[Kate!]

just watching Mega Families

Kelly and her husband have 10 kids. I think that's ridiculous.

I think 4 is the maximum that should be allowed for any family.

Thoughts?

[DouglasS]

Why should 4 Be the maximum for one family? If they have resources, money and care to look after a family of 5/6 kids, then why not. I do agree anymore than maybe 6 in today’s age is probably not suitable, and also with overpopulation can be regarded as selfish

[thesheriff443]

It depends if they are taken care of.

One child can be to many for some.

[Josy]

I dont think there should be any kind of limit if the parents can adequately care and financially support them.

[Smithy]

1

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Kate!

just watching Mega Families

Kelly and her husband have 10 kids. I think that's ridiculous.

I think 4 is the maximum that should be allowed for any family.

Thoughts?

Kate I agree that sometimes it's too many, but you can't stop people or put a limit on how many kids they have.

The messed up thing is even when they're unfit unsuitable parents,they still continue having more kids. Despite not looking after them properly . Sadly that's what happens .

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Kate!

just watching Mega Families



Kelly and her husband have 10 kids. I think that's ridiculous.



I think 4 is the maximum that should be allowed for any family.



Thoughts?

Back in the 1920’s / 30’s that number of kids wasn’t abnormal !

My mum was the youngest of 12 kids .. sadly her mum died giving birth to her and the eldest child ( her only sister) took over the role of mother to the other 10 boys and my mum ..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kizzy]

It's a sticky subject... I agree I theory that if you can't support your children then it's not good for them to be one of many growing up in poverty.
However, what's the answer? You can advise people not to have any more children but it can't be enforced, That is straying into eugenics.

If you have money, space and time then why not have 10?

[LeatherTrumpet]

1 for 98%

[Captain.Remy]

As long as you can really take care of them in all possible ways (financially, emotionally etc) then go raise a rugby team if you like. I couldn't care less as long as they're safe and looked after properly.
My husband and I can "afford" some, but as of now we're filing papers to adopt our first. Then we'll see, because I'm not against raising a rugby team to help me practice and stay young

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Captain.Remy

As long as you can really take care of them in all possible ways (financially, emotionally etc) then go raise a rugby team if you like. I couldn't care less as long as they're safe and looked after properly.
My husband and I can "afford" some, but as of now we're filing papers to adopt our first. Then we'll see, because I'm not against raising a rugby team to help me practice and stay young

That’s working for This Yorkshire Family on BBC ... a farming couple with 9 kids


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Strictly Jake]

After having 3.....1 is too many! Dont do it....

[Jake.]

As long as they are provided/cared for and raised right, I don’t think it matters

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Jake.

As long as they are provided/cared for and raised right, I don’t think it matters

I think the premis is

They rarely are

[Jake.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

I think the premis is

They rarely are

Not if your source is the mail online, no

[Marsh.]

You can't simultaneously fight for women's rights over their own bodies re: abortion and then enforce a limit on the number of children they could have.

No.

[Toy Soldier]

It's a strange multiplier to be honest. One is hard, two is 100x harder than one, but then 3 and even 4 aren't that much harder than 2 (based on what friends with more than two say).

Basically one is life changing but you can give one kid your full attention, adding "more than one" into the mix divides your attention and is immediately a different ballgame, but once you have more than one, it is what it is.

I think at 5+ things start to get a bit silly though unless there are large age gaps. You can't possibly be giving each child the attention it needs. If there are big age gaps then each to their own, I guess... If you have two kids who are off to Uni and another two who are in primary school, it's not really any different to just having two in practical terms, is it. Just that you're doing it for a second time.

[Mokka]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

You can't simultaneously fight for women's rights over their own bodies re: abortion and then enforce a limit on the number of children they could have.

No.

This.

[Jessica.]

It depends on mental stability and financial stability. I don't see a problem with people having no kids, I don't see a problem with people having as many kids as they want. All that matters is stability.

[caprimint]

1

[LaLaLand]

For me? One. I'd rather have a dog honestly.

When I was younger I wanted kids, but now as a 30 year old I couldn't want anything less. I'd rather not be tied down, go where I want, do what I want etc.

I treasure my own time, space and company too much to have kids (for now and the near future anyway - could all change if I met somebody/"the one").

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It's a strange multiplier to be honest. One is hard, two is 100x harder than one, but then 3 and even 4 aren't that much harder than 2 (based on what friends with more than two say).

Basically one is life changing but you can give one kid your full attention, adding "more than one" into the mix divides your attention and is immediately a different ballgame, but once you have more than one, it is what it is.

I think at 5+ things start to get a bit silly though unless there are large age gaps. You can't possibly be giving each child the attention it needs. If there are big age gaps then each to their own, I guess... If you have two kids who are off to Uni and another two who are in primary school, it's not really any different to just having two in practical terms, is it. Just that you're doing it for a second time.

The wife of the farmer I mentioned ( mother to nine kids) said that each child made things harder for them but after 5 it made no difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[JerseyWins]

Originally Posted by caprimint

1

I was gonna call it @ you saying this but you did already

[Ammi]

...my dad was one of fourteen children, so I’ll say fourteen is a good number...although more more or less than that number could work for some as well...as others have said, if we can provide love, security, stability etc and our bodies say, yes we can do this..then it’s very much a personally decided thing...

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

You can't simultaneously fight for women's rights over their own bodies re: abortion and then enforce a limit on the number of children they could have.

No.

...a voice of wisdom...