Large Families - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 62 Old 03-02-2008, 07:27 PM - Thread Starter
 
pajamajes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I didn't really know where to post this, but I hope here is alright. If I need to post this somewhere else someone please tell me and I will. Or someone can move it for me. Anyway, I have noticed that there are a lot of families on here that have more than the average 1.5 children. I have always wanted a big family. I have hated and still hate being an only child. And I love kids and I've just always wanted to be a momma. Anyway, are there any families with a bunch of kids on here. That's really interpretive I guess, but my definition would be families with 6 or more children. Everyone seems to have a strong opinion on big families, either totally for or totally against. What's your opinion? I personally would love to have 12 or so children. Also, I have noticed a lot of large families do not use birth control for religious reasons. Being agnostic, this really isn't a factor in my decision. WDYT? Let's discuss!

Jessie
pajamajes is offline  
#2 of 62 Old 03-02-2008, 07:51 PM
 
Jannah6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: BROOKLYN IN THE HOUSE!!!!
Posts: 2,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well I only have 5, ages 10,6,5,3, and almost 6 months. I love having children and didn't decide that I was finished until my c-section Sept 07. For me I just felt like I was never through and didn't ever want to feel like that doorway was closed. I'm 33, since January. Who knows, if not fo the section I probably could have had 10

: 2:Ma To 6 :12,8,7,5,2,1&
Jannah6 is offline  
#3 of 62 Old 03-02-2008, 08:21 PM
 
anne1140's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 928
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Dh and I plan on having 4. (I know that's not big for you, but to a lot of people, it is.) We also plan on adopting 2 of those 4. Our reason is because we would like a larger family, but we also understand that there are children out there that need homes, and we are wanting to provide a family to those in need.

Mama to learning.gifJulian Matthew, born 5/10/2011 nocirc.gif  

Hopeful vbac.gif for the next!

 

anne1140 is offline  
#4 of 62 Old 03-02-2008, 08:25 PM - Thread Starter
 
pajamajes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yeah, I totally agree with the PP on the adoption thing. I want to adopt some also.

Jessie
pajamajes is offline  
#5 of 62 Old 03-02-2008, 08:40 PM
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My mom has 12 kids, 2 of which are adopted. The youngest will be 3 on the 18th. (I'm 24) I like having a bunch of brothers and sisters. My mom has always used natural family planning. in fact, I think almost all of the big families I know use NFP. There are those who call it BC and those who insist it isn't the same thing, because it doesn't screw with your body or override natural functions/consequences.
I personally think that NFP is the best way to go; half of that is for religious reasons; the other half is that it just makes sense. I don't like injecting or ingesting artificial anything, because I don't think there's been a lot of research or critical thinking put into most of it. Why would I make an exception for BC?
Also most of the big families I know practice what is called "ecological breastfeeding" as an aid to NFP, because when you breastfeed like that, then it's a natural way of stopping ovulation-- automatic baby spacing, basically. it usually works for about 14-24 months after baby's born, so it tends to space kids about 2-3 years apart with hardly any effort.
The only book I've seen about it, Natural Baby Spacing or something like that, has a lot of religious references in it in regards to why, but nevertheless, the actual science behind it is sound, and you can ignore all the "god's plan" this that and the other thing, and think of it instead as "nature's plan".

Also, one other thing that I notice is that most families with 6+ kids have a stay at home parent (mine was my dad, most of the others were either split sometimes mom sometimes dad, or moms)
Are you planning on being a SAHM?

My DH and I are planning on about 5, maybe 6 kids... Unless something catastrophic happens and the world as we know it ends, in which case, we may have as many as 10.
saimeiyu is offline  
#6 of 62 Old 03-02-2008, 09:17 PM - Thread Starter
 
pajamajes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I want to be a SAHM, but it's really whatever works out best for our family. Like if I have better work opportunities or a better salary, then I will work and DH will stay home. But I am selfish and want to be with my babies 24/7. I would also like to use NFP. Pretty much anything with the word natural in it I like, lol. Drugs are chemicals, and putting chemicals into your body is always risky. Also, people say they have to take "the pill". People (well, some people) take pills when they are sick. Are you sick b/c you might get pregnant? Oh, wait that's the way your body is supposed to work! So, people take the pill so their body WON'T work correctly! Oh, that totally makes sense. : And it also irks me how men with a vasectomy or women with their tubes tied are said to be "fixed". That irks me for two reasons. (1) It implies that a correctly functioning body is not that, but broken, with the need to be fixed. (2) Dogs and cats get "fixed". I am not a cat or a dog. I am a human being. Anyway, I rant. Sorry. Continue. I love hearing from you all.

