Babies & World Population

IMO, population growth by birth is not an issue in the US. In fact, were it not for immigration, we would not have enough young people to support an aging population here. Population growth is an issue in developing nations, especially regions where women have no rights, no contraception, and often have sex under forced circumstances. It's no coincidence that these same areas have high infant, child, and maternal mortality - there are parts of the world where life seems awfully disposable.

IMO, families should have however many children they can support and provide adequately for. I bet you'll find that the carbon footprint of a large family is not much more than that of a small or average one, and is much less per person. We have 4 kids and I have plenty of friends with one or two kids who live in bigger homes, drive bigger cars, buy more "stuff," don't garden or recycle or shop locally, etc. Large families here are not the problem.

Yes! I care and overpopulation is definitely a reason I didn't have more than 2 children. I see huge SUV's and think of the gas they guzzle and then think "well, maybe they have 4 or 5 kids so need that big a car." Then I think "but what if everyone did that???" People have to be responsible. Don't they care what the earth will be like for their children and grandchildren?

You lost me at "more than the world can support." That's a huge leap with no factual support.

Yes, some parts of the world lack resources, but that's because those resources aren't evenly distributed.

Stopping "mass breeding" starts at home. Let other people make their own decisions, or move to China so you can be happy having those decisions made by the government.

I don't know. Lots of propaganda here with no basis in fact.

People reproduce because they have a right to.

I don't make a habit of questioning other people's rights unless they live under my roof.

J., I'm with you. I'm astonished by some of the responses here - it's like people are living with their heads in the sand. Just because you CAN have 5 kids and drive a giant gas-guzzler doesn't mean it's a great idea.... but also, most of the people responding do not actually live in large metro areas where they can see the everyday effects of overpopulation. I think if you live in the middle of the great plains, yeah, it's not crowded there, so it's hard to imagine what it would be like not to have adequate natural resources to survive on. For those of us who live in metro areas with 5+ million people, we see what it's like not to have enough water (just to give one example), or what it's like to be stuck in traffic every damn time you're in the car. You and I live in a state with fully 10% if the nation's population in it, and we ARE seeing the effects of overpopulation and the draining of our natural resources. It's scary.

I stopped with one child, 40 years ago, because I have exactly the same concerns.

Ever since I had this wake-up call in high school, I've studied pollution (partly out of necessity, because I have become highly sensitive to the hundreds of chemicals that find their way into my daily life, and am constantly ill even when doing my best to avoid them). I have studied where all our garbage goes. I have studied how housing spreads over the most desirable farmland, and eats away our "unspoiled" places, and how the need for timber, paper products and even toilet paper is deforesting the earth. I have studied how this changes rain patterns and creates deserts. I have studied how the high-level ozone layer of the earth, which protects humans from the intensity of the sun's ultraviolet radiation, has been diminished by air pollutants, and puts us at higher risk of skin cancers. I have studies how man-made toxins get into our air, water, food supply, bodies and breastmilk, and how many modern diseases are caused or exacerbated by these pollutants.

And there are growing social problems, too, that are much more serious because of so many people, with so many needs and desires.

That's just a fraction of what I have studied since I was a concerned high-schooler in the 1960's. The posters who claim there is no evidence of problems caused by human population pressures have chosen not to look, or to place other values more highly. I expect that's what many folks will continue to do until problems become too enormous to ignore. I don't think we're far from that point now, since I've watched so many alarming changes in my short 63 years on Earth. Maybe another generation or two…

I think families with 7, 8 or 9 kids are few & far between. I think there are also a whole heaping ton of families with 3, 4 & 5 kids who have precisely the same excuse as you do. There are countries already with limits on the number of children a family is allowed to have. We have a name for them. They are called Communists. I'm sure that's how the entire world should live to save itself, but it will never happen. Never.

I have one whom I love fiercely. But I would have been happy without, DH really wanted children and here we are. I saw a great bumper sticker last week - '7 billion miracles are enough' - I have to say I absolutely agree with it.

Population is a HUGE issue in this country because those of us in the first world consume WAY more than our proportionate share of the world's resources - one American child has a vastly larger carbon footprint than one child in sub-Saharan Africa.

And if G-D created the earth for us to care for, s/he must be horribly disappointed with how we are doing.

You talk as if mass breeding (thanks btw for referring to humans as mass breeders) is a new concept.

