If a family is unable to take care of their kids, should they continue to have kids?

[Et_Cetera]

Tell me OP, Should the couple in judgement here have not had the last child they had either? At what point do you think they should be told to not have more children.

What this family needs is help from the Church made up of YOU.

I’m sure God is pleased with all life created so far in this family, and all future life. Perhaps it is the rest of the world that tries to devalue and limit life that will be judged harshly.

I don’t think this is an issue of “Timmy didn’t get a Mercedes on his 16th birthday, so this family is terrible!” I think the OP is referring to a household where children are not being cared for properly. They should not have more children when they can’t care for them. It’s not fair to create suffering.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I don’t think this is an issue of “Timmy didn’t get a Mercedes on his 16th birthday, so this family is terrible!” I think the OP is referring to a household where children are not being cared for properly. They should not have more children when they can’t care for them. It’s not fair to create suffering.

That could be your opinion. That could be the opinion of someone in that marriage. But it cannot be Catholic teaching. We do not dictate when a married couple must stop engaging in the marital act. And it is not consistent with Catholic theology in present third world countries or historical situations.

Theology is false if it is not consistent.

Using your idea of it not being fair to create suffering you would think that the Church would have had ample opportunities to agree with you. It has not. Where Christians are persecuted today not only does the Church not tell them not to have children because of potential “suffering” it actually marries them making them promise to bring forth children. Historically when the Church suffered much persecutions. It grew. Not only by converts but by procreation. In extreme disease and poverty where many of a couples children would die, Catholics were still under the command. In Africa, Latin America etc it continues to grow. Not because these poor people are not taught NFP but rather because that is what we are to do as married Catholic children of God.

The earthly answer is to stick our selves between the sheets of this couples bed and tell our own opinions of how many children they should have. The Catholic and Holy answer is to help them support the ones they do have and to help them access the tools to be able to make it on thier own. If that is financial, physcological or educational so be it.

Such a misunderstanding of how to help people is on display here.

Call CPS.
Offer to help with the Kids.
Get a group of people together after Mass to buy food and clean their house.
Educate.
Pray for.
Empathize.

These are what we are called to do.

Judge.
Condemn.
point fingers.
insert ourselves between the marital embrace.

These are what we cannot do.

Your view of suffering is off base.

What the couple could be doing wrong is not treating their children properly. The mistake is not in having the children of future children, the mistake is in the care of the children or future children. That is what needs to be remedied.

Remember we live in a world where those of us who can and do provide for our children are STILL looked at like we should not have more. From doctors who push ABC, to the innocent comments at the grocery store about if we are done yet. It is important that we do not let that worldly and material thought invade and perverse our theology. Just as we are so quick to defend the idea that “how dare we tell a couple they do not have just reasons to abstain” we need to be consistent with that idea that we do not belong between a naked husband and wife. Even when the choice is to have a child.
It is not our business and we are questioning God’s vocation for a couple which we have no knowledge of.

The only person I know of that it would have been better if he were not born, was Judas.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I don’t think this is an issue of “Timmy didn’t get a Mercedes on his 16th birthday, so this family is terrible!” I think the OP is referring to a household where children are not being cared for properly. They should not have more children when they can’t care for them. It’s not fair to create suffering.

So if not the Mercedes, what is the dollar amount that a couple should not morally have a child? And is there a document in the Church that supports this? Who makes these decisions? You? The OP?

Sometimes our western view clouds us to what is the purpose of life.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Personally, I think it’s crazy, irresponsible, and often times abusive to have children that you cannot afford.

However, once the couple has kids, you can’t exactly slap a ‘return to sender’ sticker on them and throw them in the mailbox, so nagging, insulting, or harping to the couple about it is unfair and counterproductive. Especially since there really is no way to know if they could afford the kids when they had them. And even if you did talk to them, do you really think that there’s anything you could say to keep them from having more kids?

