Study:Children Fare Better in Small Families

[roddma]

I went duh where it said parent of larger families have less time to invest.Interesting study but is it really the number of kids, parenting style or both that determine how well you raise them?
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/121178/20160104/smaller-families-more-beneficial-for-children-study-finds.htm

[Mrsaztx]

I think people with fewer children, typically, tend to be a bit more purposeful (?) about it. They set out with the intention of having one, two, or three kids usually based on what they can afford and take care of. Whereas people who have children because they can't figure out birth control will have more, because they are irresponsible with their family planning choices (this group doesn't include the people with a single BC oops, but the repeat offenders who have 3+ accidental or "accidental" children). Obviously the ones with multiple accidents aren't very responsible and don't make great choices so their children will suffer for that. Then you have the quiverfull type and others of their ilk who collect kids as trophies, so once they're born the parents have effectively "leveled up" so all they need are living children, not well cared for children.

[louisa05]

I think this it totally dependent on how the parents approach raising a large family. One of my close friends has seven children. Her kids are very well cared for. They also get plenty of time and attention from their parents. Both parents make time for one on one time with each child. It is something they are very aware of the need for and they work to make sure it happens regularly. One of their new things, as the kids get older (oldest are 12.5 yrs twins) is that mom or dad is available to go away for a weekend with one or two kids at a time on the kids' request. Sometimes, they stay at my friend's parents home (an hour away) because of expense, but the weekend still belongs to the kid who asked for it. (And grandma and grandpa travel a lot so they might not be there). 

[lawlifelgbt]

I think large families can raise kids well, too, but I agree that they're better off when the decision to have a larger family like that is purposeful, when the kids aren't accidental, and when the parents can afford to raise them.

Growing up, I was friends with a family who had 5 children, on purpose. The parents treated them like individuals and spent time with each of them (still do, every time I would go to this coffee place where the mom liked to go, I would see her there with a different kid, spending one on one time). But, it must be harder to find the time. Still, it was nice to see how the siblings were close and would play together. I had serious sibling rivalry growing up with my only brother.

My good friend and his fiancee also plan on 4 or 5 kids. Not what I would do, but I know they can afford them, they will give them attention, and that they are both really smart people, which we need more of in this world. I don't see anything wrong with educated people intentionally having big (but not QF) sized families. In fact, it's good for society. I watched Idiocracy a while ago and I am pretty concerned.

[Deist woman]

I have 3 kids (grown now).  The youngest is on the autism spectrum, and also has several severe learning disabilities.  The amount of time, attention, and resources that he needed caused my older two to be shorted very often.  Of course, you do what you have to do, and my older two had happy childhoods and turned out well, but I do regret all the things I didn't get to do with them.  With each child, you have the possibility of special needs.  If  I'd already had six children before him, I really can't imagine what the childhoods of the other kids would have been like.  I am sure we would have all managed, but I just can't see where it would have been fair to the individual children.  I am pretty sure that few couples planning large families consider that eventuality.   ((Let me say, that my son, although still having challenges, turned out AWESOME, as did his two sisters!   So, to any parents going through this now, hang in there!))

[roddma]

I think one problem with some larger families is the sanctimonious attitude. Many of these women only have 'Mom" as their ID, and frown on anyone who limits the number of kids. It bothers me when the parents say the kids have plenty of;built-in friends.
And the kids don't get that one on time daily. Madonna was one of six and said she didnt get enough attention so I wonder about near double digit kids. Nothing personal against larger families, but I doubt double digit kids is something many people can handle well.

[SassyPants]

To me it makes sense. No matter how you dice it, there are still only 24 hours in each day-

Most people have to earn a living and sleep- those 2 items alone, consume much of those 24 hours.

[bingbangboom]

On January 23, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Deist woman said:

I have 3 kids (grown now).  The youngest is on the autism spectrum, and also has several severe learning disabilities.  The amount of time, attention, and resources that he needed caused my older two to be shorted very often.  Of course, you do what you have to do, and my older two had happy childhoods and turned out well, but I do regret all the things I didn't get to do with them.  With each child, you have the possibility of special needs.  If  I'd already had six children before him, I really can't imagine what the childhoods of the other kids would have been like.  I am sure we would have all managed, but I just can't see where it would have been fair to the individual children.  I am pretty sure that few couples planning large families consider that eventuality.   ((Let me say, that my son, although still having challenges, turned out AWESOME, as did his two sisters!   So, to any parents going through this now, hang in there!))

The boom family is here currently. Bigboyboom has autism and I constantly worry if babyboom gets enough attention because of everything that happens with a special needs member of the family. Both kids seem happy, and that keeps me going. 

Thank you for the "light at the end of a tunnel" story, I needed it today.

[danvillebelle]

I have no doubt that parenting a large family can be done well.  But so many of the fundie whacko wives are just addicted to pregnancy and babies, or all the attention they get with each one, or both.

I knew I wanted more than 2, but I also knew I was done when I was pregnant with the 4th.  I had an overwhelming, gut feeling at about 5 months along with her, of "this is it, you are done, no more."  I had 2 boys and 2 girls, which was the "dream family" I'd always wanted my whole life (bizarre how that turned out).

[2xx1xy1JD]

Did the study control for factors that might lead a family to have more children?

Let's say that family A consists of parents who are very family-oriented, who live in a close-knit somewhat traditional community, and who are doing well financially.  They have 4 children - because they want them, and can afford them.

Family B consists of parents who aren't particularly careful about birth control.  They don't have a great deal of education.  While they haven't been motivated to really prevent births, each new birth brings some additional stresses.

 

[Clementine]

I am sure that big families, up to a certain numer of kids, can function great, with the right parents. When homeschooling comes into the scedule though, I have my doubts.

I just don't see how it would be possible for one adult to give 6+ kids a good education and take care of the family at the same time. Something's got to give. Either the homeschooling (like in a lot of fundie families we discuss here, their kids seem to have gaps in their education) or one of the oldest siblings will have to step in and take a huge responsibilty just to make things work. I'm not really a fan of either of the coping methods.