Limit the number of children per family?

United States
March 23, 2009 4:51pm CST
What do you think about limiting the number of children per family? I think that this should be an issue looked into for the families of the United States. I think there should be a limit on the number of children families can have. I think it would help with some of the issues we are facing now with the environment, food and water. I am not sure what number of children each family should be able to have but I do think this is something we should be thinking about. I think family planning needs to improve there roles they have in the schools and in the clinics. I am tired of hearing about children being born and the parents do not want or can not take care of. I know it is not the child's fault but we have to something. In my family alone I know of six children that their parents had them one after another and then left them for others to raise. When is it enough? How many children do people get to have only to leave with others to raise? I know this is a touchy issue but I feel like things need to be done. What do you think?
4 people like this
22 responses
• United States
23 Mar 09
while I see your point I think that it would be easyer to put an end to invetro firtilization or make it slightly easyer to adopt. I know that invetro is the only way that some people can have children but it seems more and more that they end up having litters of children instead of the one, two, or maby three that a healthy mother is truely able to take care of. As far as having a bunch of children and then not taking care of them, I am all for sterilization; if you have at least one child that you are not caring for full time and you get pregnant then after the baby is born the mother and father should be fixed. But that will never happen aparently people who do not take care of their children have rights too. I have not wanted children for over 10 years and the only way I can be sterilized is if I have 3 kids. The doctors I have talked to say I may change my mind, I would rather adopt, and I wish that other people felt the same way.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
25 Mar 09
Are you still pretty young? I think they won't do that until you're at least 28 or 30.. I don't remember the age. Did you consider a vasectomy instead - or does that also have an age limit where they won't perform that either? One thing I feel that is beyond stupid is telling a woman who has health problems where getting pregnant might put her LIFE at risk that she cannot have her tubes tied until she's 30. That happened to a friend of mine and they refused because she was only 22 at the time. She and her husband adopted
@j47lee (740)
• Canada
24 Mar 09
hmm.. i think they should limit the number of children.... i mean if you can afford to have so many kids thats ok... but if you dont have the money.. then why would anybody have so many kids is beyong my knowledge... seriously....
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
25 Mar 09
Therein lies the problem. IF you can afford more kids, you should be left alone. If you CANNOT, well then it's fair to say that you shouldn't be allowed. I just have a problem with telling someone who can afford to that they can't. That is ridiculous.
• United States
24 Mar 09
Well first I would ask you what the people who are raising those six children think? I think the minute the government begins to tell people how many children they can have is the time I renounce my citizenship for some place, any place that does not do this. I personally have never seen the orphanages in China that are filled with beautiful baby girls who have been abandoned by their parents who need to have a boy and can not because of limits on the number of children they can have. (have heard they no longer do this or upped the limit but still) What I have heard from others who have been there is that the children are barely cared for because there are so many. They have shown videos of little girls sitting in high chairs all day long, some even have a hole in the middle so no one has to worry about cleaning them up or changing a diaper. That it seems to me is a much worse fate than being in a large family. Now I know there are extreme cases where children are starving and beaten or abandoned by the parents, but government limits on the number of children in a family. No Way!
• United States
24 Mar 09
Limits on children would greatly reduce this kind of abuse, and help some of these children. One of the people raising those children had a heart attack last week at 2am while the children slept. He had to call ambulance and then beg someone to come over take care of them. I dont think it is fare for the children or the people who have to raise children from others careless ways. There has to be a way to get this problem solved. Look around your community and you see the families with more than three children struggling to take care of them but they will have another child and there children will do the same thing. I have personally seen this in my own family. My grandmother had 8 children. They could not take proper care of them. My mother said all the time it wasn't fare to her to be put in a home with all those children. She never got any attention or much to eat. Most of the 8 had more than four children. There children my cousins are the ones under 21 that have the children. One has three that got taken away (she said she will just have more) and the other one with five children left them with her father who had the heart attack. The doctor wouldn't fix her because she was under 20 and said she might want more (she doesn't deserve more) but you are right we dont have the place to tell her she can. Im just asking for more family planning. I do fully understand your point of view.
