

What agenda? How bizarre. This is a discussion board, we are discussing. I don't coo at large families, but neither do I think it's fair to single them out as key drivers of planetary disaster. It's that simple. If you think that my one extra child relative to you puts you on a higher ethical plane, that's fine, but I'm free to disagree without the implication I have some mysterious ulterior motive! If we are looking at my carbon footprint I have much worse crimes to confess than having three kids!

Or indeed two extra, i obviously have no idea how many kids you have.

I was sooo broody for 3 weeks after my second child was born.......then colic kicked in. Nope.

I felt this way after my first, despite a horrific birth and a baby who cried around the clock I had an overwhelming urge for another - it's hormones OP don't let the bastards trick you! I did and had DC2 13 months later.

Having two so close certainly put me off having anymore and I didn't have that urge the second time round but now that the youngest is two I'm considering a third. I think it's only now, two years later, that I can really trust my judgment and weigh things up rationally - it's such a fog in the baby days. Give it time and wait for things to settle before deciding - four children is no joke!

Congrats

Oh come on! You are very exercised about the fact that in your opinion having large families is A Ok you obviously have a large family yourself.

I gave two girls thanks

It’s not the children who are due to be born who have caused the problem with the environment , it is the people who already exist , or have existed that are currently causing the issue. The children due to be born will simply live with the consequences of what previous generations have done

As a person who exists, what makes you think you have a right to add to environmental damage with your 4th child and burden your child and the children they beget with life they did not ask for in a world damaged caused by your generation.

The decision to have a 4th child is utterly selfish. You want it. Not even your dh wants it. Environment be damned in the face of your need to procreate.

@Unusualsuspicion
Agree with every word! Who decides the ethically correct number of children? Replacement level has no intrinsic value in and of itself.

@MsTSwift so I do indeed have precisely one more child than you (and have stated upthread in my first reply to op that there is no way on earth I'd have any more, I can barely just cope with three). Why do people always insist on looking for hidden agendas?

Your agenda ain’t hidden!

The birth rate is dropping in almost all countries. In 25 to 30 years the population is likely to stabilise and probably reduce. Through education and increasing living standards.

Probably too late and probably not sufficiently enough.

In 1927 there were 2 billion people on the planet and it took 127 years to increase from 1 billion. It took 33 years to increase that to 3 billion in 1960. By 2011 we were at 7 billion and it was only a 12 year gap between 6 and 7 billion. We're expected to hit 8 billion in 2023 with another 12 year gap. However, they are expecting the rate to slow and it will take a whopping 14 years after that to reach 9 billion by 2037 and another 18 years to reach 10 billion by 2055 and a far better 33 years after that to reach 11 billion in 2088.

The planet will still be fucked though.

If it helps immediately after I had my first baby I enthused to DH that I wanted 5 of these (and I hand in heart meant it!). DH was somewhat horrified (he's 1 of 4 and not wanting a huge family as a result, 2 maybe 3 at a push!). Now I'm on my second with the first running riot and am slightly less enthusiastic at the prospect of throwing any more in to the chaos lol! I'd wait until the hormone rush has left before making these decisions (from personal experience glad I did, although when this one arrives I may say the same again to DH and watch his hair turn grey and fall out 😉). If you're still keen - then sure go for it!

So what is it then MsT? I don't think the OP should be told she's a selfish cow for wanting a 4th child, if that's what you mean. It's an opinion, not an agenda. As a matter of fact I do think very large families are a bad idea, but because of not being able to give each child enough attention, not for planetary reasons. You're being very weird!

The problem in most developed countries (and many developing) countries is not the birth rate.

Nearly all population growth is now due to population momentum other than sub-Saharan Africa which is the only region where population growth is significantly above replacement.

If every woman (and in demographic terms, it's only women who count I'm afraid) in the UK who had children had a maximum of 2, then fertility would be way below replacement with all its attendant issues. There are many women who dont't have children (about 1 in 5 women in their 40s (I think 45-49 is used) does not have children in the UK) and then there are a similar proportion of women who (through choice or necessity) will stop at 1 child.

So you'll end up with a fertility rate of about 1.4 childen per woman - about what you see in Japan, Italy and Spain. I'm not convicned that these societies are really benefitting for such super low fertility. Fertility in the UK is about 1.9 children per woman which I think is probably about the sweet spot. Slowly declining population but which allows society to adapt to ageing population. Within that, given that current trends show 20% of women have no children and 20% of women have 1 child, there's room for families to have 3 or 4 (or even more) children and still be below replacement with a declining population.

As pointed out, the problem in the UK is not population growth but lifestyle.

AnnieTotach

Thank goodness someone is talking sense

I have four and I wouldn’t do it. All fine when they’re small but wait until they’re older you spread yourself so thin, the expense is enormous too

Thanks Annie Totach

I did feel like it the moment I had my third. 4 years on and significant health problems later I don't and am waiting for a hysterectomy

I felt just like this after number three. He is now four years old and DH is booked in for the snip. When Number three was tiny I was adamant that I wanted four but now I'm glad DH had more sense then me and couldn't imagine having another.

Let your hormones calm down before you start trying to decide on another.

To be fair I always wanted three

Which I now have . Maybe there is an element of knowing that I’m not going to do thus again!

I felt so terrible in the pregnancy that I was very sure at that time that I wouldn’t !