Children From Small Families FARE Better Than Children From Large Families-HERE'S WHY

Why Children From Small Families Fare BETTER

Children in small families receive more parental attention and individualize care.In small family environments parents can devote more time in the nurturance and raising of their children.
Children in small families receive more parental attention and individualize care.In small family environments parents can devote more time in the nurturance and raising of their children.
There is more parent-child interaction in small families.Children have more access to their parents.
There is more parent-child interaction in small families.Children have more access to their parents.
There is more money allotted per child in small families.Money isn't stretched so tightly and there are monies left for things beyond the basic necessities.Small families are more likely to be socioeconomically affluent.
There is more money allotted per child in small families.Money isn't stretched so tightly and there are monies left for things beyond the basic necessities.Small families are more likely to be socioeconomically affluent.
Because there is more money allotted per child in small families, there is money left over for children to particate in cultural and intellectual activities such as attending museums, dancing school, music class and/or other related activities.
Because there is more money allotted per child in small families, there is money left over for children to particate in cultural and intellectual activities such as attending museums, dancing school, music class and/or other related activities.
Because children from small families are exposed to cultural and intellectual activities, they tend to appreciate beauty and the better things of life.
Because children from small families are exposed to cultural and intellectual activities, they tend to appreciate beauty and the better things of life.
In small families, there are monies allotted for books, computers, and other intellectual activities.As a result, children from small families begin school academically prepared and ahead.
In small families, there are monies allotted for books, computers, and other intellectual activities.As a result, children from small families begin school academically prepared and ahead.
Children in small families are likely to pursue tertiary education as there are monies allotted for this.As a result, they tend to be in jobs and/or careers where there are advancement opportunities.
Children in small families are likely to pursue tertiary education as there are monies allotted for this.As a result, they tend to be in jobs and/or careers where there are advancement opportunities.

Why Children From Large Families Fare WORSE

Parental resources in large families are stretched to the limit. Parents simply cannot give their children the individualized attention they need.Oftentimes, children are left to their own devices.They must SWIM or SINK.
Parental resources in large families are stretched to the limit. Parents simply cannot give their children the individualized attention they need.Oftentimes, children are left to their own devices.They must SWIM or SINK.
Bereft of parental supervision and interaction, children from large families must raise themselves and/or each other. Children from large families seldom, if ever, have close relationships with their parents.
Bereft of parental supervision and interaction, children from large families must raise themselves and/or each other. Children from large families seldom, if ever, have close relationships with their parents.
There is less money allotted per child in large families.There is hardly enough money for the rudiments, let alone anything else.Children from large families must often DO WITHOUT even the basic necessities.
There is less money allotted per child in large families.There is hardly enough money for the rudiments, let alone anything else.Children from large families must often DO WITHOUT even the basic necessities.
Large families tend to be poor or impoverished. Finances are stretched to the max. Parents find it EXTREMELY DIFFICULT  to adequately  provide for their children.
Large families tend to be poor or impoverished. Finances are stretched to the max. Parents find it EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to adequately provide for their children.
Children from large families do not participate in cultural /intellectual activities as there are no monies for such.As a result, such children are inured to the higher human needs and the appreciation of beauty.They often are rough around the edges.
Children from large families do not participate in cultural /intellectual activities as there are no monies for such.As a result, such children are inured to the higher human needs and the appreciation of beauty.They often are rough around the edges.
In the homes of typical large families, there are little books and other intellectual paraphernalia.Children from large families begin school academically unprepared and behind.
In the homes of typical large families, there are little books and other intellectual paraphernalia.Children from large families begin school academically unprepared and behind.
Children from large families do not continue their education after high school.There are no monies for that.They have to work and thus settle for low and dead end jobs with no prospect of advancement.In essence, they remain in poverty or near poverty
Children from large families do not continue their education after high school.There are no monies for that.They have to work and thus settle for low and dead end jobs with no prospect of advancement.In essence, they remain in poverty or near poverty

Survey Regarding This Hub

Describe your family size

See results without voting

Describe your childhood situation

See results without voting

Small Families Provide The VERY BEST Environment for Children to Grow Up In

Children from small families(1-2 children per household) fare better than children from large families(6 or more children per household). There are myriad reasons for this. First of all, parents of small families, on the whole, tend to be better educated, more liberal, and/or more socioeconomically affluent. There is a correlation between the levels of education and income and family size. Basically better educated and more socioeconomically affluent tend to have smaller families. Secondly, there are more physical, emotional, and financial resources allocated per child in the small family than there are in the large family.

Parents have more time to devote to the caring and nurturing of children in the small family. This means that children from small families receive more individualized parental attention than their counterparts from large families. Children from large families oftentimes do not receive the prerequisite individualized parental attention. They may not even receive the basic level of parental attention. They are left mostly to their own devices and lead a hardscrabble and an extremely harsh existence, existing at the most elemental and rudimentary level.

