Having children

[CaliLobo]

Just talking to a few young unmarried women who work in my apartment complex, and they raised some interesting points.

In CAF and among practicing Catholics, there seems to be a mentality that there are two vocations: consecrated life, or marriage WITH children. It almost seems to be that if a Catholic is married and chooses not to have children, that he or she is from Mars–like why would someone choose such a thing.

1. But in a fallen world like ours, isn’t it better for people to contribute to organizations that take care of children in need, instead of bringing even more children into our world?
2. Is it really a sin for a married couple to choose not to have children? If so, why? Genesis 1:28 says "God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’ " But as you can see, the verse is a blessing from God, and not a command from God.
3. Isn’t the economic cost of having children (approx. $266770 depending on what you put down in http://www.babycenter.com/cost-of-raising-child-calculator) a legitimate reason for a woman to choose not to have a child? (I checked the box that says I would pay for a four-year college, and in East Asia, college tuition DOES count toward the cost of childrearing.) Isn’t simple economics the major reason for decline in birthrates, and not a breakdown of morals?
4. Some women don’t wish to have children because they fear the impact it will have on their physical bodies (baby weight among them) and their lifestyle (work, schedule, hobbies, etc.) We can’t blame them for that right?
5. Isn’t it a wiser decision in the United States, considering #1 and #3, to save up for one’s own healthcare in old age, and use one’s money toward organizations that help poor children instead of giving birth to more children in a fallen world?
6. Shouldn’t a Catholic NOT have a child if he or she feels mentally or physically unready or unequipped to handle childrearing? Wouldn’t it be selfish to raise a child in such circumstances?
7. Is being a lay single person also a vocation in Catholicism just like marriage or consecrated life?

 

[Abu]

The breakdown in morals is reflected in the number of unmarried men and women living together, the number of illegitimate births, the number of divorces, the huge rate of abortions which are government supported, the use of contraceptives and the push for same-sex unions as a “marriage”.

Living a chaste unmarried life is perfectly worthy.

Marriage is meant for procreation and education and to marry while deliberately denying the main purpose of marriage is a grave fault. The birth dearth which is depopulating so many nations points to the need of a return to morality and sanity. Abortions and contraceptives are a major reason for the birth dearth.

A return to sanity demands that more and more Catholics be formed in Christ’s plan for humanity, know His mandated faith and morals and evangelise others in His truths. Unless and until Catholics do that who can or will? That is what is needed in the U.S.A. and worldwide.

Even within marriage, for those who have a grave need, there is the availability of Natural Birth Regulation which uses the fact that women were designed so that almost 2/3rds of the time sex is inherently infertile. This fact shows that the unitive function of sex is just as important as the procreative aspect. At one time it was thought infertility was always an “abnormal” state. Now we find that infertility has been designed as a “normal” state a majority of the time in women.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Your final point is fine. The single life can be a vocation. (BTW, religious brothers and sisters are lay people. Deacons, priests, and bishops are clergy.)

The rest of your post is liberal modernist anti-life agit-prop. Married Christians must be open to life. Our tragically low birth rates are self-genocide.

 

[markomalley]

Just talking to a few young unmarried women who work in my apartment complex, and they raised some interesting points.

In CAF and among practicing Catholics, there seems to be a mentality that there are two vocations: consecrated life, or marriage WITH children. It almost seems to be that if a Catholic is married and chooses not to have children, that he or she is from Mars–like why would someone choose such a thing.

1. But in a fallen world like ours, isn’t it better for people to contribute to organizations that take care of children in need, instead of bringing even more children into our world?
2. Is it really a sin for a married couple to choose not to have children? If so, why? Genesis 1:28 says "God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’ " But as you can see, the verse is a blessing from God, and not a command from God.
3. Isn’t the economic cost of having children (approx. $266770 depending on what you put down in http://www.babycenter.com/cost-of-raising-child-calculator) a legitimate reason for a woman to choose not to have a child? (I checked the box that says I would pay for a four-year college, and in East Asia, college tuition DOES count toward the cost of childrearing.) Isn’t simple economics the major reason for decline in birthrates, and not a breakdown of morals?
4. Some women don’t wish to have children because they fear the impact it will have on their physical bodies (baby weight among them) and their lifestyle (work, schedule, hobbies, etc.) We can’t blame them for that right?
5. Isn’t it a wiser decision in the United States, considering #1 and #3, to save up for one’s own healthcare in old age, and use one’s money toward organizations that help poor children instead of giving birth to more children in a fallen world?
6. Shouldn’t a Catholic NOT have a child if he or she feels mentally or physically unready or unequipped to handle childrearing? Wouldn’t it be selfish to raise a child in such circumstances?
7. Is being a lay single person also a vocation in Catholicism just like marriage or consecrated life?

