2006-06-21 02:53:57 · 21 answers · asked by alecnaaron 3 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
No, unless they have a very serious reason (for example; a severe health condition). Growing up in a big family is very good for a child, and it is good for our society, which is growing increasingly self-centered everyday. The youngest of ten has a personality that you won't develop with just one kid!
As for population problems, that is ridiculous. The entire world could inhabit Texas and the population density of the state would be less than that of the Bronx.
If everyone just has one kid or even two, our social security system will crash. Fifty years from now, who is going to take care of you and your spouse and everyone else who only had one child?
2006-06-21 15:42:12 · answer #1 · answered by aeiou12 3 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Well, I for one want a big family, about 5 kids. I already have 2 that we can barely afford but we're making it. I plan on going back to school next year so I can provide for the number of kids I want financially. I came from a big family and the family get togethers are so nice. I have 9 aunts and unles on my dad's side, then 5 aunts and uncles on my mom's side. I've always dreamed of having a big family of my own. However, if you can't provide for the children then you don't need to have very many. If I can't afford 5 kids then I most certianly won't have them. The two that I have never do without. They are ALWAYS fed, and cleaned. I work with both of them everyday with trying to teach them colors/abc's/numbers and they're only 1 and 2. My fiance works for them while I stay home to raise them. With the career field i'm going into, I'll be making 30 bucks an hour. If I have 2 more children and see that there's no way I can provide for a 5th, I will stop there.
2006-06-21 03:08:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course. But I think its a decision for the married couple, not for their family or society or the government to make. I have 3 children with 2 year age gaps. I'm now at a place where I'd like to have my fourth and final child. We very carefully planned all but the first child. There is money to support them, love to help them grow to be happy adults, and patience to raise them. Some people only want one, but four sounds like heaven! And I'd trade countries if this one tried to limit my family size!
2006-06-21 03:35:00 · answer #3 · answered by Velken 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
considering how selfish it is to make a child who i sgoing to suffer this horrid world, and eat food out of the mouths of the starving children from other countries..i would say that no one should have children for a good while. At least a generation. The thing is..the world is overpopulated, and is going to die if someone does remove a few billion. It will happen with a plague or nukes..something stupid...
2006-06-21 02:57:42 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and no,, I'm an aussie,,and here if you have a baby you automatically get a $3000 grant from the govt.,,but from next month they are giving $4000 grants,,how do you work that out,,everyone else before this scheme came in had to fork out for their own baby goods but now in Howards wisdom all the down and outers will be dropping kids willy nilly, just to get the cash.
2006-06-21 03:11:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think so, there is a family i know that have 7 children and the 8th on the way, all the poor kids are dirty and uncared for, they get picked on at school and i feel so sorry for them.
The parents claim benefits and he also works on the side, so they have plenty of money, but unfortunatly choose to spend it on cigarettes and alcohol, instead of condoms!
2006-06-21 02:59:03 · answer #6 · answered by Cherry 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO, but they should limit the behavior of the children they have.
It is good for some couples to have many children as it makes up for the many who have none or only one. the population of man is diminishing in many western world countries and asian countries while it is increasing in third world countries.
maybe if everyone adopted a third world baby it would help.
2006-06-21 02:58:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i kinda do. i think it is irresponsible for people to keep having more and more children knowing they don't have enough money to take care of them. but other than that, i don't think there should be a limit. we're not overpopulated like china.
2006-06-21 04:36:31 · answer #8 · answered by Niecy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
nicely, you would possibly want to no longer were paying interest even as Rick Scott, the Governor of Florida, ordered each and each and every of the welfare recipients examined for drugs. truly 2% of them examined effective, as adverse to eight% of the non-welfare inhabitants. except you're prepared to provide never-ending toddler care, many of the individuals on welfare can't get a pastime, or maybe once they do, they do no longer make adequate funds to pay for toddler care, it really is why I say never-ending. And in case you reduce off welfare even as the youngest youngster is 10, then what's going to it accomplish? Our modern-day welfare gadget is guaranteed to fasten human beings into welfare. It desires to be scrapped and punctiliously remodeled to artwork excellent. see you later as all we do is throw 1 / 4 in a blind guy's cup, we may be able to't be shocked even as he remains there begging the subsequent day.
2016-10-20 11:11:08 · answer #9 · answered by louder 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Amount of children = directly proportional to amount of money parents have, amount of time they can provide with their children, amount of love parents can share, amount of tender loving care
Amount of children = inversely proportional to the number of vices of parents, the number of lovers the parents have, the number of extra activities, number of financial commitments
2006-06-21 04:13:17 · answer #10 · answered by ray16_mm2001 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