As there is more monies allocated per child in the small family, children from small families are exposed to more educational, intellectual, and/or cultural opportunities such as theatre, piano/dancing/ singing lessons, overseas travel, opera, and/or going to fine restaurants to experience different cuisines. This exposure translates into children from small families having a better and more advanced all around education. This exposure also results in children from small families being more cultured, knowledgeable, sophisticated, and urbane than children from large families. Children from small families have cultural and intellectual savvy that children from large families do not possess.

Another by-product of being exposed to cultural and intellectual activities is that children from small families want to obtain the highest level of education and the best job possible in order to provide their own children with the same opportunities. They want to obtain high goals as a result of their exposure to affluence, luxury, and culture as children. The saying that children from small families are used to the better and finer things of life is a truism.

On average, children from small families tend to be better adjusted and know how to successfully navigate their environment. They are more creative and self-actualized than children from large families. They are routinely encouraged by their parents to be creative and to use their utmost potential, especially if they are only children.

Children from small families,for the most part, have a marked appreciation for beauty because of constant exposure to the finer things of life. Parents of small families inculcate their children that there is more to life than just the rudiments of food, clothing, and/or shelter. They instruct their children regarding the importance of the higher human needs and insist that culture is as essential as food, clothing, and/or shelter.

Children from large families, on the contrary, are often raised by their parents with just the basic rudiments such as food, clothing, and/or shelter, if that. Parents of large families typically tend to be less educated, more conservative/religious, and/or socioeconomically poor, even impoverished. On a whole, less educated, more conservative, more religious and poorer people tend to have large families. Children from large families are further taught the principle of just mere instinctive and primal survival, nothing more, nothing less. Children from large families are not raised to appreciate the higher human needs such as appreciation for beauty, culture, the finer things of life, and the importance of self-actualization and individuality. Such things are often beyond the purview of the average large family.

Children from large families are routinely inculcated with the premise that they are part of the group. They are further told that their individuality count for very little or nothing. They have an extremely meager material existence. They have no concept of affluent living and privacy, often crammed together in an extremely crowded environment. They also have a low sense of self and little sense of self-love. Their parents impart to them that individualism means nothing and that the collective is of the utmost importance. The concepts of self-actualization and self-fulfillment are foreign in the large family environment. Beyond that, they are taught that self-actualization and self-fulfillment are selfish values.

In small families, the primary source of children's interaction and their sphere of influence are their parents. As a result of this intense parental attention and guidance, children from small families are steered into proper activities which decrease their likelihood to indulge in deleterious and delinquent behavior as children from large families are more predisposed to do. In a study done by Lipsey and Derzon (1998), it authenticated that there were factors which caused delinquent behavior: (1) socioeconomic poverty, (2) poor parental supervision, (3) low parental involvement, (4) poor parent-child relationships, and (5) large family size. In large families, there are multiple factors and variables such as socioeconomic poverty, poor parental supervision and parent-child relationships, and low parental involvement. Based upon such factors, juvenile delinquency is more prevalent in large family than it is in small families.

Countless psychological and sociological studies have consistently confirmed that in large families, parents do not have the physical resources to supervise their children. They are clearly unable to devote the necessary time to a large number of children. There is evidently little parental interaction with children in a large family environment. In the large family environment, it is commonplace for children to be left supervised and to their own devices.

Children from large families participate in less parent supervised activities than their counterparts from small families. Unstructured activities=more involvement in more dangerous, more deleterious, even delinquent activities. A friend of mine, a registered nurse/supervisor, had a patient from the unpaid hospital wards who was one of 13 children. She told me that the boy would routinely sneak out of his home at night, roaming the streets until 5 o'clock the next morning. She further remarked that that he often burglarized nearby apartments, stealing articles such as radios and television sets.

Many times children from large families become involved in delinquent activities in order to receive the attention that they do not receive in the home environment. Many girls from large families because they did not receive sufficient parental attention fall for anyone who would give them the attention they need. Oftentimes, such attention, especially if it is from a male, is not positive. If children do not receive adult attention at home, they will seek it elsewhere and that attention can be quite negative with dire consequences.

Children from small families tend to be more mature than their counterparts from large families as a result of mainly interacting with their parents. They are more exposed to adult behavior via their parents thus learning adult behavior, mannerisms, and/or speech patterns. This results in more adult behavior. Children from large families, au contraire, interact mostly with their siblings and seldom with their parents. As a result of mainly sibling interaction, they possess more elementary and/or rudimentary levels of behavior, mannerisms, and/or speech patterns. Siblings raise themselves and/or each other in large families while children in small families are raised by their parents.