The Catechism states:
1652 "By its very nature the institution of marriage and married love is ordered to the procreation and education of the offspring and it is in them that it finds its crowning glory."160

Children are the supreme gift of marriage and contribute greatly to the good of the parents themselves. God himself said: “It is not good that man should be alone,” and “from the beginning (he) made them male and female”; wishing to associate them in a special way in his own creative work, God blessed man and woman with the words: “Be fruitful and multiply.” Hence, true married love and the whole structure of family life which results from it, without diminishment of the other ends of marriage, are directed to disposing the spouses to cooperate valiantly with the love of the Creator and Savior, who through them will increase and enrich his family from day to day.161
​

Also, the Code of Canon Law says:
Can. 1055 §1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized.
The openness to bringing forth life through the conjugal act (which is rightly done only within marriage). As Paul VI said:
Men rightly observe that a conjugal act imposed on one’s partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife. If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will.
Honestly, when I look at your list of objections, each and every one of them sound horribly self-centered, particularly and egregiously item #4: Some women don’t wish to have children because they fear the impact it will have on their physical bodies (baby weight among them) and their lifestyle (work, schedule, hobbies, etc.)

Maybe if a person is not willing to totally give him/herself to the other ordered toward procreation, perhaps this person is not mentally ready for marriage in the first place.

 

[Fiery_One]

Honestly, when I look at your list of objections, each and every one of them sound horribly self-centered, particularly and egregiously item #4: Some women don’t wish to have children because they fear the impact it will have on their physical bodies (baby weight among them) and their lifestyle (work, schedule, hobbies, etc.)

#4 in particular is both disgustingly selfish and profoundly un-Catholic.

 

[markomalley]

#4 in particular is both disgustingly selfish and profoundly un-Catholic.

I would not necessarily say it in that way. A lot of people are informed by the culture, which is ordered to egocentrism, rather than by the Faith. Sadly, this includes a lot of people who are baptized Catholics. You will see that the OP reports being a “Christian Seeker” – meaning that he/she likely was never formed in the Faith.

So while stating that it is egregiously self-centered, I would hesitate from using the adverb “disgustingly” when modifying the adjective self-centered.

It’s better to assume that the person is honestly asking a question out of “seeking” in an effort to discern the truth…

 

[aemcpa]

If you have so many objections to having children, don’t get married. The purpose of marriage is to provide a stable and loving home for children, not so the couple can enjoy sex and save money.

 

[aemcpa]

Also, I just went to babycenter.com/cost-of-raising-child-calculator

Total garbage.

Childcare and education costs $3,120 a year from birth? This assumes every kid is in professional daycare, when there are often many other options.

$720 a year for clothes? I haven’t spent that total in 7 years on my 3 kids combined. There’s always someone with hand-me-downs, birthday and Christmas gifts, not to mention the baby shower.

Maybe the first kid will raise the cost of housing, but that cost isn’t linear for multiple children. And it doesn’t account for larger houses having correspondingly larger appreciation in value over time, so this cost is offset in the long run.

 

[RPRPsych]

Just talking to a few young unmarried women who work in my apartment complex, and they raised some interesting points.

In CAF and among practicing Catholics, there seems to be a mentality that there are two vocations: consecrated life, or marriage WITH children. It almost seems to be that if a Catholic is married and chooses not to have children, that he or she is from Mars–like why would someone choose such a thing.

1. But in a fallen world like ours, isn’t it better for people to contribute to organizations that take care of children in need, instead of bringing even more children into our world?
2. Is it really a sin for a married couple to choose not to have children? If so, why? Genesis 1:28 says "God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’ " But as you can see, the verse is a blessing from God, and not a command from God.
3. Isn’t the economic cost of having children (approx. $266770 depending on what you put down in http://www.babycenter.com/cost-of-raising-child-calculator) a legitimate reason for a woman to choose not to have a child? (I checked the box that says I would pay for a four-year college, and in East Asia, college tuition DOES count toward the cost of childrearing.) Isn’t simple economics the major reason for decline in birthrates, and not a breakdown of morals?
4. Some women don’t wish to have children because they fear the impact it will have on their physical bodies (baby weight among them) and their lifestyle (work, schedule, hobbies, etc.) We can’t blame them for that right?
5. Isn’t it a wiser decision in the United States, considering #1 and #3, to save up for one’s own healthcare in old age, and use one’s money toward organizations that help poor children instead of giving birth to more children in a fallen world?
6. Shouldn’t a Catholic NOT have a child if he or she feels mentally or physically unready or unequipped to handle childrearing? Wouldn’t it be selfish to raise a child in such circumstances?
7. Is being a lay single person also a vocation in Catholicism just like marriage or consecrated life?

