Thoughts on some of the negative comments on here and in real life

[Dontcryformeallegra]

I must admit, I haven't really had many negative comments about having 4 children in real life but I often read stuff on Mumsnet!
What do you think about the following and do you have any to ad?

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]@Glassofshloer
overpopulation will actually destroy the planet for your descendants?

Overpopulation would destroy the planet for descendants, but we are not overpopulated now and projections by the UN indicate we won’t reach the point of overpopulation at least between now and 2100. There is even a 27% chance that world population will have started to decline by then if the current 70yr trend of slowing birth rates persist.[/quote]
You would gamble the future of your kids on 27%?! Am I supposed to be reassured by that?! 2100 is 1 lifetime away… honestly what you just wrote is scary not reassuring.

I mean I’m from a bigggg family, but the mums of 4+ on here desperately defending their decisions really need to just put their hands up and admit they’ve been selfish. I mean we’re all selfish by nature, so nothing unusual there, but you should have the self awareness to admit it.

Glassofschloer you will be very glad that people were selfish enough to have children when you are old and in need of the next generation.

People don't have big families because they can't or don't want big families. The environmental reasons are just goady s*. These are often the same people who eat lots of meat, fly loads and think they're wonderful for wish-cycling.

The youth population is actually declining in the UK and there was an article circling last year about how this is an issue. It's all very idealist to say we should just reduce the number of children we have. We are already reducing them and the elderly population is a much bigger problem.

@stairway

Glassofschloer you will be very glad that people were selfish enough to have children when you are old and in need of the next generation.

No I won’t. I want what’s best for my child, not for me.

@Glassofshloer

I mean I’m from a bigggg family, but the mums of 4+ on here desperately defending their decisions really need to just put their hands up and admit they’ve been selfish. I mean we’re all selfish by nature, so nothing unusual there, but you should have the self awareness to admit it.

How? These people are very rare so if anything they're helping replace the elderly. Constant flying around the world and the day to day living of each human is the issue.

@BiscuitLover09876 it isn’t either/or though is it? I don’t have 4 children and I also don’t fly round the world - the last time I was on a plane was 4 years ago to Scotland. I eat very little meat maybe once a week or ten days, don’t drive so walk most places or take public transport…

I mean the Radfords make the argument you have & havent they been to Australia and the States in recent years?!

Not goady, but when people say that having children is selfish, do they mean about climate change or personally being greedy for another child? Anyone expand on 'selfish'.

@stairgates

Not goady, but when people say that having children is selfish, do they mean about climate change or personally being greedy for another child? Anyone expand on 'selfish'.

When I say it, I mean they’re being unreasonable in expecting the world to shoulder another person (and therefore another lineage), in terms of the economy, environment, resources, services. More houses needing to be built. Green belt land being lost. Infrastructure and medical care overwhelmed. I think more than 4 or 5 kids is taking the piss if I’m honest, it’s to satisfy a maternal urge & not thinking it through.

@Glassofshloer
What is scary about saying that if trend we have been on the last 70yrs continues, world population will reach zero growth by 2100 with a 27% chance of declining? It’s a lot less scary than the alarmist things you’ve been saying asking do you realise that overpopulation will destroy the world for your descendents ...I mean...how can you prophesy that overpopulation will destroy the world by 2100 when not even the UN agrees this is a possibility. You’re like a modern day Nostradamus.

Overpopulation isn't a number of people = issue thing. If I produce 200 tons of carbon and someone in Gabon produces 10, they have have 20 children and I have one and we even out. But with the increase in development in places like Brazil, India, China and so on, everyone is producing more. And we produce MUCH more.

So if a person in the UK has 4 children they produce massively more carbon and also the rest of the world is trying to copy that.

Which is why immigration is a more sustainable solution to an aging population in the UK than British people pumping them out.

@Glassofshloer
When I say it, I mean they’re being unreasonable in expecting the world to shoulder another person (and therefore another lineage), in terms of the economy, environment, resources, services. More houses needing to be built. Green belt land being lost. Infrastructure and medical care overwhelmed.

So you’re talking UK specific by talking about housing shortage, green belts and son. Large English families are not causing any of that. You’re scape goating.

Looking at ONS, even with some people having large families the number children per woman was at 1.53 in Quarter 1 2021; this is in line with the recent trend of a decreasing total fertility rate each year since 2012 (at 1.93). (Remember replacement rate is 2.1).

Large families are causing ZERO increase in population because they are more than balanced out by those that are childfree. How can it be “selfish” if the people who want children plus the people who don’t want children, together result in NEGATIVE population growth as a result of their decisions?
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/articles/provisionalbirthsinenglandandwales/2020andquarter1jantomar2021

Surely this is good, we all can do what we want as far as family size as it doesn’t cause overpopulation. It in fact, being well below replacement rate can even have net inflow of migrants due to climate change and the country could still have zero population growth..,

Me and DH got married 40 years ago and discussed at length whether to have children or not. We decided not to for a few reasons and one of them was because we both felt the planet was overpopulated and we did not want to add to it.

The UK is now far more crowded, ridiculously so. The roads are packed and journeys take far far longer than they should. Not enough houses but hey let's just keep building and building until we have little or no countryside left.

The NHS can't cope, GP's can't cope, schools can't cope.

No one should have more than 2 children unless, of course, the 2nd is a multiple birth.

It makes me laugh that a poster says having children isn't selfish but is, in fact selfless! That is just laughable. Just look at how many posters say "I have 3/4/5/6 or more children but I don't give a damn". That is totally selfish.