• United States
26 Mar 09
To say that reducing the number of children in a family would negate abuse is to equate the number of kids with violence? I dont think so, how many kids did that woman have who drowned them in a car? 2 if I remember right, and the lady who drowned hers in a tube had a stable life as far as anyone could tell, I dont think it would have mattered one bit if she had one or twenty she was mentally off... as is anyone who abuses their children. I know a couple who have only two planned children and the Father lost his temper and bruised his 7 year old. Going hungry is also a matter of the parents doing what needs to be done, I had five children and times got rough but I promise you they always had food to eat, not one time can they tell you they ever missed a meal.... so again the numbers have nothing to do with it. You never said how the people caring for those six kids feel about the kids? Do they want to give them away, are they sorry these children were born? I know that I would not particularly want to raise a grand child or a relatives kid, in other words I am not actively seeking it, but I would and would not care a bit because they are a part of my family and I would want to do right by them.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
25 Mar 09
People do not always follow in their parents' footsteps . My grandma had... 12 siblings, but my grandma was also born in 1920 something. Back then, not every baby or child survived to adulthood and many of them didn't live long anyway, not past 40 or 50. My mom had 7 siblings, my dad had ONE. I have four siblings - and I have 3 kids. Two of them are my step kids but they have always been with us. My siblings have 3 kids, 2 kids, 2 kids, and 1 expecting. I think we are fairly balanced. In our cases at least from me and my siblings' point of view, we all planned our families - except for my brother. He was young when they were all born but he has ALWAYS been pretty responsible. My nephews and niece are just about grown now - 18, 16, and 15. My kids have a fairly good understanding that it's important to be able to take care of YOURSELF independently BEFORE doing anything that leads to having someone else who will depend on you. I have told them that if you don't do this, life can be VERY hard - as if it's not hard enough already. I also told them that nobody else is REQUIRED to help, so it's better to plan and make sure you can provide. My daughter understands this better than my son, but she is 19 and he is 17 - plus he's a boy. At least he doesn't have to be concerned with getting pregnant. My little one... well she is the child I wanted FOREVER from the time I was five. We spoil her as much as we can, within reason lol.
@baileycows (3665)
• United States
23 Mar 09
I think that we should limit the number also. It's just how do you do this and be humane about it. Your always going to have people messing up and having babies. I mean do we really go as far as they do in China and other places and kill them. That is just not right either. They are human and did not ask for any of it.
1 person likes this
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
25 Mar 09
Heh. That is why I would NEVER willingly choose to live in a place like China where they have rules like that. Freedom is the most important right ever. Plus, if anybody started trying to tell me how many kids I could or could not have, I'd do exactly the opposite of whatever they told me. Bunch of jerks. If I was told to have SIX, I'd have ONE. If I were told I could only have one, I'd have SIX. Screw them. Whoever 'them' is.
@rakesh284 (1472)
• India
24 Mar 09
Well I think there should be some definite limit on the number of child a couple should have because otherwise they can produce one after another baby and this will increase population and they might face different problems due to bigger family and from government too because they are also so strict about family planning. I think that limit should be 2 children per couple.
• United States
24 Mar 09
My mother in law wanted a girl so she had four boys...lol. I think if this is the case you should adopt. I understand people wanting to have there own children but if you want to be picky about what gender you want you should just adopt. You would get to pick the skin, hair, and eye color that way also. There is still the issue how many? This is where the problem remains. Some cant deal with one, others are ok with three. Maybe an idea would be to prove income wise you can take care of more than one. I remember once a lady said I have five children I always get a good income tax check. There are just so much to deal with. Its a great idea but I would not want to be the one coming up with the rules
• India
24 Mar 09
hi rakesh i also thinks as u thinked but u told that there should be only two child but i says tht there should be limit upto only three.because people sometimes want a girl but they dont get it so there should be try upto only three not more than that.
@Aquilis (175)
24 Mar 09
There are very few reasons to do this. Japan and China have the issue of overcrouding, but in most western countries this is not a problem. In fact its quite the opposite, we should be encouraging people to have more children as the birth rate keeps on dropping the west every year. I know we often see certain areas packed full of children, but on the whole childbirth rates are seriously down. We are becoming an aging society and the only way to avoid this is to have more children, not stop people from having them.
• United States
24 Mar 09
I think a good idea for these countries is to recruit people from other countries to come in and help with the jobs. I really dont mean to stop having them. I mean for people with six or seven that cant take care of them to stop. We should have a limit to whats happening.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
25 Mar 09
Well obviously someone should THINK about whether they can afford six children BEFORE deciding to have that many. Most people are not blessed with sextuplets, so it's not like the majority of people with too many kids to support were told 'congratulations, it's four girls and two boys', know what I mean? Somewhere along the way between child one and child three, they should have taken stock of the costs involved in their family and also thought about things like college and retirement and actually if they can even feasibly retire at all... any more. We are probably not having more kids, even though we could. It would make it harder even if the costs didn't increase much, just based on the economic climate and all the other garbage going on these days in government.