You raise some interesting points, which I’ve heard from quite a few young women (and men) myself. Here’s my take on them:

1. The two are not mutually exclusive: I can raise children of my own, and contribute to helping those less fortunate than me. Besides, the overpopulation problem is overstated, and is more a question of inequality and mismanagement than of an actual “lack of space”.
2. Yes, since one of the ends of marriage is procreation. (This isn’t just a Catholic idea; see Malachi 2.) However, involuntary infertility, due to a medical reason for example, is by no means culpable.
3. Not necessarily. If you look at my country (which is not Catholic), “poorer” families tend to have more children; “middle class” and “upper class” families tend to level out at 2 and 1 on an average. It’s less about economics and more about perceived advantages and convenience, especially with the rise of individualism.
4. No one’s forcing them to get married, at least not in the West. And “baby weight” is a pretty frivolous reason, though your mileage may vary on that.
5. Again, saving up and rearing children is not mutually exclusive. Plus, and this is a hugely important point, even if you’ve saved up a lot, who will care for you in old age?
6. Yes, but in that case, he or she is not obliged to marry. In the Catholic faith, marriage implies openness to parenthood.
7. Most definitely.

 

[SamH]

Just talking to a few young unmarried women who work in my apartment complex, and they raised some interesting points.

In CAF and among practicing Catholics, there seems to be a mentality that there are two vocations: consecrated life, or marriage WITH children. It almost seems to be that if a Catholic is married and chooses not to have children, that he or she is from Mars–like why would someone choose such a thing.

1. But in a fallen world like ours, isn’t it better for people to contribute to organizations that take care of children in need, instead of bringing even more children into our world?

Interesting. So who cares for the children in need when the makers nolonger exist?

You seem to be under the mistaken belief what one doesn’t consume will be passed on to someone else. It doesn’t work that way. If all four of my children didn’t exist, what they don’t consume doesn’t suddenly appear on a dinner table in Africa. And 30 years from now what my children don’t produce as productive Americans means even less in the US - meaning less to help the children in need at home and abroad.

 

[Joe_5859]

Openness to children is a prerequisite for entering into a valid marriage. It’s not just window dressing. If a couple goes into a marriage insistent on not having children, their marriage would be invalid.

I’ll only respond to a few of the points as others have already done a good job. In response to the cost, in point #3, I always, always, always will dispute such figures. Children are not nearly that expensive. I am a one income family with two kids (one of which is special needs). And there is no way it is going to cost half a million to raise them. (I think that would be my entire paycheck until they are 18!)

Kids aren’t nearly as expensive as many would have us believe. My wife only buys clothes for the kids when they are on clearance for $2 or less. Kids don’t need all the expensive gadgets and gizmos.

Regarding point #5, I think the question is a sad reflection on the current mentality that is so prevalent. Instead of having children to take care of us as we age, we think we need more money to take care of us. We wouldn’t need nearly as much money if we had more kids.

 

[Ophelia23]

The purpose of man and women joining one another in the sacrament of Marriage is intended toward Life. I place a capital ‘L’ on Life, because I mean it in all senses of the term: the betterment of two halves in the journey toward Heaven, the true Life in Christ, life in creation. It is equally all of this. To eliminate any part of this is to essentially break apart marriage in general. Whether you interpret the passage you mention from Genesis as a command or as a blessing, did God not see it fit to make this point abundantly clear to us: That He wishes man and woman to unite “be fruitful”? Why else would He have even said this if it were not His intention? He didn’t say, “'Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it if that is what you want.” Further, how many times are we assured throughout the Bible that our God will provide for us? Why live a life in fear of what God has created and encouraged among us?

This is not to say that we are called to be careless or foolish. We are called to be trusting, open to God’s will, and willing to love. If a married couple needs to space out children, there are natural means to do it. If a married couple is unable to conceive, this is God’s doing. The point is to simply be open and willing.

Living a celibate single life is very much so a calling for some, and it certainly is a vocation. That is what is amazing about our God–He has a genuine purpose for all of us and that purpose aims to His glory and His glory only. Not our glory. Not our comfort. Not our wants. His glory. His wants. Our surrender. And it is through this surrender–whether it be to single life, to married life with children, to holy life through Clergy–that we find true happiness. “To love You, take my world apart.”

