Why do people think it's acceptable being negative about wanting lots of children?

[MrsVidic]

Hi, I am 39 weeks with dd 2 and I'm 28. Dp and I have had the number of children discussion the other night and have decided to try for a 3rd after we get married and 4th a few years later.
Anyway since chatting with my parents/ family etc about this I'm getting really pissed off. To start with I only mentioned number of children as we will be looking to move to a bigger house ( only have a 4 bed ATM) to accommodate.
My parents only had 2 dc and it seems everyone trying to dissuade us has no more than 2 dc.
Our close friends with 4 have been really supportive etc.
It seems to be people think they have a right to be negative about your plans if you want more than 2, that it's ok to remark on what is not really their business.
I've had comments regarding we'd be mad to move just to have more children, it will be too expensive- I work pt and dp has a good safe job.
Maybe I'm hormonal but I think if your a grand parent you should be happy at the prospect of more grand children?

Yeah, those with money need not have any responsibility for anything they do Graciescotland
Hahahaha!

How many children do you have moonferret?

It's totally irrelevant. If I said 0-2 you'd claim I was just expecting people to be like me. If I said 3 or more you'd say I was a hypocrite.

Thanks for the replies- tbh I hadn't considered the environmental stuff (we tend to have low carbon foot print generally)
My post was more about why ppl think it's ok to comment / disapprove about wanting a large family - when they wouldn't bat an eye lid at trying for number 2 and would assume anything over 2 is a mistake.

Size of house- we have chatted about moving and would be best to move sooner rather than later for us- which is why we would get a bigger house (as our mortgage is nearly paid iyswim)
Thanks for all your experience about large families

But moonferret, you're perfectly happy to criticise and attack other people's choice of family size.

I think given how strongly you feel, the

Damn Phone. I meant to say the only appropriate number must be zero otherwise you would only be adding to the work population crisis.

Have you ever considered that sneering at people doesn't really work when it comes to changing minds and hearts?

The argument for only two children per family, in my opinion, is far too simplistic. An assumption is being made that the carbon footprints of those families is far less than those with more children - where I live in London, I have seen plenty of families with just two children who drive unnecessarily big cars and who also, unnecessarily, use these cars frequently for short journeys. These same families also fly more than twice a year. Their weekly shops include a lot of imported fruit and veg. I was one of five - we didn't have a car and walked everywhere (something that has stuck with me in adult life - I now do have a car but only ever use the car if I absolutely have to which is hardly ever, I make my 3 children walk to school (20 minutes uphill on the way there)/a mile to the shops/the park etc come rain or shine). We grew all our own fruit, veg and herbs so were not relying on supermarkets for a large chunk of our food. I'm vegetarian and we didn't fly - in fact, I first got on a plane when I was 18 years old.

My children don't have the latest gadgets which are constantly being replaced by their newer better versions - they play with traditional board games and I encourage them to play outside as much as possible. We recycle everything and my children have a definite awareness of environmental responsibility. I agree with what another poster said, in that, it is not about how many children people have but about educating people and getting them to consume less.

Four close couples friends of mine have chosen not to have children and not for the benefit of the environment but so that they can carry on living the lifestyle that they are used to, which incidentally is one that involves consuming - 3/4 nice holidays a year involving long haul flights, eating out, getting in the car and going away at weekends , spending their money on nice cars, clothes, items for their house, home improvements etc I also know at least 6 couples who are having trouble conceiving so they may not even have children. I also sadly know of three families who have lost a child to illness/accident. Not everyone can have/wants children/children survive therefore a variety in how many children each family must make it even out a bit. Also, a variety in family models surely must equal better odds at producing fine pillars of society who will be able to benefit society in a positive way.

Retro although your family with 3 children has a small carbon footprint you cannot guarantee that your 3 children will have families with small carbon footprints. They might but then again they might not.

Well, op think this thread has been a good example as to how some people will judge your choices. I have never read such negative responses on this thread, its normally very supportive and pro choice. At the end of the day you must do what is right for your family. Some people always spend their time judging others (as evidenced here). Being the Mum of a larger family is challenging but wonderfully, wonderfully rewarding and it was the best decision that my dh and I ever made - we wouldn't change a thing.