• United States
24 Mar 09
Russia and France are having hte same issues. The government is encouraging people to have more children. THey have a shortage. Their population is off balanced. Which means more poeple on government services (that are too old to work) and less workers paying into them to pay for it all.
@starangel (414)
• United States
24 Mar 09
I'm against it. I believe in human rights and if I want to have more children I don't want anyone telling me I can't. Sure there are people who have more kids than they can take care of and there are some bad parents out there...but why should their bad choices effect the lives of those who are good? We're not going to run out of food and water just because we have more kids. Our country is sooooo dependant on the government to take care of us that we don't know how to take care of ourselves. That gives them the control over us in making us think the world is going to become desolate because there are too many people. It's bad enough that the government thinks the world would be better if the population was only 1/10 of what it is now. They want us to depend on them and they will make sure that we 'need' them to survive which will make it easier for them to take away freedoms. I believe in freedom and I believe in being in control of my life and my family and my childrens lives. I will not agree to have the government control my life and I will fight for my Godgiven right to have as many kids as I want. You're right, it's a touchy issue. But, hopefully you're open to opinions. It seems that you would be because you realize the sensitivity of the subject. Another words, don't be offended by my opinion. lol
• United States
24 Mar 09
I am in no way offended by your opinion. It wouldn't be worth it to post a question if everyone thought the same way. I just want people to be careful. Think of the children before the have them and stick them in a daycare all day or cant feed them and give them a healthy lifestyle (both physically and mentally). I guess its more about the childrens well being than the environment though it does play a part. And when most people see this question they only think of the U.S. but this is for the whole world. I cant stand to see children in other countries starve. It breaks my heart. Some thing should be done. What do you think we should do? Im glad there are people out there with other opinions. It helps me to see other options as well. Thanks for sharing.
@xParanoiax (6987)
• United States
14 Apr 09
I don't think it should be a law...but as a social movement, I think it's not a half bad idea. There's alot of good things that can result from people and their choices with family. I just don't like anything that hinders choices.
@mommyboo (13174)
• United States
25 Mar 09
I disagree. I DO feel that in CERTAIN cases there should be limits - for instance someone who is living off the government or other people, cannot even take care of themselves, is not responsible... etc - someone like that should probably NOT have kids. I don't have any issues having something implemented so people who do not want to have kids can have free birth control or get vasectomies or have their tubes tied, even if they are 20 years old. This is an example of using tax payer money for something that would actually BENEFIT the general public. I am against a BLANKET type of rule or regulation, because a responsible loving committed financially secure couple really should not be PUNISHED because of all the jerks in the world who go about having kids willy nilly that they can't afford! It's not MY fault that other people are irresponsible and damned if *I* am going to pay for THEIR choices and mistakes. I'll live with MINE but not because of other people. I can't control them so how would that even pertain or apply to me? I don't like hearing about unwanted children either! Heck, it must be horrible to find out from the adults in your life that they didn't even WANT you! I also think people ought to be forced to step up - with an ultimatum like - you take parenting classes and you get some job help and get out on your own and learn how to take care of yourself and your child - or you can go to jail. I know that sounds harsh but really, it would probably make people choose the right decision because who wants to go to jail? I think there is way too much co-dependence on other people, family mostly - and family ADDS to it by going 'awww that's my grandkid, of course I'll do everything' or 'the kid is part of my family, of course I'll support his deadbeat parents so the kid has a place to stay' blah blah blah. A little tough love? Come on people. They take advantage of you and you LET them. If something can be worked out that ONLY holds the idiots responsible and it doesn't touch the normal hard working families who want (and should get to have) more children, then I'm in favor. Basically if you prove you are and can be responsible, it wouldn't affect you. It would only affect you if you are irresponsible, lazy, stupid, and co-dependent on other people, the government, etc.
• United States
25 Mar 09
I think as long as you can properly care for children, have all you want. I would limit the number of kids a woman or a man on welfare or food stamps can have. We've got women like that nutjob octomom popping out kids left and right and they are forcing the government to pay for it all. That's not fair. It's not my job to support someone and their 11 kids in 13 years. You should be forced to be out and work like the rest of us. But for people who have the means and the ability and resources to care for 20 or so kids, that's their life, not mine.