Really, your only options are to call CPS if the situation warrants it. My guess is that 16 kids in a single home warrants it, unless their house is particularly huge there might even be a local ordinance about having that many people in one home. (Most places only allow 2/bedroom, even in single-family homes. Though the ordinances aren’t usually enforced, because it’s hard to know how many kids are in a particular home. If you think there may be a law like that in your area and you think they may be violating it, you can always file a report to the city.)

But the one thing you can’t do is judge, try to get more opinions to bolster some sort of moral case against them, or say anything to them. You can simply evaluate if the kids are facing abuse, neglect, or unsafe conditions and report on that.

 

[MomaMary8]

Thanks for the replies everyone! I guess my first response is that I am more worried about the children most of all. It truly is a sad situation because not only are they in poverty, but oftentimes the kids have to take care of the others because their are so many.** I don’t know if it’s so bad in the sense that they are starving, but i do feel it affects their quality of life because the kids can’t get support or services** because they don’t have enough money and it seems like they don’t want handouts, though in this case i’d say it’s foolish not too.

Also, someone mentioned that lack of education shouldn’t stop people from kids. Don’t take it as i’m saying since they don’t have a higher education that they can’t have kids. By education, I meant that maybe the parents weren’t capable of understanding NFP or didn’t understand that having so many kids would put a strain on them financially. Don’t get me wrong if parents are able to raise as many kids as they want go ahead. I actually think people need to do this more often. However, if you are unable to take care or provide for them, then it might be smart to start NFP.

OP: could you please clarify these. I understand you may be trying to be charitable in your descriptions of these friends of yours, but I think we need to know a bit more information. I always have my children help each other. That’s the great benefit of a large family. They learn from early on how to lovingly care for another. Charity begins in the home, after all.

As for quality of life. That is VERY subjective. What services do you feel they should be receiving? If these children attend a school, most “services” for children can be rendered at the school. If it is as dire as you imply, the school should notice.

 

[TSB4]

I see nothing in your post that implies CPS needs to be involved. If they attend mass every Sunday, how is it your place to judge how strong their faith and intelligence is? Many people have only 2 children and can mistreat them behind closed doors. Yet, in the public eye may seem to have it all together, like intelligence and nice things. Being well kept. The size of their family doesn’t concern me at all. However, if they are struggling, I do think people should offer help and support. It’s easy to judge a larger family for its lack of things rather than a smaller family. One of those children could be running this country someday, or caring for one of us when we are old and decrepit. My advise, offer support any way you can.

 

[kozlosap]

NO! ! Maybe some good old fashioned common sense is needed here. I have the same philosophy for those living where there is not enough water or food.

 

[TEPO]

So if not the Mercedes, what is the dollar amount that a couple should not morally have a child? And is there a document in the Church that supports this? Who makes these decisions? You? The OP?

Sometimes our western view clouds us to what is the purpose of life.

I have to agree with your posts on this thread.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Original Poster, you need to understand that judging another family for having “too many children” is gravely sinful. You are buying into the modern Culture of Death. Human life is a gift from God, not some terrible curse. If you see families in your parish in need, you can try to organize charitable physical and spiritual help for them. However, telling married people not to have children or that they have already had too many is not Christian.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

NO! ! Maybe some good old fashioned common sense is needed here. I have the same philosophy for those living where there is not enough water or food.

Interesting view for a Catholic.

Do you really think people in impoverished nations should not have children? Would that apply historically as well? Apostles? Jesus himself?

I am reminded of the words dickens wrote.

if they are to die, they had better do it now, and decrease the surplus population".

Bah humbug?

