<p>Is it the popping out lots of babies or having a philosophy about raising them that differs from yours that bothers you? Both of my paternal grandparents came from families of nine children. My grandfather became a physician and my grandmother was an accomplished woman for her time. I didn’t know him but I knew her very well and never heard her say one negative thing about coming from such a large family. I think she loved her siblings – scattered through the world as they were – very much.</p>
<p>The world population was much smaller when your grandparents were kids than it was now. There were about 1.5 billion people on earth in 1900. There are more than 6 billion now. If every couple contributes 10-20 kids to the world, it’s pretty easy to see that the capacity of the planet’s resources will be reached sooner rather than later. My complaint about it has nothing to do with their philosophy. Large families most likely love each other just as much as small families. I think it would have been fun to have another sibling growing up. But to breed at that rate is ignorant at best and selfish at worst.</p>
<p>Every couple is not going to have 10-20 kids. How many people do you know who do? I don’t know any personally. I know lots of people with one child or two. That’s a hypothetical concern. For every family that has ten kids, there are people who have none.</p>
<p>Just because it’s not common doesn’t mean it’s ever a good idea. I’m not advocating anything like a one-child policy, but I think that we should be aware of the world beyond the US.</p>
<p>It’s kind of like a situation where if everyone took a shell away when they visited the beach or if everyone wanted to grab a chunk of the Grand Canyon. It’s probably survivable if only a few people do it, but over time, the effects will show.</p>
<p>It just seems like a weak reason to me. This article and concept was about families in this country and there are just never going to be a lot of families in the general population who do this. There’s a reason the Duggars have a television show – because they are unusual enough to warrant it.</p>
<p>Gosh, what about childless couples? If everyone did that, there would be no people at all!
A disaster! Relax, son of Opie, my guess is that is will all balance out. Rich countries now are running a little bit below replacement birth rates.</p>
<p>Well, geomom, I’m 23, and my guess is that I’m going to be around a lot longer than you will. It is a concern. To be fair, developed countries aren’t contributing to the global birthrate, but then again, how many people are we sure are not a burden on the world’s resources? Just because there is a little bit of environmental wiggle-room for people to have more babies than is prudent doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. I have no concern for the survival of the human race long-term. I can’t conceive of many ways the population would ever dwindle to nothing. But the world population growth would show that my prospective scenario is closer to happening than your counterexample.</p>
<p>But to put the question on the other foot, why is having that many children a good idea for anyone involved? The world collectively tore apart the octomom, and I don’t see how this situation is much different.</p>
<p>The Octomom case is different for many, many reasons – all of which are explained in great detail on the Octomom thread. Basically, she has no job, no spouse, seems to be very short on good judgement and parenting skills and there is the whole issue of how many embryos should be implanted at a time. It’s an issue of responsible parenting versus irresponsible parenting. That’s a lot different from a situation where there are two parents who are capable of paying for the expenses of raising the kids themselves and are having them one at a time or maybe with the occasional twins. As for the question of why having “so many children” – and I’m not sure what you mean by so many but one of your previous posts said 10 to 20 which I think we can all agree is very rare in this country – is good for anyone involved, your only argument seems to be the environment – how do you know there are not families that thrive with seven or eight kids – or maybe more? I already mentioned my grandparents who seemed to thrive just fine with eight siblings each. I certainly would not sit in judgement of people who choose to only have one child or none or two or three – so I’m not sure why I or anyone should sit in judgement of those who would have six or nine or twelve, if they can do a good job. At this point in our country, women have a say over their own bodies, and that includes not using birth control and procreating as much as they want.</p>
<p>I applaud all those here who are able to see and accept that lifestyles different than those they would choose for themselves are indeed worthy.</p>
<p>Well yeah- my argument is the environment, never anything else- I’m glad I’m understandable. I never said anything about the actual family dynamics or that it would be bad for the children involved. But the world extends beyond this country, and people should be aware.</p>