A study was done in 1975 and 2001 by R.B. Zajonc, a social psychologist. Dr. Zajonc stated that the larger the number of children per household, the less mature and more backward the intellectual environment is for all concerned. The study further authenticated that oldest children from large families have lower IQs on average than similarly situated children from small families. In a study done by Black(1981) and Downey(2001) based on The Resource Dilution Model, oldest children have the highest IQ but with each successive sibling, there is a reduction in IQ. They explained that the reduction is a result of in the further division of parental time spent with each time in a continuing growing family.

John P. Holdren, top science adviser in the Obama administration, stated in 2009 that the larger the family, the lower the IQ of the children. He confirmed Dr. Zajonc's findings that children from large families are less likely to perform well intellectually than children from small families. Dr. Joyce Brothers, the noted psychologist, adamantly asserted in 1981 that children from small families are brighter and more creative than their counterparts from large families.

The reasons are obvious, in small families, parents spend time conversing and discussing things with their children in addition to teaching them. In small families, it is the parents(adults) who parent their children. This is the way things are supposed to be in a family. In the large family, parents do not devote time to having a conversation and discussing things with their children. Parents of large families seldom, if ever, teach their children. Children in the large family environment must learn to proverbially swim or sink. In large families, parents do not raise their children, it is the children who either raise themselves or each other which is total inverse logic and unnatural.

It is not unusual for children in large families, especially the oldest child, to assume parental responsibilities regarding their siblings. Many children in large families are parentified children; they are the ones who raise younger siblings instead of the parents. Children raising children implicitly explains why children from large families are less developed emotionally, intellectually, and psychologically than their counterparts from small families. In large families, it is the children who teach each other, not the parents.

Parents, as adults, have more education, experience, knowledge, and wisdom than any sibling has. Children who primarily interact with their parents instead of their siblings are more developmentally mature for this very reason as opposed to children who only interact with siblings who are either at the same level or a level only slightly above. Siblings are children themselves and not as developmentally mature as an adult. No child, on average, has more advanced education, experience, knowledge, and/or wisdom than an adult.

Because there are books and other educational paraphernalia in the homes of small families plus the intense, individualized parent-child interaction, children from small families come to school more prepared academically. Another aftereffect of this academic preparedness, children from small families tend to be high academic achievers. In my elementary school class, all of the honor roll students were from small families. The top three honor roll students were only children( I was one of them)!

In contrast, the children from large families in my elementary school class come to school academically unprepared as there were little by the way of intellectual paraphernalia in the home in addition to having very little or no interpersonal relationships with their parents, only siblings. These children were very poor students. They were C, C-, even D students. The overwhelming majority of them (90%) regularly attended summer school and/or remedial classes during the school year. They were relegated to the class for slower students.

Parents of small families place a premium value on education and academic achievement more than parents of large families. They are of the realization that if one is to achieve high levels of success, one must obtain a high level of academic achievement which increases the likelihood of furthering one's educational and career attainment. Parents of large families value pure street smarts and other forms of instinctual behavior over intellectual and academic achievement.

The concept of intellectualism and academic achievement are simply not viewed important in the large family environment. It is enough in the large family environment to survive from day to day. To them, it is hard enough for parents of large families to provide their children with the very basic of necessities, let alone books and/or other intellectual things. The main concern in the large family is barely covering the basics, including the art of survival. Children in large families, because they grow up in financially tenuous circumstances, have a very strong survival instinct. They are used to making do on very little or next to nothing.

According to a study done by Lillian Gelmont and Frances Moralla in 1973, there was a strict correlation between large family size and low academic achievement. The study showed that children from large families tend to make poorer showings on intelligence tests and other educational measures. The study added that this was in contrast to their counterparts from small families who excelled on intelligence tests and other relational educational measures.

For instance, I had to teach one of my maternal cousins, who was one of 8 children how to read and do arithmetic on a rudimentary level. Her parents never taught her how to read and there were no books in the home. Another example of this was a former classmate in the 5th grade who could not do simple multiplication and division problems. She was 13 years old and retained thrice in the 5th grade. In addition to that, she was extremely inarticulate and could not write in complete sentences. This young girl had little or no interaction with her parents. They felt that it was her job to raise and teach herself, not theirs although they were the parents.

Children from small families have more socioeconomic opportunities to continue their education, even to the tertiary level and beyond. Studies done by Blake in 1989 and Steelman in 2002 confirmed that children from small families, on the average, attain higher levels of education than children from large families because there are more economic resources allocated per child in small families. Children from large families, because of socioeconomic circumstances, oftentimes have to discontinue their education in order to work to supplement their family income. It is not unusual for parents of large families to force their children to quit school to work because of insufficient income. A social worker friend related to me that a 16 year old client had to quite 11th grade in order to work to help support his parents and 8 siblings. As a result of children from large families being forced to discontinue their education, they are oftentimes relegated to low end positions.