Jessie
pajamajes is offline  
#7 of 62 Old 03-02-2008, 09:24 PM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 16,378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We have 4 and another due this month...we will have at LEAST one more beyond this. In a PERFECT world I'd just keep taking them as they come though.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
#8 of 62 Old 03-03-2008, 05:08 AM
 
mauimama5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: a wee bit out in left field...
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hello! We have six! We have 2 girls 20 months and almost 9. We have 4 boys 3,4,11,almost 15.

We have been thru some rough times but overall I feel very blessed by our choice to have this many kids.....
mauimama5 is offline  
#9 of 62 Old 03-03-2008, 05:23 PM
 
waldorfknitmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Pregnant or nursing and knitting!
Posts: 1,221
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh Oh, Oh count me in!!!! Honestly, Honestly, I want to have as many kids as I can until I hit menopasue. I LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE children and I LOVE my baby!! He's now 21 mo and we have been trying for #2 since he was a year. I want many mnay kids, like 15, 16? maybe even 17 or 18, I'm 22 so its plausable. Dakota brings me much joy, why wouldn't I want more joy in my life?

Samantha:: love.gif {Waldorf Doll Maker} broc1.gif{Organic Farmer}knit.gif{crafter} computergeek2.gif {blogger}  and crunchy mama to 4 boys under 5! run.gif

waldorfknitmama is offline  
#10 of 62 Old 03-03-2008, 10:04 PM - Thread Starter
 
pajamajes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Natural Momma of 1, you sound just like me. Don't you hate it when people say "Oh, you'll change your mind!" and laugh and kind of smirk. Like we're stupid. I hate that.

Jessie
pajamajes is offline  
#11 of 62 Old 03-03-2008, 10:25 PM
 
Down2Earth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I grew up in a large family, 7 kids. I didn't have a great childhood. My brothers were abusive and my mom had mental problems and we seemed to have a single parent even before my parents divorced. It is very very hard to have that many children. You have to be completely committed and dedicated to being a good mom. You will need to live a completely selfless life for many decades. If you are ready and willing to support all your children in a healthy (physical and mental) way of life, then go for it! I'm not saying you shouldn't have a large family, just be aware of some of the drawbacks from someone who lived it and was always lost in the crowd.

Angela , wife to DH (Oct 1999), mother to DD (Oct 2008)
Down2Earth is offline  
#12 of 62 Old 03-03-2008, 10:34 PM
 
aprilv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 373
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i agree with the pp, the commitment of the parents really matter. i am the oldest of 5, and i really feel like our parents weren't prepared to have that many. there were many times when no one came to my school events, etc because there just weren't enough parents to go around and as you can see it still bothers me! even now, as a 29 year old, i still feel like i miss out sometimes. most of my friends' moms came to stay with them when they had their babies- not my mom. she couldn't because she had already missed several days of work due to my youngest brother being ill and didn't want to ask for more days off. that was hard for me.
at the same time, i do love having my siblings. we don't all hang out, but we get along well and all of us are very close to at least one sibling and that's a great thing. i plan to have 3 or 4 kids, but i have a very involved dh and i am very aware that i'll want to be more 'fair.'
aprilv is offline  
#13 of 62 Old 03-03-2008, 10:42 PM
 
jimblejamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central California
Posts: 2,874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pajamajes View Post
Natural Momma of 1, you sound just like me. Don't you hate it when people say "Oh, you'll change your mind!" and laugh and kind of smirk. Like we're stupid. I hate that.
ME TOO! I don't have any kids and when I say I want 6 people tell me, "Yeah. Right. Just wait till you have ONE." Right, like I just picked that number out of a hat and gave it no real thought...

Formerly known as "JessicaRenee".  hang.gif  Single mama to Jude (Sept '09)!  biggrinbounce.gif

jimblejamble is offline  
#14 of 62 Old 03-04-2008, 12:32 AM
 
Ofwait's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Here
Posts: 756
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I grew up in a family of 6, and I now have 4 of my own. There are benefits and draw backs to every size of family. I personally love four, and at the moment don't desire more, but give me another year.

C wife to J, Mom to B, C and Jjumpers.gif Iblahblah.gif, and Pbabyf.gif

Ofwait is offline  
#15 of 62 Old 03-04-2008, 03:16 AM
 
sostinkinhappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 828
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My mom grew up as an only child and she always wanted 12 kids, which she had. There were 6 boy and 6 girls in my family growing up. It was tough as a child, but not because of my mom. She was awesome but bio-dad was...well, let's just say he went to jai for his lack of parenting skills. I love having so many siblings now that we are older too.