 

[robwar]

What is the position of the church on this? In my own life, I know a family who has 16 kids.Now yes this is a beautiful witness to life, but at the same time, they can’t really take care of their kids. Neither of the parent’s has an education and the father is the only one who really works ( I also wonder if the parents might be close to being near the IQ level for MR, since in talking to both the mother and father they seem to have intelligence issues). Also, the kids live in poor conditions and most of them suffer from mental illnesses that they can’t treat too well because they can’t afford it.
So what does the church teach on this? Could their parish priest tell them to go on NFP? In a sense it is their right to do so or not, but from what i’ve gathered it seems more like they have kids out of a lack of knowledge, rather than knowingly so. and doing it because they have a strong faith (granted they do attend mass every sunday, but I don’t know how devout they are, if at all outside of mass, though as I said it seems like they may have trouble understanding certain things intellectually)

Also can a priest advise someone not to have more kids and go on NFP if they are unable to provide for them. Also would it be wrong for a family to limit the number of kids if they have a high chance of having a certain disease?

No to all your questions. children don’t belong to the parents, they are temporary loans from God. It is not for you to judge if someone has too many. All children below to God and it is Him who calls them and us into being for His purposes not ours. While you may think you know all there is about this family, I would wager that you don’t or don’t have all the facts. If someone is able to have that many, then help them out not talk about them on the internet.

 

[Et_Cetera]

So if not the Mercedes, what is the dollar amount that a couple should not morally have a child? And is there a document in the Church that supports this? Who makes these decisions? You? The OP?

Sometimes our western view clouds us to what is the purpose of life.

I’d say it’s morally wrong if the children don’t have enough food, clean shelter, adequate healthcare, clean clothing, a comfortable place to sleep, a feeling of security, and a household that allows them to be in good health. No one here knows what is truly going on with this family, but with what the OP described, there is reason to suspect that these kids are in substandard living conditions. Maybe the house is clean, maybe things work for them, but also…what if the house is in dire condition inside? It could happen anywhere really. Growing up, my cousins lived in a regular, upper-middle class neighborhood, so everyone was surprised when CPS was called because the inside of their neighbor’s house was filthy due to the mother’s mental illness. I agree with everyone that judging isn’t going to help this family, but if these children need intervention, then they need it. It’s always so weird to me that this forum is obsessed with being anti-abortion, but then there’s a story on here about possibly neglected children, and most people are like, “Hey, it’s fine, I’m sure they’re okay because God likes big families.” It just doesn’t add up. Re-read the OP’s post. It doesn’t sound like things are okay in the household. Do you really think that these parents are able to provide a good environment for their children? OP: If you think there is neglect (neglect is a form of abuse), then file a report to the state. Kids deserve a clean, happy home.

Edit: So I just re-read the initial post, and I failed to address the part where it is mentioned that some of the children appear to be suffering from untreated mental illnesses. You need to do something about this. It’s extremely unfair to the kids living in this household. If they need psychological help, then someone needs to take the steps to help them, if the parents are unable to do so themselves.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I’d say it’s morally wrong if the children don’t have enough food, clean shelter, adequate healthcare, clean clothing, a comfortable place to sleep, a feeling of security, and a household that allows them to be in good health. No one here knows what is truly going on with this family, but with what the OP described, there is reason to suspect that these kids are in substandard living conditions. Maybe the house is clean, maybe things work for them, but also…what if the house is in dire condition inside? It could happen anywhere really. Growing up, my cousins lived in a regular, upper-middle class neighborhood, so everyone was surprised when CPS was called because the inside of their neighbor’s house was filthy due to the mother’s mental illness. I agree with everyone that judging isn’t going to help this family, but if these children need intervention, then they need it. It’s always so weird to me that this forum is obsessed with being anti-abortion, but then there’s a story on here about possibly neglected children, and most people are like, “Hey, it’s fine, I’m sure they’re okay because God likes big families.” It just doesn’t add up. Re-read the OP’s post. It doesn’t sound like things are okay in the household. Do you really think that these parents are able to provide a good environment for their children? OP: If you think there is neglect (neglect is a form of abuse), then file a report to the state. Kids deserve a clean, happy home.

Edit: So I just re-read the initial post, and I failed to address the part where it is mentioned that some of the children appear to be suffering from untreated mental illnesses. You need to do something about this. It’s extremely unfair to the kids living in this household. If they need psychological help, then someone needs to take the steps to help them, if the parents are unable to do so themselves.

