First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply Should People Have Less Children?
34924 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Florida
Offline
Posted 11/13/14

MissileThePoliceDog wrote:

Why don't we take half of the population and push them somewhere else?



4845 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / NYC
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
Having a lot of children isn't a smart decision to make in my opinion.
I feel that since the cost of living expense and education are constantly rising, affording a proper environment for multiple children isn't likely to happen.
Our population is already a growing problem and we're living longer as well.
It jeopardizes our food supplies, social security, and in general their own mental health, since unless your rich and don't need to work hard or choose not to, how will you give all these kids a good upbringing without neglecting or causing conflict with the others.
What about your own lifestyle? Your significant other?

I think it's stupid especially for today's society.
2346 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46
Offline
Posted 11/13/14

Mugen417 wrote:


brookline wrote:

Should there be a world wide limit on the number of children a person can have?

1, 2, or 3 children are fine, but should people be allowed to have up to 10 and 20 children?

Considering the rising cost of living and world's depleting resources and environmental pollution, should the number of children a person has be limited to at least three?

Tell me what you think?


Not if you lived in a country like Japan. they're predicted to become an extinct ethnicity



Isn't Japan planned to be down 35-40 MILLION in 50 years?

Anyway, there is a great film on this subject already.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/
Posted 11/13/14
I say they should, but people are going to breed like rabbits anyhow. Outside of China, that is.
1090 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / CA
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
In probably the next couple centuries, there is going to be a problem with overpopulation. ( I will be long dead )
So until then, the number of children should not matter, only a number parents can handle is good enough
4510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
UK
Offline
Posted 11/13/14

Akage-chan wrote:


tkayt wrote:How about encouraging more local adoption? There's already loads of needy children out there.



The problem is that many of these children have problems, either mentally, physically or emotionally. Many children in adoption were not given up for adoption at birth. They were placed in adoption after their parents were either determined to be unfit to take care of children or one or both parents were placed in jail. Many of these children were abused and will face years of therapy.

Very few people either can or are able to take care of children like this either because they don't have the finances to do so or because they can't emotionally handle a special needs child. Telling couples "You should adopt" instead of surrogacy is almost as heartless as what their crummy parents put their children through before welfare agencies intervened.



I think you'll find that I said "encourage" not "should". Children with problems still need homes so it's worth really thinking about if you're able to help. Many just dismiss this option outright. It may not be necessary for children to have years of therapy because a good supportive home is therapy itself. Surrogacy cost money too so either way money is spent. Surrogacy can be heartless when a not so perfect child gets rejected. It can be heartless when the agreed child is not given to the parents that made an agreement and sometimes had their own bio child implanted or bio sperm inseminated. It's heartless when some poor woman in another country from the desired parents is depending on the pregnancy to go well to earn some money to provide for her own family and the pregnancy miscarries. Surrogacy also requires sorting out legal stuff which does mean paying legal fees apart from fees or living expenses to the surrogate. Surrogacy depends on women who've had successful pregnancies before and who are mentally and physically willing to take the health risk to help another. It can work out wonderfully for some but it's not the answer for every person wanting to be a parent.



867 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / ihlok
Offline
Posted 11/13/14 , edited 11/13/14
people should be encouraged to have not more than 2/3 kids. someone may be able to take care of more children but the funny thing is, the world isn't. nature already is stretched too far. but humans are humans. folly comes naturally to many. they'll continue to overpopulate, pollute earth to the point where millions die. only then the dumb, deaf and blinds will start working for a better world seriously.
religious teachings are to be blamed as well. almost all the religions came into existence during the period where high birth rate was necessary. hence they profess the view of 'as much child as you can have' and many people follow them blindly. unfortunately for many people faith trumps logic.
17307 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / My Couch
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
It all comes down to the welfare of those children. The problem isn't having too many children, it's having too many incompetent parents.
Posted 11/13/14
The octomom should be executed.
Sogno- 
45766 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
as long as you have the means to support them and you will, you know, actually care about them then by all means have as many as you'd like

14946 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / San Francisco
Offline
Posted 11/13/14 , edited 11/13/14

tkayt wrote:
I think you'll find that I said "encourage" not "should". Children with problems still need homes so it's worth really thinking about if you're able to help. Many just dismiss this option outright. It may not be necessary for children to have years of therapy because a good supportive home is therapy itself. Surrogacy cost money too so either way money is spent. Surrogacy can be heartless when a not so perfect child gets rejected. It can be heartless when the agreed child is not given to the parents that made an agreement and sometimes had their own bio child implanted or bio sperm inseminated. It's heartless when some poor woman in another country from the desired parents is depending on the pregnancy to go well to earn some money to provide for her own family and the pregnancy miscarries. Surrogacy also requires sorting out legal stuff which does mean paying legal fees apart from fees or living expenses to the surrogate. Surrogacy depends on women who've had successful pregnancies before and who are mentally and physically willing to take the health risk to help another. It can work out wonderfully for some but it's not the answer for every person wanting to be a parent.


Surrogacy is no more heartless than people having kids "the oil' fashioned way". For many people, there is always some sort of payment involved. For a woman who depends on someone else to financially support her, popping out kids keeps her as financially solvent as someone in a third world country who elects to be a surrogate for the same reason.

I agree with you that surrogacy is not the answer for all couples, but the stigma attached to being one and for couples who depend on one needs to stop...or at least until every couple who can have kids opts to adopt a child as well.

4464 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M / CALIFORNIA woop woop
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
People that can't afford children should not have them. Period!
5010 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / F
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
As long as there isn't an enforced "every couple must have 1 child" rule. I'm very happy with my freedom and my 4-legged babies, tyvm. Don't need an expensive brat that talks back and runs my blood pressure through the roof.
26821 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Chicago, IL
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
If it's their desire. Even if I think it's best to have less children. Having more can get them very overwhelmed.
runec 
28348 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/13/14
Honestly, there is a point where a child's quality of life and development will decline simple by virtue of the parent's having less love and attention to give as they add yet more to their brood. Overpopulation is definitely a concern. But so is not raising children that turn into stupid, shitty people because you had 10 of them and barely had any time or energy left for any of them individually. -.-
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.