To think that it is not socially/environmentally irresponsible to want a large family?

[stillstanding]

I am one of four children. My parents were both one of four and most of aunts and uncles had large families too. I therefore grew in up in a fairly rumbustious home with loads of people coming and going and I loved it and I always hoped that I too would have a large family.

DH and I are now discussing how many children we would like to have and it turns out we are not exactly on the same page as he would prefer that we only had two DCs.

His main argument is that it is socially and environmentally irresponsible to have more than two children. He feels that the planet is overburdened as it is and there is no need to overload it any further. He's comfortable with two DCs because it's "two in two out" but that any more would be selfish of us.

I suspect that his main drivers are his own background (he comes from a rather calm family of 2 DCs where no one talks over you at the dinner table) and the financial toll. He is probably targeting the whole social/environmental irresponsibility angle because the environment is something I have become increasingly concerned about in recent years. He says that there is no point in me being militant about recycling, for example, and then having four children.

Ultimately I suspect that the financial aspect is going to be the deciding factor in this decision but I wondered if any of you had considered this issue?

How can it be too late for most of us to do anything? The OP is considering having another child, that was the point of the thread.

Perhaps you could tell her to adopt a couple of disabled children?

I do think that's the route for us later on. Probably try to care for a child with SN as well as that's my background too.
Things change, priorities change, what you set out with as your planned journey suddenly becomes completely different doesn't it?

MZ I don't think you're being flamed, sorry you feel like that, it's just a heated debate......that and you're wrong

I just hope I haven't offended Hatrick, who was extremely kind to me on a thread back some months ago...

It is personal choice.

I might have fears about the growing UK (and world) population but when friends of ours have had a fourth or fifth child, on a personal level I am pleased for them. Because they are people who love children and will do a good job bringing them up to be good people to have around.

Equally, I have three or four women friends whom I feel OUGHT to have had children (because they're clever and nice) and who didn't and we needed those clever and nice genes.

I know it sounds contradictory but it is possible to hold these two emotions in my mind at the same time.

lol, that's what my friends and family say too.

A very nice lady at work said to me 'Hurry up and have kids! We need the ones like you to have babies!'.

Bless her.

Yes I did consider the issue. We were in the same position as you are. I wanted more children, DH didn't. He cited money. I was worried about the environmental impact.

here's an interesting article

OP
adopt a couple of disabled children

Phew. That's a relief.

but the pair of ou need to adopt a couple of disabled children

Yes, having children is unequivocally the worst thing you can do for the environment bar personally setting fire to a thousand acres of rainforest for fun.

BUT I would imagine scarcely anybody seriously makes decisions on family size based on this fact.

This is one of the reasons that the "holier than thou" attitude of many environmentalists descends into hypocracy when they are themselves parents...not recycling rubbish is a minor environmental offence compared to the impact of having children.

'How can it be too late for most of us to do anything? '

Absolutely- I will greatly sahre with that-

anyone want ds1?

seriously I would love to foster one day as well, but not now- I have enough.

at the idea of people procreating forever- I don't know anyoe who would even consider that (OK my nan did and she was a fool with 16 kids). The gulf between 4 and that is immense.

(filz am assuming the shut up needed a , yes? LOL)

And of course the desire to reproduce is more than a desire, its a need that has driven women to reporduce despite it historically being a massive risk to health and life in times past (and still is elsewhere on this planet). There is nothing wrong wioth not wanting children but its not the natural way of things, from a replication of DNA perspective (the main drive of life in a non faith belief system)

I seriously considered it

having any children at all is quite scary considering our resources at the mo and sometimes I have pangs of guilt about it. What kinda world will they grow up in? when I was growing up there was an abundance of wildlife and sea life. Now when I snorkel in sites that were briming with colourful life when I was a kid, they are almost completely barren.

I would like 3 from a selfish point of view but think that having 2 is prob more ethical as when we get old and die they are just taking our place rather than increasing numbers.

Ideally we'ld like to adopt the 2nd and 3rd but not sure how easy that would be these days. We would certainly consider an older child rather than a baby so maybe it'll be possible

These are just my own personal feelings about our own family planning choices. I dont think that people who have more than we would choose to are wrong

Interesting article, Quattro - thank you.

Have to say that having read through this thread again I can't see any particularly strong argument that works in my favour. As Sputnik says more children = more consumption. Simple as.

I think that if we do decide to go for a larger family we will have to accept that that decision is not in line with our environmental principles and is driven by the heart and not the brain. We would then try to reduce that impact (recycling, reduced flying/car use, raising eco-conscious children etc) and hope that not everyone else would want as many children. But ultimately we would have to be honest with the fact that we made a selfish decision, albeit one that we could live with.

I have 2, and will be having no more.

More to do with not wanting the strain of pregnancy on the body and not being able to face lack of sleep again.

I justify my choice (in my own mind, not to others, they know I am just lazy) with the '2 in 2 out' argument. I think the planet is definitely over-populated, but do what is right for you.

FWIW, I am one of 5, and I hated it. I longed to be a child from a smaller family.

OTOH, look at the whole social dynamic going on in China. When that dreadful earthquake struck, entire generations were wiped out, because none of the children had siblings.

has anyone cited the research arguing that 'well educated' women are having fewer and fewer children and infact this will impact on society?

I am doing my bit for this cause

aside from this 'BOG OFF you judgemental people - this is our choice i would not dream of criticising yours;

ah yes rotten, I wasnt sure if it were research or anecdote though

I would claim to be likewise but the biys (obv not tiny ds4() seem to-

ahem

take after their father academically

pmsl

i think that its up to the individual couple hw many kids they have or dont have as lng as they r working an supporting them its there choice and in nature it will all balance out with some people not having kids im one of your stone throwing peeps cause i have 4 and look after other peeps kids too .

Well said Missy!! My MIL is very VERY vocal in her opinion that no-one should have no more than 2 children. She even fell out with one of her friends when she told her that her daughter must be thick to have 3 children!!

ATM Dh nd I have 1 lovely DD (who we have waited many years for) but ideally I love the thought of a bigger family (3 or 4) - haven't told MIL yet though!!!

beautiful she is too and lovely name

LOL Peachy!

Of course it is up to the couple to decide. Not a single person on this thread has suggested otherwise.

What people have been saying is that over-population is a huge problem and we can't all carry on putting our heads in the sand about it indefinitely. It is a factor that people need to start thinking about when it comes to making these decisions.

Obviously we will all come to different conclusions based on different factors. But it is pointless to pretend that having a large number of children does not impact on the environment and we should be honest about that.

www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm

www.eubios.info/EJ124/ej124i.htm

The one below refers to the UK, to women born between WW2 (I think) and 1975:

[http://www.bristol.ac.uk/cmpo/publications/papers/2007/wp165.pdf]

I think start with the one child, then anothe r if you want and then another if you want and then another if you want... I could go on indefinitely. I think children are great but deciding how many you will have beftre you actually have one does not make any sens(environmental or economical). You might not want a second child at all or feel that you want more because children are exausting but so lovely(when they sleep).
I am going to be very controversial here but maybe the over-population is due to living too long, not to have too many children...just a thought...