I think all agree that CPS can be called and that the family may need help. But from what source do you arrive at the idea of it being morally wrong for this couple to have kids? By your criteria entire countries should not have kids.

Do you give the state or a religion the moral authority to dictate non-procreation to a married couple? If so, why? And in what moral teaching do you base this power to dictate life to a married couple?

 

[Et_Cetera]

I think all agree that CPS can be called and that the family may need help. But from what source do you arrive at the idea of it being morally wrong for this couple to have kids? By your criteria entire countries should not have kids.

Do you give the state or a religion the moral authority to dictate non-procreation to a married couple? If so, why? And in what moral teaching do you base this power to dictate life to a married couple?

It’s from my own mind and logic. You can have your opinion, and I can have mine. I don’t think people should have children if they can’t provide them with food, clothing, medical care, and the necessities to have a physically and mentally healthy and happy lifestyle. It causes the children to suffer, and that isn’t right.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

It’s from my own mind and logic. You can have your opinion, and I can have mine. I don’t think people should have children if they can’t provide them with food, clothing, medical care, and the necessities to have a physically and mentally healthy and happy lifestyle. It causes the children to suffer, and that isn’t right.

Wow. There are a lot of people who would never have been born if we used your mind and logic. Like anyone in persecution, anyone alive during diseases that had no cure like the plague. etc.

Suffering is a part of redemption. It is a part of our own salvation. To say that one should not live because there may be suffering is not only non christian but rather illogical. Not only that but it is not the place of earthly entities.

You are right that we can both have opinions. Mine just happen to align with the Catholic Church.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

It’s from my own mind and logic. You can have your opinion, and I can have mine. I don’t think people should have children if they can’t provide them with food, clothing, medical care, and the necessities to have a physically and mentally healthy and happy lifestyle. It causes the children to suffer, and that isn’t right.

I looked into your other posts. This is quite interesting. You staunchly defend welfare recipients and government assistance to the poor. To the point of becoming upset about it.

Saying things like.

These rude ideas toward the poor are so un-Christian. How about bring thankful that you have a job that provides enough for you? This whole thread is sickening, and I’m surprised moderators haven’t shut it down.

Yet, you have some sort of hang up about the poor being denied the right to procreate. Very interesting.

Do you think it is morally wrong for an African American married couple on welfare to have children? Should the government mandate birth control?

 

[EasterJoy]

I’d say it’s morally wrong if the children don’t have enough food, clean shelter, adequate healthcare, clean clothing, a comfortable place to sleep, a feeling of security, and a household that allows them to be in good health. No one here knows what is truly going on with this family, but with what the OP described, there is reason to suspect that these kids are in substandard living conditions. Maybe the house is clean, maybe things work for them, but also…what if the house is in dire condition inside? It could happen anywhere really. Growing up, my cousins lived in a regular, upper-middle class neighborhood, so everyone was surprised when CPS was called because the inside of their neighbor’s house was filthy due to the mother’s mental illness. I agree with everyone that judging isn’t going to help this family, but if these children need intervention, then they need it. It’s always so weird to me that this forum is obsessed with being anti-abortion, but then there’s a story on here about possibly neglected children, and most people are like, “Hey, it’s fine, I’m sure they’re okay because God likes big families.” It just doesn’t add up. Re-read the OP’s post. It doesn’t sound like things are okay in the household. Do you really think that these parents are able to provide a good environment for their children? OP: If you think there is neglect (neglect is a form of abuse), then file a report to the state. Kids deserve a clean, happy home.

Edit: So I just re-read the initial post, and I failed to address the part where it is mentioned that some of the children appear to be suffering from untreated mental illnesses. You need to do something about this. It’s extremely unfair to the kids living in this household. If they need psychological help, then someone needs to take the steps to help them, if the parents are unable to do so themselves.

If the children need intervention, then yes, an outside party might feel responsible to step in and do something. That might include calling authorities who might take some of the children out of their home, whether they like it or not and (let us be blunt) whether or not the caretakers the state entrusts the children with have a home that is “happy” for them.

