10 kids? To judge it not to judge?

[Sekena]

I don't have 10 kids lol BUT boyfriends Dad was one of 10 - boyfriend's dad was a 'rainbow' baby born after a stillbirth -although doubt if this term was used then. Boyfriend himself is one of 5 - and all the sibs get on.

On MN - you get for instance a lot of 'only child' threads and parents potential guilt for not providing siblings and the opinions on these quite rightly are overwhelmingly that onlies don't miss out and these only child stereotypes are nonsense - which I completely agree with - I firmly believe an only child can thrive and doesn't need siblings. However - I also believe that a child in a large family can also thrive - just like my boyfriend's dad did. However if I was to say I'd like 10 kids - would I be judged ? I haven't decided on this at all - I'm currently pregnant with my second - but honestly felt my DD thrived as an only so definitely didn't conceive to give Dd a sibling - am delighted for this child in its own right !

I'm currently open minded about family size and am a SAHM. But what are your opinions on families of 10 like my boyfriends Dad's - WIBU if this is what I wanted ?

Isn't a more stable population better than a declining one? I think in this country the birth rate is under 2, so I guess not a problem for those who do have larger families? If our younger population does decline dramatically, where will our future workers come from? Obviously if our population was expanding it would be different, and probably not good, but it's not as far as I'm aware?

Oh hush now..

Such nonsense. I have four, I can afford them. Almost everyone I know has 3, lots have 4. We can all afford them.

We don't need to reduce the population in Western Europe, we need to increase it. We are well below population levels and some countries are begging people to have more children.

I'd judge, and I think most people would. I really don't think you can give the necessary time and attention to each child when you have so many, and parentification of the elder children is almost inevitable. I know several people from very large families and almost all would have preferred fewer siblings. I'm one of four and I think that was too much sometimes, being one of ten sounds awful.

I'd also honestly feel sorry for them because it sounds like my idea of hell on earth just becoming a baby factory for over a decade. Yuck. I'll keep my small, quiet family ta.

You might be able to afford them, I doubt you have quality 1:1 time with them much, it's hard enough even with one

@Whenharrymetsmelly I doubt you have quality 1:1 time with them much, it's hard enough even with one I honestly don’t know what you mean. If you’re finding it hard to spend any time with one child is it that you have a very demanding job?How is that different than siblings?

Well if you wanted to spend an hour 1:1, then if you have 4 that's four hours. How many people have four spare hours a day?

Demographics show that when the Baby Boomers retire (in the next five years) there are not enough people in the UK workforce to replace them.
When you look at the number of children 0-4 there will be a significant decrease in population by the time that generation comes of age.
This has happened in all countries where the population has moved in to cities from agricultural rural life, most countries such as Russia, all of Europe, Japan and also newly industrialised nations such as Brazil and countries particularly like China with the one child policy has helped to speed up a spiralling demographic collapse.
This means that by the time you have children and they come of age there will be much fewer people on the planet, the trend is down significantly across the globe.
I don’t think that the posters who are arguing against having children because of the lack of resources realise that the problem is not population growth but population decline.

Thing is it’s all moot when heavy industry and consumerism is causing much of the damage to the planet, not people having more than two children.

Only because so few would ever want to do it! If everyone was having 10 children we'd all be fucked

Yes but if driving and flying are bad, how much worse is it x 10

You can't compare a childless person flying to a family of 12, my goodness😂

'Big' families are one thing- a standard big family of 4 children is eclipsed by one with 10. Nobody needs 10 children in 2023

I have 4 children, I'm 1 of 5, my mum was 1 of 17 and my dad was 1 of 12.

No one ‘needs’ any children? No one ‘needs’ to have a family at all. All you ‘need’ is to have the basics to survive.
People are allowed to have as many children as they want, as long as they are able to support them. ‘Need’ isn’t a question. I wonder how much of the world’s resources are spent on IVF treatment and storing frozen eggs and embryos. Do you think we should start by cutting that first if people are so concerned with too many children being born? The people accessing those services don’t ‘need’ to have children, they want to have them. The resources involved in creating a child through assisted reproductive technology far outweigh those involved in natural procreation.
‘You can't compare a childless person flying to a family of 12, my goodness😂’ I didn’t make this comparison at all? I said if people are flying, driving, etc. Families fly. People with children are overwhelmingly the ones driving those loathsome quasi jeeps.

@Eyerollcentral

Most people want a family... you can have a family without having ten (ten!) children. Therefore, nobody needs to have ten children (to satisfy the desire to have a family).