Two NEW YORK DAILY NEWS articles from the 1990s maintained that children from small families had more positive outcomes that those from large families whose outcomes were more negative. The first article stated that children from small families achieved a higher level of socioeconomic affluence in adulthood than their counterparts from large families. According to the article, children from small families had more available socioeconomic opportunities that afforded better quality of education and more educational opportunities thus access to better jobs.

The second article confirmed that children from large families ended up the poorest socioeconomically. It explained that children from large families tend to be impoverished and as a result have lesser educational opportunities thus having to take lower level, dead end jobs. It added that children from large families suffered more psychological stresses due to the constant vying for parental attention and being in a neverending state of financial struggle. It continued to state that another influential factor relating to this psychological stress is oldest children parenting younger siblings, preventing them from experiencing normative childhoods and adolescence. The article concluded that they also exhibited more pathological behavior than children from small families due to the poor parent-child dynamic which is normative in the large family environment.

To conclude, children from small families tend to fare better than children from large families in so many ways. They have more socioeconomic advantages which allows to pursue more constructive intellectual activities. They have more individualized time with their parents. They also develop quicker as a result of primarily interacting with their parents, who as adults, are able to impart a more advanced level of education. They furthermore have more opportunity to pursue higher education than their counterparts in large families who oftentimes must forego any forms of higher education,having to work in order to supplement family income. The small family is the best environment for a child to be nurture in. The small family is the future while the large family is becoming an atavistic remnant of the past.


© 2010 Grace Marguerite Williams

More by this Author


ANY ILLOGICAL COMMENTS PRAISING LARGE FAMILIES & DENIGRATING SMALL FAMILIES WON'T BE ACCEPTED & WILL BE....DELETED, THANK YOU. 36 comments

oldest of 7 5 years ago

im 24 and the oldest of 7 the youngest is 10 years old. i started chaning nappies when i was 5, saftey pins and 5 year olds dont mix and adding a baby really dont mix, when i was 11 it became my job to change nappies, give baths, make and feed bottles, entertain younger children. all while recoving from surgery (an opertation on my leg that should have been done years earlier, a problem that was picked up at school because my mother was to busy to notice) and when i was 13 my parents had another baby so i had 2 times as many nappies. i always wore my unifom on wear what you want days because my clothes had holes and never fitted me. i finished year 12, but never had help with homework they couldn't once i got high school because it was to advance for them. my mother still neads my help and when i was 18 i organise every thing for my dads funeral from headstone to helping put him in the coffin. im 24 now with 3 kids of my own and still needs me to help with her kids and can never offer advice. i will not be having any more kids and will always think my parents are the most selfish people ever


ppompeiiable 5 years ago

I disagree BEING ONE OF THOSE CHILDREN NEGLECTED IN A LARGE FAMILY. My mother did the same fight as the lady with the eight kids. Wait until they grow up. You are neglecting them and paying attention to you three youngest the most. All the rest are being waysided and abused. Stop lying. Tell the truth. You arent loving and paying attention to all your kids.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

To oldest of seven: I wholeheartedly agree with you. As I have stated time and time again, parents do not raise children in large families. It is the older and/or oldest siblings who raise their youngest siblings. Children in small families grow up better off educationally, intellectually, psychologically, and emotionally than do children from large families. Children in small families are allowed to have childhoods and are treated equally by their parents whereas children in large families are treated hierarchally with the oldest children having no childhoods while the youngest children are so overindulged. Parents who do have large families do need psychological help as they should develop hobbies and the women should have jobs. That will curtail the number of children a couple has.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

To ppompeiiable, I agree with you. The large family is a negative dinosaur in society which is on its way to extinction. Most of the children I know who came from large families HATED it! Those who did not are in denial. The large family is an incestuous and abnormal family. Children growing up in large families are usually developmentally behind than that of small families as demonstrated in the responses of people who came from large families. Children from large families are less developmentally able intellectually, emotionally, and psychologically than children from small families. Studies show that children from small families have higher IQs and are more intellectually developed and competent than children from large families. Children from small families are more likely to attend college and postgraduate education than children from large families. Parents raise their children in small families whereas in large families, siblings raise each other. Large families are totally abhorrent and abnormal. Children from small families are happier and are less likely to engage in delinquent and other risky behaviors because of the attention they receive from their parents. Studies show that children from large families are more likely to join gangs and girls from large families are more likely to have teenage pregnancies because of the lack of attention they receive from their parents. Children from small families have higher and better self-esteem than children from large families who have little or no sense of self. Despite mythologies that children from large families are more compassionate and considerate, the opposite is quite true. Some of the most selfish and inconsiderate people come from large families and some of the most beautiful and considerate people were only children.


oldest of 7 5 years ago

What ur saying is so true well at least in my family i bearly had a childhood and my younger siblings can't even be bothered cleaning their rooms. as a child if i complained i would hear "thats what u get for being part of a big family" from my dad & "if u think ur life is hard imagine how ur grandma felt she was the youngest of 13 and when she was a baby her bed was a dresser draw next to the fire" from my mum.

i still rush threw my dinner, as a kid only the 2 finish would get 2nds. im also not big on sharing. i give blood, but never give money to charities. This might seem harsh to everyone but growing up in a large poor family u don't just give stuff away to someone cause they are having a sook about there life


Learn Things Web profile image

Learn Things Web 5 years ago from California

I come from a large family and I have to agree just from my own experiences. I never really felt like I was parented. There were too many kids for my mother to really spend any time with us. She had too much to do. There was also too little money for many things that we wanted. I was the second youngest and did get more attention as my older siblings left home. But I basically had to raise myself.


MelindaKLegs 4 years ago

I am from a family of four. I am the youngest. All my older sisters resent the fact that my mother began attending college when I was four. I am happy she did. She was a great mother and she died young, so I'm glad she did what she loved while she was alive. She read to me and I read to her, one story each, every night. Money was sometimes tight despite the fact that we were upper middle class. Two of my sisters were in college at one time and money was really tight then. There was child-on- child abuse that was physical, mental, and emotional. It affected all our lives in a detrimental way. My older sisters resent the fact that mom wasn't there enough for them because they were used to a 1950s mom that was room mother every year and was a stay at home mom. I grew up with a liberated, educated mother in the mid-1960s to 1970s. It was of great benefit to me to have an educated, working mother. None of my older sisters have been able to have a successful career outside the home and support themselves. They all have depended on a man to support them and that has not always worked out. Sometimes, the work you do to live with a man is more than the work you would have to do to pay your own bills. My mother and father were/are very intelligent and we were exposed to many books, art supplies, music, opera, ballet, symphony, museums, plays, vacations, etc. We could not afford overseas vacations. However, at least two of my older sisters feel that they were "put upon" and had to help raise their younger siblings. The oldest sister refused to do that at all. The two middle siblings are the most resentful. I had to help clean, cook, and take care of the home. I believe that was good for me and for all us as a learning experience. I would have liked to have three children, but was only able to have one due to health issues. He is very intelligent and we have a great relationship. My oldest sister had no children, my second oldest only one, the third sister had three. My oldest sister said nastily at one point that each of us sisters had how many children we believed there should have been in our family. I notice a great deal of defensiveness that is inappropriate and ridiculous in the above responses. These are facts. You did not cite the studies, but I doubt based on the writing samples above that most of these people would be able to read and interpret scientific studies. They obviously do not understand statistics or sociology. Sociology cannot predict outcomes in a small group. Statistics do not apply well to individual cases. I do know some larger families that work out fairly well, but the mothers in those families stay home. That is not financially possible for most middle class families in the USA today. The number of hours of work needed to maintain middle class status in the USA today is about 100 per week. Therefore, in order to remain in the middle class most mothers must work. Even when the mother stays at home, in larger families mothers tend to be defensive about their choice of family size and tend to underestimate the resentment of their children. The truth can be painful.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Thank you for your insightful comments. Always feel free to stop by. It is good to add to the discussion on the subject! Amen to you, MelindaKLegs, many mothers of large families do seem to be very pathologically defensive regarding their family size and oftentimes deride mothers of smaller families. You are so on target stating that many children from large families actually resent it! Peace to you always!


Mom of two 4 years ago

My husband and I both grew up in families with 7 children. Our families were very different, his much less interactive with his parents and mine much more interactive. My mother parented us and my family supported us financially very well. We were able to peruse many of the activities you said we would not be able to. We took dance, music, travelled all over the country and some internationally, and we all graduated from college and most have advanced degrees and all have supported our own families very well in upper middle to upper class income and opportunity levels. We were the priorities in our parents lives and they made sure we were well taken care of, our emotional needs and academic needs were attended to and they made sure we had time with each of them and were able to learn to look out for each member of the family. My husband's family on the other hand did depend on the children to raise each other but only because both of his parents had to work. Despite that 5 of the 7 of them have college degrees and they are all living productive lives at a middle class level or better. I think your generalizations are just that too much of a generalization. For each post were someone else has a story about a successful large family you say but you are the exception well, not everyone can be an exception. Good families, productive families and success stories along with great opportunities come in all sizes - good parents are good parents and do everything they can for their children and if they are raised in a loving and positive family dynamic, the children can and will go on to lead a happy and successful life despite the number of siblings. BTW one reason my mother had so many children was because she was an only child who was despitely lonely even though she had every opportunity in the world and had a large extended family nearby. She says she would not give up any of us, even though she was widowed at 46 and still got us all through college and onto successful lives


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

To Mom of two: you have substantiated this hub. You stated that your mother loved and nurtured you. You furthermore added that your mother was an only child. People from small families grow up in a more nurturing and loving environments than people from large families. The former also receive individualized attention from their parents. Being from a small family made your mother more loving and more nurturing. If your mother was from a large family, she would not have been as nurturing and a concerned mother.

You stated that your mother as a widow got all seven of you through college. Mothers from small families raise their children and are concerned about their emotional, psychological, and financial wellbeing while mothers from large families believe in children raising themselves, not caring about their upkeep, contending that their children can do the best they can, if they swim, good, or if they drown, good. Small families are better than large families, all around in terms of chilidren's development, success rate, and the type of parents such children eventually become.


Ruchi Urvashi profile image

Ruchi Urvashi 4 years ago from Singapore

It is great to read your perspective about large and small families. I do have a small family and the family members get lot of attention and love.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Of course Ruchi! Children of small families do fare better because parents can effectively give their children more attention than parents of large families. It is just simply impossible for parents to give a large amount of children the individualized attention the children need. In the average large family, parents are less interactive which means that it is the oldest/older children who raise the younger ones. That is a fact of life.

Those who claim that they received adequate attention in large families are only in denial. Children in large families raise themselves mostly. Also, in the average large family, many children have benign neglect. It is quite the opposite in the small families, children in small families have the best of all worlds. They are more affluent because there is more money allotted per children, they also have better health care and better nutrition. They also have monies for cultural and intellectual things which children from large families do not have because the average large family is impoverished. Ruchi, what you have stated is so true. It is refreshing to hear from people of small families. I want to hear from people from small families and/or people who have small families to state the advantages of the small family system. Thank you, Ruchi, for your intelligent response and good night and God bless!


Rajib 3 years ago

I totally agree with the article. The truth always sounds bitter and harder to digest. There may be some exceptions but overall the author in the analysis is spot on.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Rajib, THANK YOU. Most intelligent people KNOW this. However, the majority of people from large families are IN DENIAL regarding their family life. They know that THEY are on the SHORT end of the familial stick; however, they stick to their INVERSE MYOPIC "vision" of large families. Large families are WORST socioeconomically, emotionally, educationally, and/or in OTHER ways than small families. I am glad that you, Rajib, are one of the FEW INTELLIGENT people who agree. Most people from large families have an INVERSE LOGIC of things. They think socioeconomic poverty, deprivation, and lack of parental attention are normal. Well, that is typical large family logic!


Tom Riddle profile image

Tom Riddle 3 years ago from Hogsmeade

Inspirational. I do hope they die out. That's what I've been saying about mudbloods all along.


Tom Riddle profile image

Tom Riddle 3 years ago from Hogsmeade

I try to serve as an inspiration for others


End the trend 3 years ago

I am from a large family (10 children) and must agree with a lot of what is presented here.

Luckily I was able to buck the tend and attend university and now have a great career as a teacher.

I have two young children and my husband and I have made the decision to have a small family in order to be able to provide for our children... By provide I mean time, money, opportunities, etc.

I am fully aware of the disadvantages that children in large families face and it certainly isn't something I want my children to struggle with.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Amen, my sister. Thank you for stopping by and adding to the discussion. End the trend, what you have said is true. Children need parental love, attention, and to be provided with the best of opportunities and to have a high or least decent socioeconomic standard of living.

Poverty is detrimental to children's development educationally, physically, mentally, and psychologically. There is a higher incident of child poverty in large families than they are in small families. Many parents of large families unthinkingly have children without considering the financial, emotional, and psychological ramifications on the family.

Many parents of large families are of the school that "God will provide" and "whatever the children do not have, well tough" . This is not the proper way to raise children. Children should be raised in the best of all circumstances emotionally, financially, and psychologically. Nice to hear from you End the trend and God Bless.


Sharon white 3 years ago

Crock of crap this article. I grew up in a small family and had all the same issues as the kids from larger families. No money for sport or extra education. No extra time with parents as they were busy trying to make ends meet etc. same s$@t different shovel. I have 6 kids, they get individual time because I make it that way, and they are better educated than me. Family size does not determine dis-function size.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Sharon, your parents tried. They care for you and did the best they knew how. Your parents are smart and caring people. They worked to make ends meet. At least they were caring and intelligent enough to have a small family.


happytobetheonly 2 years ago

I think in the old days, people generally had lots of kids because most people were farmers or artisans. They needed lots of hands for labour and what c0uld be better than getting free labour from your kids? Since most people lived in villages back then ( I am talking about hundreds of years ago), they lived a subsistence lifestyle i.e. they grew their own food, wove their own clothes, built their own cottages, collected their own firewood etc. This meant that they did not have to buy anything often. This in turn translated to a low cost of feeding, clothing and housing a child, and a big benefit to be gained from having an extra pair of hands to do the farming, housework, weaving etc. In the year 2013, there is simply no excuse to have a large family. From farming to every conceivable industry is heavily mechanized now. Human labour is not valuable any more. The cost of feeding and raising a child is much more than the benefit to be gained from their labour.