I'm really surprised at some of the reactions. I hadn't even thought about it much before.
Yes,the UK is overpopulated but that isn't due to a few British families who have larger families. I very rarely see English speaking families with more than 3 children.
Would the people who are worried about larger families causing problems for the environment go and say the same thing to larger families emigrating into the UK from abroad where it is only natural to have bigger families and move their whole families here with them?
Sorry I havent read all the thread so I might have missed something.

Actually laughed at the poster who suggested it was ok for her to have 2DCs but she would foster instead of having any more.

Why have any of your own at all?

There are loads of factors that affect the environment, go & do something POSITIVE like plant trees or volunteer at greenpeace rather than coming on here to preach negativity as you are unnecessarily adding to your own carbon footprint; no one on here is going to change their family plans because of your posts.

Oh cripes.

There are people with one child making far more of a negative impact on the world, pollution etc wise, than someone halfway across the world with five kids who's never even seen a car and will live and die in the same tiny village.

I have one DS at the moment. I want four children. They will probably be a mix of bio and adopted, but is it really anyone else's business? My brother doesn't have children and probably never will. DH has two sisters who are childless and likely to remain so (both around 40 now). Does that make it okay?

And yes, even with people like the Duggars and their exponential numbers of children, the US birth rate is declining and has been for some time. I know many people who have more than two children, but just as many who are only having two, one, or none. My two best friends each want 2 and then their husbands are getting vasectomies...interestingly, both say they would be satisfied with one but both have younger sisters they're very close to and say that they want the sibling bond for their children.

Also, Paul Ehrlich's book "The Population Bomb" (1968) is an interesting read...apparently by 1985 there was going to be world-wide famine and a life expectancy of 42 due to over-population.

Ffs and why don't we get shot of all people over 60! After all we live in an ageing population, what is that doing to the environment and health care services , bloody environmental irrisposibility ? I've heard it all now!

"Why do people think it's acceptable being negative about wanting lots of children?"

Because the planet is something that we all have to share? So your environmental decisions affect me, and my decisions affect you.

And when it comes to environmental decisions, all the recycling/public transport/washable nappy stuff is absolute pissing in the wind compared to the environmental impact of having another child related link

If you were sharing a birthday cake with ten people, and you took a third of the cake for yourself, would you really say "Well, this is how much cake I want, it's my decision, how dare you criticise it" if you got funny looks?

If you were my friend/relative, and told me you wanted four DC, I would smile and say 'How lovely' or somesuch, I wouldn't actually criticise. But since you asked, on a public forum.... that is why.

I wasn't going to respond to this thread but I just can't help myself!

I think world population is a really interesting and valid debate and it's a shame it can't be had without attacking other peoples choices. As yet, there is no worldwide law or accepted number around the amount of children a couple can have so your opinions on it are really just that - your own personal views.

It's interesting someone earlier said that they consider 2 children to be the 'acceptable' number to have, based on the fact that they replace the parents and no more. Well my view (and it is just my own view) is that 3 children is the 'acceptable' number based on the fact that not everyone has children and that not all children survive into adulthood. Of course, in terms of a need to reduce the global population, someone else might consider that 2 or even 1 is irresponsible. It's just opinions - I actually have no idea, if some world wide limit were set, what the maximum number of children a couple would be allowed to have in order to maintain population and support our ecomony and industries and older generations, taking into account that not everyone has kids and some don't survive, natural disasters etc etc.

In terms of world population, much of the increase is down to an increased life expectancy. And many countries - Japan, Russia, Germany - have a declining population. The fact that parts of Asia and Africa and the world overall have growing populations does not really impact these countries potential social and economic issues that their declining population may lead to, so I think it is too simplistic to say that someone in Europe, where people tend to have smaller families, is wrong to choose a bigger family because of population growth elsewhere in the world.