Since ancient times, people had alot of kids for a matter of survival, enough hands to work the farm and all that. Jacob from the Bible had 12 sons. King David was one of 7 (or was it 8). And according to my Real Simple May 2011 magazine, a woman somewhere in Russia gave birth to 69 children between 1725 and 1765 (16 pairs of twins, 7 sets of triplets, and 4 sets of quads).

So as you can see, mass breeding is nothing new. With all that said, are you worried that an earthquake will hit and there will be nothing left for you - to eat? If that is the case, maybe you should start stocking up? To live? Maybe you should learn how to camp and live off the land (cue Girl Scouts theme song). There are many ways to survive a disaster...you just have to be prepared.

Btw my family is from the Philippines and being the underdeveloped country it is, its citizens don't worry about things like losing their homes, not having enough to eat, having their internet and cable cut off b/c they don't have that to begin w/anyway, so it looks like they are much happier and more content than those of us dependent on electricity, Wmarts, grocery stores, internet and mobile phones. Maybe this great nation of ours can take lessons from a 3rd world country before disaster strikes? idk.

I'm sorry that there are still people out there who think that global warming is a "farce" when the majority of the greatest scientific minds of those current living accept it.

I have a friend who chose not to have kids, at least one reason being the overpopulation.

There is no doubt at all that people have ferked up the earth in a 1,000 myriad ways, and done things to our own species that in a 1,000 unimaginable ways.

I try to "tread lightly" on the earth (I'm sure I could do more, of course) and teach our son and his friends the same. I have talks with family about it, but it just isn't on most people's radar--they are concerned, as most of us are, with the problems here and now (trying to schedule a babysitter, or get a better job, or decide which school to send our kids to, where to go for vacation, etc.).

I do believe that if everyone stopped buying bottled water, turned off all electronic appliances, reduce water waste (ie, leaving the tap on while brushing teeth, etc.), put white or light colored roofs on their houses, choose cars with better gas mileage or carpooled or took public transport, bought organic and/or locally, it would make a huge difference. And while I realize that not everyone does this, or tries, I firmly believe that it's worth it if even only a few or some of us do.

It does scary me to think of the earth my son and his generation, and his children and their children, are inheriting. Very very scary.....

We are going to hell in a hand basket and taking our beautiful world with us. It won't matter cause all the issues you raised above are what is going to be our undoing as a race...the part that makes me think twice about having more kids...they'll have to suffer too when we eventually realize we've run out of natural resources and life turns tough...I can't stand the thought of my babies suffering. :-(

I think it is not up to me to judge or legislate any ones' reproductive choices.

I have one child, I have friends who have 3 and 4 children. Does that make me more responsible? No. Will their having more children destroy the planet. I don't think so.

In advanced countries the trend is towards less children. Third world countries tend to have more children per family to compensate for higher infant mortality rates and to ensure that parents are taken care of in their old age - the more children you have that survive to adulthood, the more people to help feed you when you are old. We no longer need that system as we have a better economic system with built in retirement programs. Those things don't exist in third world countries.

I look at this way - do we want to be like China? The government enforced a Zero Population Growth policy on its citizens in the 70s limiting each family to only one child. The result was an increase in abortions, and abandonment of female children - as male children are culturally more valued. Rural areas are allowed to have more than one child, with prior approval, as they are needed to work the farms and fields.

My carbon footprint will not destroy the earth. The major producers of pollutants are the very industries that make us a "first" world country. And while the world council is developing emissions standards, many countries, especially those moving from third to first world status, are in the middle of their industrial revolutions and are not abiding by the emissions standards. They cannot while they are struggling to leave their third world economies behind. Currently industries that exceed emission standards simply pay a monetary fine - not much of a deterrent, eh.

I do what I can, keep my water heater on a lower setting, turn off lights when I leave a room, turn off power strips to electronics when not home, try to be more efficient when running errands to burn less fuel, etc.

But, this problem has built up over centuries, and just because, as a country, we may be ahead of the curve, we do not have the right to judge or impose our familial values on others.

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_population_growth

And for another point of view read the works of Thomas Robert Malthus(1766 – 1834)

We have one and will have no more. There are many reasons for having only one, but we are definitely mindful that the world is overpopulated and it is only downhill from here. However, the people who will be most affected by the crises that are caused by overpopulation will not be in the developed world. Those in poor 3rd world countries will continue to bear the main consequences of our unbridled reproduction and consumerism.
When our children's children are grown this world will be a fundamentally different place, there is nothing we can do to stop this at this point. Nature will correct itself and if will cost a great deal of human life and suffering.
However by making good choices today, we may be able to lessen the intensity of the blow that is coming for humanity...