You hit the nail on the head by pointing out that the poorer a couple is, the more likely they are to have lots of kids. I have personally seen this in developing countries, where the poorest of the poor tend to have 5-10 kids each and the number drops drastically with increase in education and income. I guess poverty-ridden people still cling to the old idea of 'more hands for labour equals more money'. This makes sense, because in developing countries with ineffective child labour laws, the parents send their kids to work as soon as the latter can barely walk and talk. Invariably, the parent makes a contract with the child's employer and collects the child's pay directly. The poor child does not get to see even a penny of the money he/she is sweating for. In such a situation, there is a clear incentive to parents to keep having children. Even if a couple of their children were to die of malnourishment or disease, the parents don't mind because they can always replace them with more.

All the above goes to show that large 'families' , stripped down to their basics, arose as a way to exploit children. Since we are now civilized people, I see no purpose in having large 'families' since the children don't benefit and the parents also don't benefit.

Finally, I would like to reply to Sharon White, who commented above: Sharon, if your parents couldn't make ends meet with a small family, imagine how much worse your situation would have been if you had been part of a large family. Conversely, imagine how much better off you would have been if you had been the only child.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Happy, I am GLAD that YOU have responded to my article. At last, one person with some good sense. Happy, you really do not know the incessantly challenged folks from large families who critiqued my article and then they admitted to the conditions which I described. Happy, people of large families are in DEEP, DEEP DENIAL. People from large families are on a DIFFERENT planet from normal people. They AREN'T normal at all. They have a different culture and psychology from us normal folks. You are so correct in your response. Large families are WRONG. I knew this since I was a child and heard stories from my parents and relatives. Also in my extended family, those from large families were the poorest and among my classmates, those from large families were the poorest. Happy, parents of large families DON'T care, all they care about is having children after children ad infintium, if their children DON'T have. They say, well, they DON'T need. Well, those are the "children" who shake down more affluent children for money. I have seen it. People had large families in the days when they did not know better and there were NO ACCESS to contraception. With advancements in contraception, there is NO reason why people should have more than 2 children. Large families are totally inane in this postmodern era.

You are right about Sharon White. Really, now. Some people DON'T think Her parents were smart enough to have one child. If she was from a large family, she would be under water, drowning. Of course, the situation would be MUCH, MUCH WORSE. Happy, some people DON'T think. Oh well, Happy, I am SO GLAD that YOU stopped and added to the discussion of my 3 hubs. Please stop by again.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

@Happy, large families still exploit children. Children in large families do not have even the necessities. The overwhelming majority of large families are either impoverished or near poverty. Written a hub on this. Children in large families do not have what normal children have. They only have the bare rudiments, if that.

Children in large families develop a poverty mentality and poverty consciousness. They resent those who have more, calling them spoiled because their parents are unable to provide them with even the basic amenities. Many large families have to depend upon charities and other forms of assistance to keep them afloat. Many children from large families are the recipients of sponsored breakfasts and lunches in addition to sponsored medical and health care as their parents can ill afford to provide such care.

It is apparent that parents of large families do not care about the economic well-being of their children at all. They just produce without caring about how this effect the children in the family. Of course, there is no parental attention in large families. Children are left to raise themselves and each other. This is de rigueur in large families. One can say that children in large famlies are very instinctual and live at the very lowest common denominator. They are content to live at near nothing and believe that socioeconomic struggle and want are NORMAL lifestyles. They have an inverse psychology and perspective that normal parents, children, and people DON'T have!


Jane 2 years ago

Where this may be true in some cases, it certainly isn't in mine. I'm not in denial either. I have 5 children, all of whom excel at school, at their hobbies. They are all extremely popular, they are the child every parent wants their child to be friends with. We travel and show them the beauty of the world. They eat healthy, never miss school. They are complete individuals and never have to look after younger siblings. When people first meet me and I tell them how many children I have they immediately make an assumption about my mental health, my intelligence,my finances and the type of person I must be. People always tell me they judged me wrongly. I feel this article only fuels peoples prejudices and that people and children should not be stereotyped. I wonder if the royal family get judged so quickly ?


LR 2 years ago

I know boys, especially from large families, never fall for anyone who would give them the attention they need. Instead, they beat or kill them to prove their superiority, including women.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

WOW, rhat's interesting.


seriousrunner 2 years ago

Such distortion and manipulation of studies. We can extrapolate material selectively to prove a point. The hallmark of a biased article. My 5 boys are gentlemen. Any sized household can be wrought with chaos and poor parenting. When a set of parents want a larger family (like myself and husband) our world and focus are our kids and their growth and development. Same with my network of larger families.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Well, it isn't the case for typical parents of large/very large families. Oftentimes, they have children without considering the ramifications of having such children on their families and particularly on the existing children. The average child in a large/very large family has to do without even the rudiments. Children in large/very large families are accustomed to doing without. They have inferior food and no medical/health care among other things. Poverty and penury are common in the large/very large family scenario.

