Reply to Why do parents decide to have more than 2 children

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Why do parents decide to have more than 2 children"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]OP here.... I don't check the board very often, just once a day.

Several observations:

1) Of course, if you end up being pregnant with multiples, congratulations, such is life. If you end up merging families, such is life. If an "accident" happens, such is life. If you end divorcing with children but remarrying a spouse without children, I do understand that you might want to have a child with the spouse. And yes, adopting is a wonderful thing. There are many children in need of loving families. I wish I could just adopt INSTEAD of having my own children, but my longing to have my own biological children was stronger. 
It is difficult to provide an exhaustive list of all variables in the introductory paragraph of a new post. You know what I meant when I said "decide." A well-thought through decision between a man and a woman about their family future.

2) I am not judging. I am just asking. I am not telling anyone how to reproduce. "Why do I care?" I just want to know, because I see large families everywhere around me, and it is different from what I was seeing around me growing up.

3) I understand what the replacement fertility rate is. But I also know that the world population is growing constantly. Ideally, every family would have between 2 and 3 children. This way, the world population would remain stable. We all know that some people don't have any kids, while some have 10+. But overall, people are having more kids than what is needed. [b]For those posters, who were offended by my "highly irresponsible" remark, I understand that how many children to have is mostly an emotional, not a rational decision. I don't think you are having 3 kids because the replacement fertility rate is 2.1 children per family. You couldn't care less what the rate is.[/b]

4) To all offended mothers of singletons: What I meant was, for a child, having a sibling at home is better. A peer, a playmate, a confidant, a competitor (i.e. you are not the center of the universe), etc. If you disagree, fine, this is not the point of my post. You are not contributing to the world's overpopulation.

5) I also understand that growing up in a large family and generally being surrounded by a large family is an important factor: it is what you know, like, and cannot think of changing. I also understand that if you were one of two children and "hated" it, you decide not to have two children (maybe none, maybe only one, maybe more than 2). [b]Again, I see this as an emotional, not a rational reason.[/b]

6) The "what if one sibling dies and there is a lot of pressure and reliance from parents on this one child only" argument is ridiculous. This is a reasoning from 1900s, when families had 5+ children because they knew that one diphtheria outbreak can wipe them all out in one short week.

7) The "status" or "luxury" observation is interesting. Maybe the reason why I am seeing it here more is the fact that this is very a very affluent area.

[/quote]

It sounds here like you are insinuating that the only acceptable reason to have any kids at all is for population replacement (your given "rational" reason).  If that is true, I feel very, very sorry for your children.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics