What FACTORS causes SOME PEOPLE to have MORE children than they can adequately
support financially, emotionally, and psychologically? Most intelligent and educated people have the amount of children that they can properly give individualized attention, care, and time to. They also have the amount of children they can educate and give them more than the bare rudiments. Intelligent and thinking people have the amount of children that WON'T cause the oldest and/or older children to be PARENTIFIED children.
How can you be the judge of financial, emotional, and psychological support in each and every large family? You seem to push forward an agenda against large families who you deem unintelligent, uneducated, and probably conservative. I suggest that you ask your questions more like questions rather than finger-pointing, angry rants.
Any right thinking, educated person does not believe in large families. Large families ALWAYS penalize the oldest/older children.They are forced to raise younger siblings, forfeiting THEIR childhoods.Kids in such families AREN'T treated equally.
Children should not be raising children. Children should have a free childhood and adolescence. Any parents who force their oldest children to raise siblings is abusive. The parent has the children, they should raise them or DON'T have them!
gm, well then that is the end of that lg fam then. Those who do everything for their children only teaches that child that they will always be given or have things done for them, which make society what it is today...lazy and the Me, Me, Me attitude
Life in large families for the oldest child is akin to being an ostarbeiter in a German labor camp during World War II or a slave in the Antebellum South. NO life, are on 24/7/365. Wrote 3 hubs on oldest children in large family,check them out!
gm then you have interviewed all the wrong ppl. My gma had 12 kids but miscarried 2. The oldest went to war with many of the men and so did most of the boys in that fam. None of the children raised any of the other children.
Why are you assuming all older children in families raise their siblings. Unless you have been witness to every single large family in the world, you can not imply that. I personally have not had a social life in 19 years. I'm always with my children
An overwhelming majority of oldest children in large families RAISE their younger siblings Some do this as young as 7 years old.Many oldest siblings HATE their parents for doing this.Many become so weary,they learn to avoid responsibility as adults.
I would just like to say that it seems that you are generalizing and labeling all large families as bad. I think that many factors come in to play when it comes to large families. With some it is a choice, with others it is maybe a dysfunctional upbringing, lack of education and irresponsibility. With that said, this does not mean that all large families are bad. Love can be found within any family - it has nothing to do with the size.
It has to do with the mother and the father. You can have a house with 7 kids that is full of love and a house with one child that is abused on a daily basis. Abuse and neglect can happen in any family size. I know someone that was raised as the only child. He grew up with a mother that worked for the county, was highly involved with their church and beat this person regularly behind closed doors, while also mentally abusing him.
The size of the family has nothing to do with these issues - it's the parents raising the children. Different people come from different backgrounds. Not everyone grows up with the same types of privileges in life. People come from broken homes and repeat patterns. It's about breaking cycles. I have a large family, and while it is hard at times, I wouldn't trade it for the world. We have a lot of love in this house and I'm constantly told by members of my community what great kids I have.
They're respectful, polite, have big hearts and have goals in life. They will all contribute something to society one day... I respect your opinion though, because I know these issues do exist. But it's just not right to label "all" large families. I find that to be close minded and generalizing. Maybe you faced some sad experiences in life with the work that you did, but not everyone in the world is like that.
The overwhelming large families that I have encountered via relatives, parents, and associates were poor and disadvantaged. They admit that they didn't receive the needed attention &oftentimes depended upon outside help for food & other neces
Most are. C'mon on. Parents NEVER raise children in large families. It is always THE OLDEST CHILD.Oldest children in large families are NEVER children but adults at young ages.They forfeit their childhoods, raising younger siblings & having adult
I actually have a lot of more feedback to give you on this but no time right now. I can give you a ton of scenarios of families with 3 children or less that were terrible parents and where kids parented siblings including myself.
Yes, but those incidents are rare. Parents of small families RAISE their children. Parents of large families MAKE their oldest children RAISE their youngest siblings. That is typical parenting behavior in large families. Oldest is ALWAYS the parent.
Not really. My oldest do not raise their siblings. I, however, grew up raising my little brother and my older brothers I was not raised with. I know many other families like this here in New York, as well. It's the parent not the size.
It is THE SIZE.Parents of small families often RAISE their children,they don't expect the oldest to raise them.However,in large families, there are MORE children than the parents can control so they ENFORCE oldest children to assume parenting duties.