I dread to think what the future holds for your children, grandchildren , great grandchildren etc. It seems that none of you care.

Also the argument that the population needs to increase in the UK. Like hell it does. Yes we have an ageing population but how can forever increasing the population ever solve that? We will just need more and more and more people.

How many of the children now will be carers anyway? They can't fill the vacancies now so is that really likely to change?

I know the facts show that families, on the whole, are having smaller families but it is honestly difficult to see that. Almost all my neighbours with children have at least 3 and quite a few have more than that.

Oh and just to make it clear, DH and I have no children, have been vegetarian for over 30 years, have had 4 holidays which involved flying in 40 years and they were all short haul, buy most things second hand and recycle everything we can.

We would never think that because we have no children we don't have to worry about our carbon footprint.

We are both very concerned about climate change and the future problems of rising sea levels, food shortages, water shortages and all the other problems. We won't even be around and yet we care. People with children should be worried but most seem not to give a shit

I have 4 and my sister use to always try to make me feel shit about it, it was constant sly comments and digs, she saw herself as better than me as she only has 1, I don’t speak to her anymore

Thankyou.@Glassofshloer
If the children from the larger family all went on to be a credit to the local community wouldnt that be better then importing people to fill vacancies that do need filling? I have to admit I did not consider the worlds infrastructure when having my family, I just like adding new members of the family.
I think the more I read about how hard it is going to be for future children the more I feel that having their brothers and sisters will be a benefit to them, the futures children are going to carry such a heavy burden.

Large families are causing ZERO increase in population because they are more than balanced out by those that are childfree.

Yes @PlanDeRaccordement by people like @mydogisthebest !!

If the bigger families had stuck at 2 all along then maybe couples like mydog would have felt able to have their own children.

You can’t rely on ‘not everyone does what I do so they negate my actions’ that’s a totally selfish mindset. It’s just relying on everyone else to go without so you can have more.

As mydog said, if we have an increasing elderly population, how can the answer be to keep having kids? Do we just grow the population larger and larger and larger?

If the children from the larger family all went on to be a credit to the local community wouldnt that be better then importing people to fill vacancies that do need filling?

Why?

I think the more I read about how hard it is going to be for future children the more I feel that having their brothers and sisters will be a benefit to them

Why?

@Glassofshloer

Large families are causing ZERO increase in population because they are more than balanced out by those that are childfree.

Yes @PlanDeRaccordement by people like @mydogisthebest !!

If the bigger families had stuck at 2 all along then maybe couples like mydog would have felt able to have their own children.

You can’t rely on ‘not everyone does what I do so they negate my actions’ that’s a totally selfish mindset. It’s just relying on everyone else to go without so you can have more.

As mydog said, if we have an increasing elderly population, how can the answer be to keep having kids? Do we just grow the population larger and larger and larger?

I can never understand the argument that we need to keep adding to the population in order to care for the elderly. The posters that are so quick to tell us that we need to increase the population never explain how on earth that is going to work.

@Glassofshloer

If the children from the larger family all went on to be a credit to the local community wouldnt that be better then importing people to fill vacancies that do need filling?

Why?

I think the more I read about how hard it is going to be for future children the more I feel that having their brothers and sisters will be a benefit to them

Why?

For the first question, where would they be being imported from? The area where they are currently producing 10 tonnes per year. When they came here wouldn't they just start being a high producer like the locals or would they be expected to still only produce 10 tonnes. I feel the UK pays people badly and treats them worse, sounds a bit modern slavery. Better way would be to make sure those UK people who can work do work, I think unemployment will be pretty low as people will be in demand.

Second part, if resources are getting low its always handy if you can call on family first when you need anything. I'm still not sure how bad we are expecting things to getand would appreciate any rough ideas, literally completely empty shelves and no fuel? Actual fighting in the aisles? Bit like the first lock down? Homes under water I can imagine in some areas so these people would need rehoming and will most probably not be compensated for it I imagine.

When they came here wouldn't they just start being a high producer like the locals

Huh? You mean like your own kids? This point makes zero sense.

I feel the UK pays people badly and treats them worse, sounds a bit modern slavery.

Why keep having kids then, only to raise them in a country that treats them this way?

Better way would be to make sure those UK people who can work do work

How? Who isn’t working that can work? Your children aren’t 100% certain to work, disability or illness etc can happen to anyone.

if resources are getting low its always handy if you can call on family first when you need anything.

If resources are so desperately low you need to borrow from family, then the last thing that family will want is you knocking at the door. How is more people a cure for less resources??

Homes under water I can imagine in some areas so these people would need rehoming and will most probably not be compensated for it I imagine.

What on Earth has this got to do with having siblings?

I can never understand the argument that we need to keep adding to the population in order to care for the elderly. The posters that are so quick to tell us that we need to increase the population never explain how on earth that is going to work.

Quite. Fancy having a go @PlanDeRaccordement just because you seem to be very confident of your view here?

Glassofschloer what is your solution to an aging population that doesn’t replace itself then?

@stairway

Glassofschloer what is your solution to an aging population that doesn’t replace itself then?

Immigration, more of it, from countries with larger younger populations such as many African countries, South America & countries such as Kazakhstan

@stairway

Glassofschloer what is your solution to an aging population that doesn’t replace itself then?

Well Singapore heavily subsidises living situations where extended families live together, increasing housing options and decreasing the need for care.

There's a start.

@stairway

Glassofschloer what is your solution to an aging population that doesn’t replace itself then?

Well not keeping adding to the problem seems obvious.