 

[1ke]

In CAF and among practicing Catholics, there seems to be a mentality that there are two vocations: consecrated life, or marriage WITH children.

The purpose of marriage is prcreation and raising of children. The incorrect mentality is that marriage is for something else.

It almost seems to be that if a Catholic is married and chooses not to have children, that he or she is from Mars–like why would someone choose such a thing.

A permanent intention against children is an impediment to valid marriage.

1. But in a fallen world like ours, isn’t it better for people to contribute to organizations that take care of children in need, instead of bringing even more children into our world?

If a person has a call to such service, they do not have a call to marriage.

And no, it is not “better” to refrain from having children. This is at best a gnostic heresy view of the world.

1. Is it really a sin for a married couple to choose not to have children? If so, why?

If two people have a permanent intention against children they cannot marry.

If two people who marry do not have children for reasons out of their control, no it is not sinful. Many people go into marriage open to children and things do not work out that way due to health, feritlity issues, major crises that arise after the marriage.

1. Isn’t the economic cost of having children (approx. $266770 depending on what you put down in http://www.babycenter.com/cost-of-raising-child-calculator) a legitimate reason for a woman to choose not to have a child?

Um, no.

Isn’t simple economics the major reason for decline in birthrates, and not a breakdown of morals?

These calculators are a bunch of bunk. They assume you lavish unlimited STUFF on your child(ren).

Secondly, not it is not “simple economics” it is consumerism and selfishness.

1. Some women don’t wish to have children because they fear the impact it will have on their physical bodies (baby weight among them) and their lifestyle (work, schedule, hobbies, etc.) We can’t blame them for that right?

I hope you are being facetious.

1. Isn’t it a wiser decision in the United States, considering #1 and #3, to save up for one’s own healthcare in old age, and use one’s money toward organizations that help poor children instead of giving birth to more children in a fallen world?
2. Shouldn’t a Catholic NOT have a child if he or she feels mentally or physically unready or unequipped to handle childrearing? Wouldn’t it be selfish to raise a child in such circumstances?

Again, hoping you are being facetious.

1. Is being a lay single person also a vocation in Catholicism just like marriage or consecrated life?

No. It is not a vocation.

But it is a valid way of living out your baptismal call.

 

[RPRPsych]

Regarding point #5, I think the question is a sad reflection on the current mentality that is so prevalent. Instead of having children to take care of us as we age, we think we need more money to take care of us. We wouldn’t need nearly as much money if we had more kids.

An excellent point , and one that is brought home to me quite starkly at work, where we often have to deal with fairly well-to-do elderly people who have no one to stay with them in hospital. (The “poor”, whatever their other troubles, rarely have this problem.)

 

[shelby_sun]

Also, I just went to babycenter.com/cost-of-raising-child-calculator

Total garbage.

Childcare and education costs $3,120 a year from birth? This assumes every kid is in professional daycare, when there are often many other options.

$720 a year for clothes? I haven’t spent that total in 7 years on my 3 kids combined. There’s always someone with hand-me-downs, birthday and Christmas gifts, not to mention the baby shower.

Maybe the first kid will raise the cost of housing, but that cost isn’t linear for multiple children. And it doesn’t account for larger houses having correspondingly larger appreciation in value over time, so this cost is offset in the long run.

I am not agreeing with the OP, but try $7,000 a year for Catholic middle school and $15,000 a year for catholic high school witch bishops strongly encourage us a catolic to do for our children.

 

[aemcpa]

I am not agreeing with the OP, but try $7,000 a year for Catholic middle school and $15,000 a year for catholic high school witch bishops strongly encourage us a catolic to do for our children.

I would never spend $15,000 a year for a Catholic school. This is why homeschooling is becoming more prevalent. In any case, most of the reason why Catholic school is so expensive in the first place is because Catholics are as selfish as the secular culture at large. If Catholics were going to Mass, tithing, and entering the priesthood and religious life, then Catholic schools would be free.

 

[Joe_5859]

I would never spend $15,000 a year for a Catholic school. This is why homeschooling is becoming more prevalent. In any case, most of the reason why Catholic school is so expensive in the first place is because Catholics are as selfish as the secular culture at large. If Catholics were going to Mass, tithing, and entering the priesthood and religious life, then Catholic schools would be free.

Catholic schools are tuition free in the Diocese of Wichita. So moving there is always an option.