I would love to have a large family as well, but my body simply won't allow me to.

Dissertating wife of Mr. Amazing Man, mother to Boo Bear ( ) Captain Knuckle (13), and The Professor (5). Expecting Penelope Rose 5/10/2010 via planned c/s.
sostinkinhappy is offline  
#16 of 62 Old 03-04-2008, 07:57 PM
 
kriket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 4,790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by anne1140 View Post
Dh and I plan on having 4. (I know that's not big for you, but to a lot of people, it is.) We also plan on adopting 2 of those 4. Our reason is because we would like a larger family, but we also understand that there are children out there that need homes, and we are wanting to provide a family to those in need.
WOAH! I think that there are a lot of people (especially on mothering) that have this same opinion, we are planning on ONLY having 2 and adopting the rest. I would like about 5. (who am i kidding at least 5) but DH and I both fell that we cannot and will not contribute to this outrageous population explosion. Plus with all the crap that my body give me TTC #1 i will be lucky to have one bio-kid! kudos to you anne1140!

I'm crunchy... Like a Dorito.
Mama to Sprout jog.gif 4.09 and Bruises babyboy.gif 7.11 handfasted to superhero.gif 9.07

kriket is offline  
#17 of 62 Old 03-07-2008, 05:08 PM
 
thewaggonerfamily's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The mitten state
Posts: 968
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We qualify. We will probably adopt/foster when we can no longer have bio kids. Its like the army, the toughest job you'll ever love. Every child makes our circle of love (and pile of laundry) larger. I thought the 2nd child was the hardest. I agree about getting "fixed" and find chemical and mechanical (IUDs) BC personally morally offensive (I'm not telling anyone else what to do...) bcause they are abortifacents. BTW google overpopulation myth. In about 50 yrs world population will probably be dropping like a stone. Suggesting overpopulation for fertility choices is rather like insisting the Earth is flat. It is based on the incorrect theory by Thomas Malthus that Food will increase mathematically while population will increase geometrically. Google Thomas Malthus or Mathusian Theory if you're bored.

Katie, mama to Katherine 19, Christian 17, Johannah 15, Nicholas 10, Genevieve 8, Matthew 5, Andrew 11/16/09 10#6oz home waterbirth and madly in love with  my husband, Scott

thewaggonerfamily is offline  
#18 of 62 Old 03-07-2008, 06:21 PM
 
mauimama5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: a wee bit out in left field...
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:
mauimama5 is offline  
#19 of 62 Old 03-11-2008, 01:45 AM
 
Anglyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 2,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I originally wanted five. I have four and I had decided before the baby was concieved that I was done. And I meant that. Right up until about a week ago. I dont know why but I have baby lust again! Im even thinking, what the heck, maybe two more?

I agree about the population explosion myth. Fertility rates are actually falling off world wide. There was a book recently republished (original date in the fifties but his predictions have come true) about this. I also remember talking abou it in a class in college when we read "Children Of Men" which is based on already happening trends.

~Me, mama to soapbox boy (1991), photo girl (1997), gadget girl (2003), jungle boy (2005), fan boy (2003) and twirly girl (2011). Twenty years of tree hugging, breastfeeding, cosleeping, unschooling, craziness
Anglyn is offline  
#20 of 62 Old 03-11-2008, 12:04 PM
 
WeasleyMum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 2,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The OP asked if there are any areas for larger families-- there is a thread in Finding Your Tribe for just about everybody (moms with dreadlocks, moms with only children, big families, military mamas, women who aren't mothers yet, moms who play World of Warcraft, etc) in addition to the area-based threads.

Whatever you're looking for, there will be a thread for it in Tribe, and if there isn't, you can start one!

Mara, mama to two boys born 05/2009 and 04/2011, after four miscarriages. 

Also: chicken3.gif  dog2.gif

WeasleyMum is offline  
#21 of 62 Old 03-11-2008, 12:40 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Healing my heart
Posts: 6,151
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have 6, and want as many as I can have LOL. I'm only 31 too. I have 3 boys & 3 girls in that order. I was in a family of 7 kids growing up, and LOVED it!

As far as birth control goes, I breastfeed, so I have no periods for about a year. My youngest is 14 months old, and no period yet. I hope soon though LOL. It's a GREAT spacing, I love having my kids about 2 years apart.

