The morality of having large families

[Pip22]

Please consider the wider implications of having more than 2 children.
We are already living way beyond the means of this very finite planet. If there are 1 million more humans every 5 days how on earth will we ever feed them, and slow climate change?
Having big families is simply self-indulgent.
Watch David Attenborough's Horizon from 9/12/2009 via Youtube or visit the website of The Optimum Population Trust for a very detailed discussion of the facts.

self indulgent, oh no no no no NO

twould be self indulgent to have none at all..

yes also, i am great , and i think there ought to be more of me....

notes children look nothing like self, cries quietly..

(Oh and BIL has no kids,my sisters 2 and 1 so averaging that up doesn't take our breeding above 2 per head. hey ho!)

Seriosuly these threads used to makemefeel bad but family size is so complex.Apart from the caring thing, which was a factor but not the factor, I always wanted 4 children.When somuch of our life was taken from us by force (SN does that) it was wonderful to actually be able to achieve something for US and not put everyone elsefirst for once. probably selfish but I have elarned the ahrd way that life takes no matter what.

DS4 is a joy, he has brought love from his briothers that we did not know possible, and if shortening my life span by a few yearas to helpbalance the extra planetary burden were the trade off then I would do it. Children areneededfor pensions,and more so as the population ages,and whilst hat doesn't negate other concerns it does balance a great many.

If one can find a financialmodel of coping with an aging society with far less tax revenue and a population where a great percentage is above working age then propose it but ATM there is no clear answer.

Oh and a finalpoint

Campaigning energy should be used much more fruitfully by persuading the Catholic Church and restrictive Governments of the benefits of contraception and population management in countries where they are not freely available and people are effectively forced to have large famillies.

Now,that is despicable.

Very good point re: Catholic Church there Peachy.

I think everyone is entitled to their opinions here...hence we are all adding in our two bob on a discussion forum. I agree with OP in the need to address this issue but also admire large families, because they sacrifice so much and are far from indulgent. If anyone has been to China they will realise why their government introduced the two child policy. If the UK's birth rate is declining I think looking at the world population and not on a national level is just as important.

What issue? There is no issue. What does overpopulated even mean? There are declining birthrates all over the world, not increasing. Most western countries have a birth rate below replacement level, and if you think telling people in the UK and Europe to have less children will do anything to help the worlds situation you have zero understanding of macro economics.

Lol at post number 2: 'you're brave'.

I have one child, and will not have any more, that doesn't make me superperson. I think ethical living is about far more than how many children you have.

Almost worth having a fourth baby just to annoy you........

Now I really want to try for no 4!

I do actually think you have some kind of point but not enough to put me off trying for DC3

I don't think telling the OP to fuck off fully addresses the argument, does it?

"What does overpopulated even mean?"
Well, I guess it would mean the population of the planet being higher than the number who can live on it sustainably?
What does it mean in practical terms? Wars over resources, starvation, deforestation; that sort of thing.

And climate change isn't going to be increasing the carrying capacity of the planet, either. We need to have fewer children and consume less. Sadly, we're not that great at either...

how funny!!! op not posted again since op....not even come back to further her argument in any way....

hmmmmm trolling me thinks....

I think it's a fair point to make.
It is certainly something to consider when planning a family imo.

I agree Heathen. It is interesting that no one has addressed the argument.
Doesn't it cross everyone's mind when you plan a family?
I hate all this dismissive 'off you fuck, dear' sometimes

so where is op....to add a few facts to this argument??

Nobody here has addressed it?

WTF was my post then, Cinderella?

I DID consider it when unexpectedly pg with third child -- but viewed the extra burden on the world as by far the lesser evil, in this case, than abortion of a child whose parents were well placed to care for it.

(I don't think I managed to put it as rationally as that at the time, though.)

My brother did the proper ethical thing and adopted instead. Cna I have his extra child-points, please?

I'm sure it's a point worthy of debate but not in the style of 'oi you lot, don't you know it's ever so wrong in every sense to churn out more than half a child each, you self-centred halfwits' and then bugger off again!

of course there is an ethical/ecological dilemma in choosing to spawn the next great brain surgeon, engineer who invents some earth saving techology or whalesaving crusader given one could accidentally birth a sponging lard arse. however, life is not a controlled experiment and yours is a simplistic and utopian view OP.

i consider at least 2 of my 4 to be on behalf of somebody else who, for reasons of laziness and selfishness chooses not to have offspring... (please do not read that as anyone without dc is selfish and/or lazy, i'm not suggesting that!)

The UK is NOT at 1.8 replacement level. It is above 2 now.

The Ponzi-style approach to the pensions demographics issue is short-sighted because it means that you have to add more people each generation. So where do you stop?