 

[aemcpa]

Catholic schools are tuition free in the Diocese of Wichita. So moving there is always an option.

From the Diocesan website: “During the past 15 years, priestly vocations in the Diocese of Wichita have steadily climbed.” In fact, Wichita is now second in the US behind Lincoln, NE in most seminarians per capita. Coincidence?

If you build it, they will come.

 

[akela135]

I think it is important to take a step back and remember that Catholics believe the point of our Earthly life is to draw closer to God with hope that we can join him in Heaven. We look to determine which of our choices will bring us closer to God who by his grace left us the Holy Spirit and the Church to guide us. Sometimes choices that will bring us greater hardship or Earthly suffering can be the ones that draw us closer to God.

When we look at the thought of having children, especially with the attitudes and issues prevalent today, it can seem like it is all hardship and suffering and that there should be other easier options. However with the wisdom of the Church to guide us we see that having children is a blessing from God and one we should embrace. What seems like hardship now will be revealed as a source of tremendous joy when we allow God to lead us.

That being said, if having children is something that a person can never be open too, then marriage is not the right vocation for them. God could be calling them to live a single-life where they can devote time and help to their community. (If not a religious life). However the single life also comes with hardships, the hardship of not being able to have an Earthly partner (spouse) to share your joys and troubles with is one of them.

I chose not to address your exact issues as other people have already done a much better job than I could but I hope my post has brought greater clarity to this topic.

 

[CaliLobo]

Also, I just went to babycenter.com/cost-of-raising-child-calculator

Total garbage.

Childcare and education costs $3,120 a year from birth? This assumes every kid is in professional daycare, when there are often many other options.

$720 a year for clothes? I haven’t spent that total in 7 years on my 3 kids combined. There’s always someone with hand-me-downs, birthday and Christmas gifts, not to mention the baby shower.

Maybe the first kid will raise the cost of housing, but that cost isn’t linear for multiple children. And it doesn’t account for larger houses having correspondingly larger appreciation in value over time, so this cost is offset in the long run.

Okay, let’s break down the $266770 figure I obtained.

Remember, I clicked that I would pay for a four-year college. Assume that costs $25000/year for tuition and housing (a low estimate), and that it takes 4 years to graduate (another low estimate). So let’s subtract $100000 and we have $166770.

$166770 divided by 18 (assuming 18 is the age of majority) is $9265 per year for 18 years. A very reasonable figure.

Want a further breakdown?

Let’s say your child only does one activity (piano lessons) from age 6 to 18. A used piano can be found for free, but piano lessons (for me in 1998) cost $90 a month, or $1080 a year. $9265 - $1080 = $8185.

Unfortunately, children do more than one activity and don’t commit from ages 6-18. Most activities are way more costly than piano. Most sports (travel, equipment, coaching, organized leagues) are very expensive. What if your child does two or three, concurrently? What if your child gets serious and has a shot at the college level? You don’t want him to be left out; you want him to keep up with his peers, right?

Assuming your child does 3 activities concurrently which are as cheap as piano lessons, that’s $3240 a year. $9265 - $3240 = $6025.

(Yes, these costs aren’t incurred during the first 6 years, but other costs are.)

How about food? Let’s say you go cheap and spend about $20/week for food. $20 * 52 = $1040 per year. That assumes a lot of mac and cheese, which you wouldn’t feed your child every day. $6025 - $1040 = $4985.

How about utilities and gas? Assume $200/month for utilities, gas, and cell phone if you live single. We can safely assume an increase for the utilities attributable to the child, especially for cell phone and transportation for the child. Let’s say $100/month increase, for $1200/year. $4985 - $1200 = $3785.

We haven’t included Catholic education, which you guys have admitted is $7500 to $15000 a year. It’s already a nonstarter with the budget I proposed, and most people wouldn’t accept payment to live in Wichita (although I do think Kansas is nice).

Now, $3785 remains. Some of that goes to gifts and clothes. Some of it may go to medical expenses. Hopefully he has good vision; yearly eye exams and contacts/glasses are about $200. Hope he is healthy in general.

Hope you’re not Asian like me so you don’t feel compelled to pay for tutoring for your child (which, in Asia, is as expensive as Catholic education, and is therefore a major cause of birth dearth there)!

You’ll also need to save some for a rainy day.

Hope his college is really $25000/year. Private colleges are much more.

So yes, although Babies 'R Us is a sponsor of the Cost of A Child Calculator, we can see that a few back-of-the-envelope calculations prove that their figures are reasonable.