Mama~Love is offline  
#22 of 62 Old 03-13-2008, 05:11 PM
 
kriket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 4,790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewaggonerfamily View Post
BTW google overpopulation myth. In about 50 yrs world population will probably be dropping like a stone. Suggesting overpopulation for fertility choices is rather like insisting the Earth is flat. It is based on the incorrect theory by Thomas Malthus that Food will increase mathematically while population will increase geometrically. Google Thomas Malthus or Mathusian Theory if you're bored.
humm, I will do that. It's not my only reason of course. There are more then many many children that need homes, and my genetics aren't exactly stellar..
I'm not trying to start a fight (really) but you really don't think that population control of some form is needed? just debating really really not trying to start anything!

I'm crunchy... Like a Dorito.
Mama to Sprout jog.gif 4.09 and Bruises babyboy.gif 7.11 handfasted to superhero.gif 9.07

kriket is offline  
#23 of 62 Old 03-13-2008, 10:14 PM - Thread Starter
 
pajamajes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think full term breastfeeding is a great form of population control! I haven't done any research on the overpopulation thing, but I don't see how families in the past before birth control had on average 6-12 kids and the earth was not overpopulated. But now that families are having 2-3 kids, we are overpopulated. Yeah, don't believe that. The problem is people not living lightly nowadays. That is why our earth is in such bad shape. It's not how many people, it's how those people live. IMO.

Jessie
pajamajes is offline  
#24 of 62 Old 03-14-2008, 06:03 AM
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
humm, I will do that. It's not my only reason of course. There are more then many many children that need homes, and my genetics aren't exactly stellar..
I'm not trying to start a fight (really) but you really don't think that population control of some form is needed? just debating really really not trying to start anything!
I've done a fair bit of research on it, and I regularly take a look at the CIA World Factbook for the heck of it. I don't think overpopulation is a real problem In fact, the more I look into it, the more convinced I am that the overpopulation myth was started with a very specific political and socioeconomic agenda in mind. I'm fairly well convinced it was a eugenics thing-- the Birth Control Society of America, for example, was very heavily into eugenics. Some of the things they spouted would today be considered neo-nazi type white supremacism. They needed SOME rationale for convincing the men of America that we desperately needed birth control, though-- they weren't too keen on the whole feminism spin of BC.

That being said, I don't necessarily think that was the whole reason... but it does lead one to wonder.

I don't personally think that any kind of 'population controls' are either necessary or moral. Whenever I have any doubts on that score, all I have to do is look at China. I think *corporation* control and *government* control are more necessary. Most of the major problems I see are caused at least in large part by unscrupulous specimens of both varieties.

Of course, if you mean 'population control' in more of a groupthink-brainwashed mass media way...
well, no, I don't like that, either.

Also, as the PP said, full-term/ecological BFing is the best form of BC ever invented.
saimeiyu is offline  
#25 of 62 Old 03-20-2008, 03:11 PM
 
AngelBee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Brighton, MN
Posts: 20,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We will be having a large family...God willing.

We have 4 children so far, are open to having more, do not use any birth control, and will be adopting in the future.

Mama to 9 so far:Mother of Joey (20), Dominick (13), Abigail (11), Angelo (8), Mylee (6), Delainey (3), Colton (2) and Baby 8 and Baby 9 coming sometime in July 2013.   If evolution were true, mothers would have three arms!

AngelBee is offline  
#26 of 62 Old 03-21-2008, 01:53 PM
 
jmcqabigler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I came from a family of 6 my dad a family of 10 and I loved being in a big family my mom was a sahm but was sick from when I was 1 and above but my parents still went to almost everything my sibling were a part of i was dragged to more wrestling matches and football games than I can count. But I still loved it and my family still gets together all the time although not as much with me because we are to far away The best part is cousins for your kids even if you do not have that for your children your grandchildren will have cousins to play with every family get together. I still go to family reunion every year with my dad's family even thought my grandparents died years ago. Alas my hubby can only handle 4 kids even then he would be happy with just the 3 we have but I am not all done yet. So we compromised with 4 so my next will be my last. That is the catch you have to make sure your hubby is up to that many kids mine just can't handle all the chaos he hides half the time during family get togethers.

SAHM to wonderful hubby of 13 yrs and 3 boys age 10,7,and 4 and our new little girl 5mo ::::
jmcqabigler is offline  
#27 of 62 Old 03-21-2008, 02:44 PM
 
kittywitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Room of Requirement
Posts: 13,486
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kriket View Post
humm, I will do that. It's not my only reason of course. There are more then many many children that need homes, and my genetics aren't exactly stellar..
I'm not trying to start a fight (really) but you really don't think that population control of some form is needed? just debating really really not trying to start anything!
I don't believe in forced population control. I am, however, fully in support of breastfeeding past infancy and making formula a prescribed and controlled substance. Really, the problem we discussed in one of my enviro politics class is not too many births, but a lower death rate. More people are living longer and against the odds with artificial methods to keep people alive (something I saw a lot working in hospice and the hospital).