• India
24 Mar 09
ya their should be a limit of children in a family.bcoz if the family has more childs then he have to take care of them .they have to full filltheir needs. as we are seeing that the needs of childrens are increasing day by day.so there should be a limity for children in a family.
@alboca (17)
• United States
24 Mar 09
If you start limiting children we would get closer to China, there is no problem with space - you give each family in the world a house on 1/4 acre and whole population could be squeezed into Texas. We have space, we just need to know how to use it better. Izabela http://share.your.momentshere.com
• United States
16 Jul 09
actually, you should just kill yourself. that would lower the population.
@vandana7 (98717)
• India
22 Aug 09
I am one person who has suffered the consequences of irresponsible breeding as I would like to call it. My father's sister was married to a gambler who didnt bring home any money, but she still felt duty bound to bring more than five children into the world of whom four survived. Similarly, my father's brother was a drunkard who never earned any monies, got married to an uneducated girl from a rich family, and they had four children. Apparently neither of the men loved children, but the women went on bringing them into the world. And after realizing that they had saddled themselves with such responsibility, they landed on us, crying to the whole world that we were not helping. My father helped them to come up. The children got so accustomed to taking that they even became abusive when we could no longer spare. So I may be a bit biased on this issue. I think the number of children should be restricted to the number a family can afford. If they cant, let them wait till they can afford. If they go beyond their prime, let them adopt. But definitely no irresponsible siring.
@tjades (3591)
• Jamaica
24 Mar 09
I really think this is something the authorities in several countries need to look at and think seriously of implementing. The number of teenage and unwanted pregnancies that we are experienceg needs to be stemmed. Too many people have more than they can manage and then they turn around blaming the state ect... and becoming a strain on the public purse. They expect to get bailout of every situation they fall into. It is also costly for the state to run homes for the many children unwanted by their parents and it is a shame that with al our modern advancemnet people still treat their kids like crap. Like you and a few of your posters mentioned it would be a hard task to implement this idea but I think it would be a good move
• United States
24 Mar 09
THis is a touchy issue. Why? Because it is a personal choice about how many chidlren to have. The government does not have a right to tell you how many children you can have. Some people want big families. Some want small families. Some couples decide not to have children at all. All of those are fine choices. It is a personal choice. Also there are religious issues to look at. Some religions do not believe in birth control and do believe in having large families. So if you limit them on the number of children they can have then you are infringing on their religious beliefs. Which is illegal. Personally I have two and that is enough. But I have friends that have three or four and this is their choice. Heck I know a family that has 6 and may have more. THey can afford it, and it is really none of mine or anyone else's business anyway. People's personal lives are just that personal and private. We may not like the decisions they make but we have to respect their right to make them.
• United States
24 Mar 09
I think that is the absolute worst thing a government could do especially a government like the US's yes there are people out there that maybe shouldnt have as many kids as they do because they cant provide adequately for all of them. but what about those parents that you dont hear much about from the press? you know those of us who CAN provide for the kids we have I have 5 kids including a set of twins they were all conceived and naturally (no invitro at all) my husband makes decent money which allows me to stay home and raise them My sister has 7 kids all conceived naturally and does just fine raising them they start telling people how many kids they can have this might as well be a communist country what needs to happen is they need to step up the protocol in those invitro clinics so that situations like Octo-mom dont happen lets not punish good parents for the lack of responsibility of others
@gzlgzl123 (224)
• China
24 Mar 09
Of course,more and more new babies are born everyday.Because of the problem of food,water and environmet,every family has the responsibility of limiting the number of children.Most of the family want to have a male infant,so when they have a female infant,they may want to have a male infant,so the number of children increase.
@eselmaro (208)
• Philippines
24 Mar 09
With regards to limiting children, I guess that would be a good idea. Earth is quite a crowded place now, in order to live well, we need to care for it, and thus taking an actions with overpopulation will be one of the best suggestions. In my part, I am not against on this issue. A father, a mother and 2 kids will do. Good luck!
• Romania
24 Mar 09
The childrens are a good thing,are a blessing. Maybe it's enough 1 or 2 childrens but this thing depend by the financial resources of the family. It's not wright to have a lot of kids and too be hungry,weak or something like that.