In fact there are very different views on where we are headed in terms of world population and the potential impact of its growth and what the Earth can actually sustain. It is just not so simplistic and straightforward as to be able to say everyone should have 2 children and that will solve things.

I do think that environmental impact is a slightly different issue and I must admit that I do sometimes question my decision to have 3 children when it comes to this.

Anyway, sorry for the essay, I just think it's a very valid debate with many different views and it would be good to be able to discuss it openly.

Well said, Loolu . :)

Just a thought but as it seems to be family commenting maybe they would like to be available to babysit but wouldn't feel able to cope with more than two children so are (in a very badly phrased way) expressing concerns about themselves rather than you.

dare I say our family number I have 3 and 3 stepchildren, oh and expecting our fourth ;) We love our huge family, just laugh at those people who on holiday whispered (very loudly) "that woman's got six kids"!!.

Pimms, I'm a military wife also with 3 dc considering a fourth. Have you ever been given a 3 bedder as 4 bedders available and how did you cope?

Fulltime sorry name changed after being outed on another thread this is pimms really

My DH is an officer so we are entitled to a 4 bed, we did however have a 3 bed when on an exchange posting so we put DD in with 2 DS and gave youngest DD (only 18months at time) in her own room. We then put a curtain up to separate the DD from the DS's.

We did also have 3 when in a 3 bed before DH promoted, that was not that bad as 2 boys were only 16months apart so shared.

They work on council house rules so insist on them sharing if they are same sex etc, have found though that if someone being posted in needs bumping up a quarter we will suddenly be the ones bumped up due to no of DCs, currently have massive house as were bumped up 2 scales as that was cheaper than giving us a hiring so lucked out. The only thing I would say is that up til the age of 6 they can't be in bunk beds, my friend husband is a Cpl got a bigger house as she had DTs and a DS and couldn't fit them in without bunk beds and as they were all younger than 6 it wasn't allowed. HIC can be annoying but also do understand when you say we won't fit in that

Thank you.

My other half not an officer and we are fine in our current house with 3dc. Ds1 and ds2 are in one double room despite a 4 year age gap. Hence ds2 is still in a cot far later than he should be but ds1 would go mental if his train track was ripped up every two seconds! Ds2 can also climb up ds1 ladder on his mid sleeper. Need drawers underneath or we would never fit them both in!!

Dd has the small single. It works well at the moment. However, if we had number 4 there would be absolutely no room.

According to the rules we would be entitled to a 4 bedder but I worry in case there arnt any and we all have to squeeze into a 3.

No room in single and DD not 6 donor even bunk beds would help. Would they expect 3 to share one room if all one gender????

Thankfully only ds1 is nearing 6 as I really don't like the thought of bunkbeds for the danger reasons. But it's something worth thinking about. Thanks for your reply

You get the feeling that those criticizing families of more than two children are probably jealous - either they couldn't afford more than two, or weren't able to extend their families further - I definitely don't buy that they're making some sort of grand sacrifice on behalf of the planet!

Fulltime, I am pretty sure if you are entitled to it they have to move you, know of a family in Germany that had the top 2 flats in a block so they could use one as bedrooms and one as living space as there were no places big enough for them and their family. If they don't have what you are entitled to you ask for a non availability chit and then you can get a hiring. I would say you would be fine, we have in the past given 3DCs the master bedroom and 1DC the smallest so that we could still have a study as such, mainly due to the job DH was doing at the time he used to bring a lot home with him.

I think I read somewhere best thing you could do to protect the planet was not have a pet, particularly a dog, because of the high meat diet and high emissions. I wonder if those saying you shouldn't have more than 2 kids also tell people off for keeping pets?

Thermos - I live in the UK, the average family size has been 2 children for 15 years (fluctuating from 1.89 to 2.1).
During that time the UK population has indeed increased, the increase is predominantly due to longevity and to a much smaller extent imigration.
In the coming 15 - 30 years the UK will desperately need more people of working age to fund and care for the elderly.
Therefore if UK folks would like receive meals-on-wheels, nursing care, bingo at the peter-pan club etc we should be positivley encouraging larger families, we sure are gonna need those kiddies.