I think it's a load of bologna. I'd rather have intelligent, educated, responsible people procreating in order to have more people on this planet to find ways to help the planet. I'm sure the poverty-stricken folks in 3rd world countries don't give 2 hoots when it comes to having more kids in terms of "population issues". I understand for many it is not a "decision" but rather lack of birth control or medical care or education, but still. Should the responsible, educated folks limit the number of kids to 1 or 2 while others are "breeding like rabbits" as you say and end up having the population "outnumbered" by those who are not willing or able to be productive citizens to their society? That said, I have many friends with special needs kids and these kids VERY MUCH DO live productive lives in many ways, so I do not mean that "different" lives are worth any less...just that the chances of an impoverished child in Africa, who cannot even get food, finding a cure of AIDS or ways to improve the planet are quite slim. I'd like to hope that the children I help create will make this world a better place in the end. Also, I do worry about things like disasters and illness. Working in medicine I have seen too many parents lose a child. Could I be "padding" my family by adding to it "just in case?" Maybe...
But whatever reason...I believe if you can support more children emotionally and financially and want to do so...GO FOR IT and please do your best to raise them to be decent people so that they can help make this world a better place.

How do YOU condone having 3 kids?? It seems as if you are berating those who have several kids when you yourself do. Yet, your excuse for it seems reasonable to yourself, so why is it not ok for others to do the same thing?

Are you aware that our natural resources have a mysterious way of reproducing as well? Sorry, but we aren't going to frun out natural resources.

I see you are in CA. How come your state hasn't fallen into the ocean yet?! That's all we heard growing up in the 80's in school. Since that didn't happen, something else had to be made up to scare people...global warming!

i just dont consider the population when considering how big to make my family. i Consider whethr or not i will be able to care for them emotionally and financially and sorry, no i dont consider africa, japan or anything else when i decided to plan my family. I abstain from meat(the second biggest polution cause, and drain on resources), and i recycle almost EVERYTHING, i walk more than i drive and i conserve energy in many other ways. Im not going to consider the fact that people have millions of kids they cant care for when i decide my families future.

idk, i guess im selfish

Did you take biology? lol. I agree with you, and to those who are judging because you have 3, you have only replaced you, your ex, and your current husband... not making the situation better, but not adding as well...

My view is ALL children that are born into this world are a blessing. There is a purpose for each and every child born into the world. If parents feel led to have 5 children or 10 children, I think it is wonderful----I don't worry about Global Warming or overpopulation etc. God meant for us to procreate. I think its all about perspective. There will always be things to worry about, I choose not to. Worrying doesn't do a darn thing but give people stomach ulcers! Life is beautiful to me regardless of the things you listed.

M

Who says that the world resources cannot support the world population? For every article or quack that writes about global warming, or limited natural resources, I can show you an article that disputes that. My DH is a Nuclear/Health Physicists that has studied natural resources extensively & doesn't buy into all the hype from people like Al Gore. Al Gore flies all over the world in jet planes, has to use lots of energy for his many mansions & I can go on and on. But Al Gore & all the other environmentalist has sold all the *commoners* on his hype to buy all his products & he gets government money (taxpayer money) to fund all his *experiments*. So us *commoners* have to unplug our homes, drive in 2 seater plug in cars, & buy all enviromentaly friendly products. But he is filthy rich thanks to *us*.

I thought you live in Canada, which is an amazing beautiful country (did you change it?) and very abundant amounts of land with beautiful vineyards & lots of farting cows. You can try to justify having 3 daughters, but lets face it in China your excuse would not have mattered. So I hope you enjoy your freedoms on procreating cause it shouldn't be up to no one but you so long as you are the one raising them & not the government.

As for my 4 children I worry more about the Government becoming more socialist & not giving my children the opportunities to prosper as they see fit. I don't want my children to have to wait for the Government to tell them how much food they can have or what kind of car they have to drive or how many kids they can have. When God is ready to take me or my children then so be it but for now he has given us lots of land & lots of soil to grow our own food & lots of animals & plants & lots of natural resources, now if we can only get our own govenment to let us use our own resources, we would be in a better place.

The only thing I do discourage or get upset about people having *lots of kids* is when they cannot support them financially or emotionally, that's when I think it becomes a problem.

The world would be boring if we were all single children or family's who just had one brother or one sister. You have to mix it up a bit! :) On the other note of survival. i don't think it is as much a matter of the amount of children as to the amount of things we fee we need to survive.