People are going to keep reproducing, that's a fact of life. We are animals and that is our instinct, in many ways, our purpose to perpetuate the species. Unfortunately we have gotten to the point of trying to trick nature and live beyond our means as far as resources go. I feel proud to have a large family that both respects and lives gently on the earth and I hope those values will be passed down.

AP Mom to 5 knit.gifhomeschool.giftoddler.gif
 
  

kittywitty is online now  
#28 of 62 Old 03-21-2008, 03:17 PM
 
berryblndgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is my first time posting on these boards, and I have to honestly say I am shocked by the number of people who've responded saying they believe overpopulation is a myth. I'd suggest that those who believe so check out http://www.overpopulation.org/ for starters. And I'd really like someone to explain why they think it's a myth.
berryblndgirl is offline  
#29 of 62 Old 03-21-2008, 04:53 PM
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by berryblndgirl View Post
This is my first time posting on these boards, and I have to honestly say I am shocked by the number of people who've responded saying they believe overpopulation is a myth. I'd suggest that those who believe so check out http://www.overpopulation.org/ for starters. And I'd really like someone to explain why they think it's a myth.
Primarily, overpopulation is based on the assumption that natural resources are all basically finite-- meaning that at a certain point, humanity will outstrip its ability to grow food, and the ability to have potable water and there will be a dearth of food and water, resulting in mass starvation/death. The other assumption is that the energy requirements for all people would be impossible to meet.

That is a faulty assumption, in my view, because it's nearly always possible to grow more food-- even *without* arable land. (We do this to excess in the US. millions and billions of pounds of food go to waste.) The ways to purify and desalinate water exist, even if they are expensive. There are a myriad of ways to create/capture energy without needing to resort to nonrenewable resources like oil, coal, and natural gas. We just don't use them to anywhere near their full extent. Therefore the problem is not finite natural resources, but rather, distribution of resources. We in the US eat how many times what someone in Africa or China or the Middle east does? How much energy do we consume? And why? And how does it compare with the rest of the world?

It's true that it would be near impossible to provide every single person in the world with the ability and resources to consume the amount of energy and food that we do in the US. We shouldn't be trying to make it possible for everyone in the whole wide world to consume like the US, though. We should be trying to reduce US consumption. We should be striving for a sustainable future, for an environment that isn't poisoned, and air that won't give us cancer. That doesn't mean we need less people in the world. We need better management.

I did look at that page that you pointed out, briefly. It spouts the same party-line that the world's resources can't support more people; I disagree. We need more responsible use and distribution.

Additionally, deliberately creating a shrinking population, as that site advocates, is foolish. You would create a population which necessitates inhumane treatment of non-producing members of society-- the elderly and disabled-- because there will not be enough caretakers to give them humane treatment. Every generation would see more elderly in need of care, and less people to give them that care. Add to that the disabled, and... Yeah. Bad idea. Life expectancy is growing. People need care for longer terms of years, because medical technology is extending lives. THAT is the major reason that the population is even growing at all right now. Unfortunately, that longer life also equates more care for many, if not all. And that care has to come from human beings; it can't come from machines. Either that, or we just stop the care and they die of something preventable. Life expectancy shrinks, so does the population. Lovely thought, huh?

You ever hear of the 4-2-1 problem in China? That's one child financially and morally responsible for taking care of two aging parents, and four aging grandparents, and God forbid taking care of GREAT grandparents on top of that! It's not a good goal. It's a problem. 60 and 70 year old men and women shouldn't be required to work in a factory or at a wal-mart or McDonald's because they can't afford to stop working or they starve. Where's the humanity in that? Social security does not work with a mostly-aged population. The math just doesn't work.
That is happening, all over the nation, and all over the world. In China, they actually have to actively seek out the elderly to man factories. There aren't enough young people, and otherwise, the elderly starve because their grandchildren barely make enough to support themselves and their parents.
Sorry, but... That's not a future I would wish on ANYONE, let alone a relative.
saimeiyu is offline  
#30 of 62 Old 03-21-2008, 05:04 PM
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kittywitty View Post
I don't believe in forced population control. I am, however, fully in support of breastfeeding past infancy and making formula a prescribed and controlled substance. Really, the problem we discussed in one of my enviro politics class is not too many births, but a lower death rate. More people are living longer and against the odds with artificial methods to keep people alive (something I saw a lot working in hospice and the hospital).
ITA.
saimeiyu is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off