Parents of large/very large families do not give their children individualized time and attention. They are unable to. It is common for children in large/very large families to raise themselves or each other. Many oldest children in large/very large families are the REAL PARENTS in the family. It is THEY who parent the children, not the parents themselves.

Since poverty is de rigueur in large/very large families, it is common for children from largle/very large families to work from childhood to get the things that normal children have and to even help out the parents socioeconomically. For example, Speaker John Boehner, one of 12 children, worked since he was EIGHT to help his family socioeconomically.

The incidence of child neglect is greater in large/very large families than it is in small families. Naturally, parents of large/very large cannot devote themselves individually to each child. The typical parent of a large/very large family can be described as non-nurturing and little involved or uninvolved in their children's lives. It is common for children from large/very large families to be left to their own devices and unsupervised. These are facts which cannot be denied. The main emphasis in large/very large families is survival at its most basic level; anything beyond this isn't even thought of.


seriousrunner 2 years ago

With all due respect, where are you getting your information and from which sources are you quoting your data? Have you actually visited some of the large family blogs and sites which (as an example of one such site) have over 10000 members (I am one)?

I have never been asked to complete a survey nor have my large family friends, so I would question the data on objectivity. I have 7 kids and am currently at home with them to raise them to be the very best they want to be and none of your statements pertain to my family nor any family I personally know which is larger (and I know many of them). We as parents are professionals and have terminal degrees, just like smaller families. I completed my medical degree, for example, with 3 kids in tow and graduated top of my class. In other words we are just a bit more efficient in our time management to attain everything any other parental unit would want to have security for their family. Again I will stress that the issue is not with the family size but rather the parental dynamics which would either support or refute your claims of neglect and negativity. Articles like yours put larger families in a very negative light and people who don't know any better presume your statements to be true. They are incorrect and hateful, and if you really want to learn the truth you should visit sites where we are members which will allow you to see the true dynamics in our households. We are doctors, attorneys, executives, etc, and some of us work part-time, some pro bono, some stay home, just like smaller families; we run around with extracurriculars and deal w juggling life just like smaller families. We simply have to be more organized. Every child has at least one activity and some multiple. Every child is expected to be successful in their endeavor. Our world is our family and that is revolved around our kids.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Nice to see you again. We learn from each other.


seriousrunner 2 years ago

This is very true Ms Williams. Thank you for your open feedback.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Quite welcome indeed, I am beginning to like you.


seriousrunner 2 years ago

Well, per the saying 'I mean what I say and I act upon it with intent' (author unknown to me) ...I have strong opinions on this topic and am vested in sharing them. I love my larger family and their development and growth into productive citizens is my passion. It is very difficult to maintain our rigorous momentum forward when people stereotype our family and assume things which put us into a negative light without understanding that large families can be every bit as successful in nurturing and molding our kids as smaller families - it takes tremendous drive and discipline by the parents (we are outnumbered) but my husband and I are a team and their success in life is a direct result of our parenting approach. I have seen poor parental role models in smaller families and some larger families, though among the larger families we know the parents have a similar passion about developing their kids to be at maximum potential.

Have you considered researching the dynamics of heterogenous families which force a cooperation among several parents and the outcomes from that? I have seen a few positive but many unfortunate outcomes in that scenario. The other topic I find interesting are women who have numerous children by several men and the dynamics of their families. I have yet to see a positive outcome from that challenging place for kids but often wonder what are some tools to help ease the transitions, as this seems to be a more frequent 'norm' among persons with a large number of children and my family (1 set of parents and fully-related children) more and more uncommon.


Guest 2 years ago

And boys never fall for anyone who will give them the attention they need, usually female. Instead, they beat or kill them. Boys from large families are more violent and domineering.


letstalkabouteduc profile image

letstalkabouteduc 12 months ago from Bend, OR

It's hard for today's young people to imagine, but family size 50 years ago was largely determined by religion, not the individuals. My parents ended up with 4 kids because they used the rhythm method -- natural birth control endorsed by the Catholic Church (I guess it doesn't work so well)! They couldn't afford 4 kids and weren't emotionally able to love and bond with 4 kids. If my dad were a young man today, he would most certainly choose to have no kids -- or, perhaps, one. It's so much better now with couples determining family size.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 12 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York Author

Well said indeed! Actually even today, 4 children are considered a medium sized family according to the sociological definition of family size. Large families are 6 and more children per household. However, you are right in your assessment of small vs. large families.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working