That is different than saying it is morally wrong for their parents, a married couple, to ever have sex with each other. If a married couple engages in marital relations, there is a chance that there is going to be a pregnancy. This is particularly true if keeping track of fertility is something they are not clear about how to do. Remember this, though: That the couple has chosen to remain positive about their family and are clear that they want every child in spite of their obvious difficulties does not mean they are oblivious to the difficulties their family faces. It may just mean that they are too sensitive to their children’s feelings and intrinsic worth to ever say a word to anyone that could be taken to mean they have a child who is unwanted. IOW, in spite of whatever shortcomings they have as parents, they have a lot more on the ball than people think.

 

[EasterJoy]

It may just mean that they are too sensitive to their children’s feelings and intrinsic worth to ever say a word to anyone that could be taken to mean they have a child who is unwanted. IOW, in spite of whatever shortcomings they have as parents, they have a lot more on the ball than people think.

What I mean to say is this: Heaven forbid that some of their children read some of the things being said about them, their parents, and their family in this thread, especially the youngest. We have to keep in mind when we have these discussions that we consider all of the implications of what we say, and not just those kindly-meant implications that we actually mean when we give an opinion.

 

[SerraSemper]

It is not up to us to determine whether a specific couple should or should not have acts appropriate for the generation of children. CPS and other interventions might be appropriate when it looks like there might be a case of neglect or abuse. That being said, I wanted to reply simply to the title of this thread: “If a family is unable to take care of their kids, should they continue to have kids?” The Catholic Church’s stance on this is quite clear: “NO!”

The Church teaches that men and women are not animals and are to prudently control their reproductive powers. The Church also teaches the concept of “responsible parenthood”. Parents have the obligation of providing for the spiritual, material, social, and intellectual formation of their children. If they are unable to provide even the bare minimums for these needs of children, they are morally obligated to refrain from acts apt for the generation of children.

Indulging in acts proper to procreation within marriage can be gravely sinful even if no artificial birth control is used given certain circumstances. For example, marital rape is gravely sinful. One can argue that the same reasons that justify or (in some cases oblige) a couple to use natural family planning in avoiding fertile times can be the same reasons as to why having such acts could be sinful. Again, this is not because intercourse is sinful in itself, but because there can be sins against prudence (like grave risk to mother’s health, the already proven inability to provide the essentials to existing children, etc.) or against other virtues.

For these reasons, so called Providentialists and Quiverfulls are fundamentally wrong in their philosophy towards procreation because they don’t use their God given faculty of reason to prudently assess when a child is able to be adequately formed and educated. Pro-lifers need to remember that it is easy to go to extremes, and providentialism is the opposite of artificial birth control or sterilization. Both extremes are wrong, but for different reasons.

 

[severus68]

I looked into your other posts. This is quite interesting. You staunchly defend welfare recipients and government assistance to the poor. To the point of becoming upset about it.

Saying things like.

Yet, you have some sort of hang up about the poor being denied the right to procreate. Very interesting.

Do you think it is morally wrong for an African American married couple on welfare to have children? Should the government mandate birth control?

I am for social justice too and support welfare and government assistance for the poor and other disenfranchised.

You appear to have misunderstood what the poster said and meant. He/she was referring to a very large family where the parents and the children appear to need more than charity. The parents obviously did not get the help and advice they needed in the past.

The poster was not being racist so why bring in race?

Not referring to this family or any family in particular but:

1. Should a priest marry a couple who are mentally incapable of taking care of their children? A priest would not marry a couple who do not want children but its not just about having children;
2. Should anyone have more kids than they are able to feed, house, clothe, educate? The Church specifies the need to educate children;
3. Catholics are not about the quiverfull movement, having has many children as possible;
4. If a couple knows there are serious reasons not to have more children like poverty, there is NFP;
5. While we can’t tell a person not to marry or how many children they should have, children should be protected and thus we have child welfare services.