We're not taking 'need' literally- as in its a matter of life and death to have children. Life would be miserable if we only had things we 'need'.But I'm this context, the term need relates to the fact that it's completely unnecessary, could stop at 5 even, and still have a big family.

If at nine children someone's life is not complete, then I don't know what to say tbh

Also I think you implied ten kids is nobody's business as people fly, but it's not a like for like comparison. If a family of 12 fly, that's flying x 12

Then import them, there's not a world shortage of people

But if someone wants 10 children and can support them, why shouldn’t they? Who are you to say when someone feels their family is complete? ‘Therefore, nobody needs to have ten children (to satisfy the desire to have a family).’ well they do if they want to have a family of ten children. If it’s fine to say you want to have a family of two children then it’s equally fine to say your desire to have a family won’t be satisfied until you have ten. Your individual opinion has no bearing on one or the other desire. Neither choice is reasonable if you are looking at things from a purely ecological point of view.
‘Also I think you implied ten kids is nobody's business as people fly, but it's not a like for like comparison. If a family of 12 fly, that's flying x 12’ I didn’t make that comparison at all. I was referring to the fact that flights and cars exist not one versus the other.

As long as you can financially support them then I wouldn't seexa problem. I know people from my teenage years who had more children than they can support and house and are constantly going on about skint and overcrowded they are!

Why should we be saying to people who live in safe, clean, good services and infrastructure etc in the west, don't have children, yet it's ok to have them in countries were life is a lot less unpredictable, they'll likely live in poverty and they have less chance of survival, because we need a population boost, every ten years. There's health, education and skill issues with that, as well as other issues.
I know families of five children who manage fine, the older ones haven't parented the younger ones etc etc, but they have reasonable, stable incomes and good health, all children are NT/physically well. Which is another issue, if your fourth+ child is disabled, or your health takes a downward turn, then there's an inevitable element of the children becoming carers and childhood stopping.

Wow so much misconception on here - its making me really angry. We have 4 children, blended family but all with us from step children being young. They have had a lovely childhood. I have always worked part time and its always been affordable .
There are loads of advantages - always someone to play with. Holidays are much easier and much more fun.
We have sheets spent a lot of time with extended family too.
The older 2 have left home now but still very close and see a lot if reach other and come on family holidays if they can.
I would never come on here and judge children with 1 child but it seems fair game to do it the other way round.
Interestingly the middle 2 who were close in age had several friends with no sibling who would spend loads of times at our house as they loved it.

DP is one of 4. They're a lovely bunch and treasure each other but I know things were tight. He'd love quite a big family. I am an only and I am SO grateful for everything I had because of it. I can't even begin to comprehend being part of a pack at home. I don't want more than 2. I'd rather give more in all ways to less
DC.

I expect the full breadth of environmental activism of some MN posters is entirely limited to railing against large families on the aibu board. 😂

I would mainly only judge if neither parent worked and lived off the state whilst having all these children. I would also think they are mad.

It depends. If your rich enough ti provide 10 kids and give the best for each kids then go for it. Good for them.

but if you are low income or need to scrape and get benefits because big family then people will judge negatively. Why so inconsiderate.

I think it would be difficult to meet the needs of 10 kids tbh. I’m one of 4 and even then had to take on a parental role, couldn’t do extra curriculars, couldn’t afford it plus was babysitting straight after school. It was shit tbh. BUT I adore my siblings and bigger families can be happy ones. I think you would have to pretty wealthy with one sahp to be able to manage 10 and even then it would probably be a bit chaotic.

Honestly my natural instinct would be to think someone had a psychological problem if they kept having children without the means to adequately care for them. I know that seems an unfair judgement but how do you get to know your children really if you are just having them in succession. It seems more like a mission to have as many kids as possible rather than thinking about the wellbeing of each child.

I have an only, I know I’ll be able to support her to whatever level of education she wishes to reach, whatever extra curriculars she wants to do I can pay for, school trips, no problem. Very different from my own childhood. It was intensely boring and stressful. Thats my parents though, I think there are plenty of parents with 4 doing a fantastic job.

Also talking about demographics is all very well but the childhoods those kids had will make a difference to how useful people are to society. If you have ten kids raised by loving but busy parents who take an interest and the kids are loved and cared for it can be great. If you have ten kids raised in neglect you have a high chance of mental health issues and suffering.

I expect the full breadth of environmental activism of some MN posters is entirely limited to railing against large families on the aibu board. 😂

Totally.

And once again the birth rate is DECLINING.