Because their super massively retarded like the other 99% of the population, in case you have'nt noticed. Now 99% may seem like a large number, but that still leaves like 70 million people who are'nt that retarded. So not bad.
Ouch, you are quite succinctly spot-on! It seems that many people don't think before they decide to have children.They are so"in love" w/the idea of large families,they fail to consider how this would negatively impact on their&theirchildren's li
If one is intelligent and educated, one has children that they can give the best life financially, educationally, & psychologically. Large families are abusive, especially to the oldest child.It is HE/SHE who has the MOST responsibility,not paren
It seems to be more unintelligent to resort to name calling of people you don't even know.
The Bible goes and tells people to replenish the earth and so some of them think that they are the only ones who should do this. LOL The Catholic Church tells people live by that example and so they do. They don't consider it to be a financial burden or anything like that. They think it is their god-given right to have many children. Seriously I have no idea how some man can support that many children. Most of the wives stay at home to raise these kids and it is their role in life.
They really CAN'T support those children. They depend upon outside charities &/or other donations to keep the family afloat..Also, many children from large families work as soon as they can walk. Many young children from large families have p/t j
Before assuming that they can't and they have to go to other assistance have you talked with many that are from lg families? How large would you say lg is? Lg fam also helped those who were farmers etc...
I went to school with some. All of them received some type of outside assistance of one kind or another. One family's clothes were donations and nothing else. Large families are totally aberrant and abnormal. That is ALL I have to say on the subject
CS is right. I know of a person whom told me that they were having another child so they could get more welfare...no kidding. I should have turned her in because now she is a druggie and isn't really there for her children. She abuses them.
Wrong again gmwilliams. It costs me between $800-$1000 a month to feed my children and that doesn't come out of your pocket. It comes out of my pocket. I would just like to add that the only parent in this house is me because of how I was raised.
ans: total lack of understanding of the effect of over-population of the "tiny blue dot" upon which we live .
Very odd, in my age group all of my friends had children in the 70s. It was thought then to be close to a mortal sin (I mean that SINCERELY) to have more than 2 children. (We all were Catholic and thought the Church was just simply wrong on contraception.)
It was just a given that having more than "replacement" children was actually bordering on being immoral in our books. I'm being very honest here. Our group was very serious about over-population, about energy usage, about healthy drinking water, about polluting the environment, and on and on . Our concern is precisely why you don't see black-sooted buildings any more in Pittsburgh; why FMC cleaned up the toxic waste they spewed into the Mississippi River; why the air quality in many states did not proceed to the worse state it was destined to go. As we became busy focused on raising our lovely 2 per-family children, however, the generation behind us never picked up the banner of social consciousness and people started having more children, driving HUGE SUVs and that's where we are. We got busy and no one after us picked up on the facts that we already knew. We can only apologize for not hanging in there when those behind us failed to understand and see through the rhetoric from forces who had an economic interest in continuing on their path. We need to apologize that we just didn't work harder to fix the mess that's causing global catastrophe. But wait, now didn't I hear just yesterday on our local NPR station, a Republican somebody or other saying (and I'm paraphrasing here) 'Well, if we had more children, we'd have more taxpayers'!!! iiii yiii yiii. So how, how, how can you argue against a mindset like that? Just hope and pray our group can retire soon and start working again toward the trying to save our lovely space in the cosmos. (PS...People might start by a little "retro reading" of "Billions and Billions" by Carl Sagan.)
by Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago
Why do children from large families (6-more children per family) have VERY LOW or NOself-awareness nor self-confidence?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 7 years ago
The large family of 6 or more children is becoming outmoded. The large family usually have a diametrically different culture and milieu to that of the small family. Parental interaction is rare to nonexistent. As a result of this little or none parental...
by Nichol marie 4 years ago
What is your Sterotype when you see a large family of 4 children or a small family of just 1 childDo u judge I dont judge on family size at all or those without children at all but I guesse this is a thing now
by Stacie L 8 years ago
After suffering a devastating miscarriage in December 2011, Michelle Duggar is trying to get pregnant again with her 20th child. The 19 Kids and Counting reality TV mom says she and husband Jim Bob Duggar are hoping to be "blessed" with another...
by H C Palting 3 years ago
Do you believe that poorer and/or less educated people have more children whom they can't support?Do you know any ill effects to the child(ren) born to these families and society? If so, what are they?
by Justamama 10 years ago
Anyone here have a "large family"?What is considered large?I have ten.
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|