jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (10 posts)

How many children is too many?

  1. momfirms profile image61
    momfirmsposted 5 years ago

    How many children is too many?

    The Duggars are on their twentieth child and I think that if the Mother does not go through menopause soon we will be seeing a few more little Duggars around.


  2. duffsmom profile image61
    duffsmomposted 5 years ago

    I think at some point there is some underlying problems or inadequacies that would make a person just keep having more and more children. It isn't even just a matter of whether they can afford them or not--it becomes a matter of being a responsibile parent.

    It is not physically possible to give each child the attention they deserve - and the older children end up parenting and that is not right.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Duffsmom, you have hit the nail on the head.People who continuously have children do have mental and emotional issues.Many of them have no outside life nor hobbies.There are some women who have baby hunger which is only satisfied by having children.

  3. Sharkye11 profile image95
    Sharkye11posted 5 years ago

    As many as a couple or a single person can love and nurture. The endless capacity of mothers and fathers to love their children has not changed. Only society's norms and expectations have changed. 18 children in a good home with loving family are still better off than one child in a bad home. And that includes wealthy families who give that one child every material object, but little or no time and true affection.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      No parent can effectively raise a large amount of children.Parents of large and very large families have their oldest children raise the younger ones.Middle children in such families are oftentimes overlooked and ignored.

  4. lburmaster profile image83
    lburmasterposted 5 years ago

    My limit is three. But I knew a family growing up that had 12 children. The house was an entire mess, no structure, and two of the children were special needs. It was hectic to say the least.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      What you have stated is quite de rigueur in the large family environment.Children in large families do not receive adequate parental attention.Some are neglected while others receive attention.All of all, such children raise themselves or each other.

  5. peachpurple profile image81
    peachpurpleposted 5 years ago

    6 children are beyond control. 4 are on the average of going bonkers. I have seen some families with 6 children without discipline nor manners and parents couldn't be bothered with them.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I totally agree with you.  1-2 children are the optimal number that a parent can raise effectively, giving each child a normative childhood.Larger families have an unequal parity with the oldest child having the brunt of the  responsibilities.

  6. gmwilliams profile image86
    gmwilliamsposted 5 years ago

    In my opinion, any more than 4 children is too many children for a parent to effectively raise.  1-4 is an adequate number of children that parents can effectively raise and give individualized attention to. Parents also have an adequate span of control over that number of children.  By span of control,  parents can easily raise and manage such children without forcing the oldest/older children to raise the younger siblings.

    Small families of 1-2 children offer the best environment in which children can be raised effectively.  Children in small families have individualized parental attention.  They also have more monies allotted to them which means that there are more monies for intellectual and cultural activities which is missing in large and very large families.   In small families, there is an equal parity regarding parental treatment between the oldest and youngest child. In the case of the only child, he/she is corrected as well as praised.  In other words, children in small families do not receive preferential treatment. 

    In 3-4 child families, the medium family, children receive individualized attention although it is a larger sized family.  Medium sized families combines siblingship companionship with enough parental attention.Parents still have a span of control over this number of children without the oldest being overburdened, the middle neglected/overlooked and the youngest being spoiled.There is still enough monies allotted in medium sized families for children to have access to the better things of life.

    In large and very large families, parental attention is nil or nonexistent.Children oftentimes raise themselves and/or each other.There is very little monies allotted for the necessities, let alone cultural and intellectual activities.There is NO SPAN OF CONTROL in large and very families.Parents DO NOT raise their children, it is THE OLDEST/OLDER CHILDREN who raise the younger siblings thus forfeiting their childhood and adolescence.

    In large families, there is AN UNEQUAL parity among the oldest, middle, and youngest children.Oldest children are overburdened and parentified, middle children are ignored, and the youngest children are spoiled rotten and are not given responsibilities. If one hears a person state that HE/SHE loves being in a large familiy, IT IS THE YOUNGEST. There is no such thing as adequate parental attention in large and very large families.BENIGN NEGLECT or worse is typical in the large family environment.