When did children become an inconveniece?

[gretahope]

…and society itself is so very different than even 15 yrs ago, about when my oldest was born, that we parents are forced to wrestle with whether we have the strength to “fight” – so to speak. I can tell you, having a teen, 11 yo, 6 yo…it is not for the faint of heart, when your kids find out about Facebook and the entire family gets turned upside down.

I’m the first to say I don’t think we’re good parents, b/c we’re older and simply do not have the energy nor the support around us to do our kids justice. Now no job, illnesses, etc…life is not simple.

Those who years ago had multiple, healthy kids, a job (only one needed), and common values w/in the marriage really can’t compare to what is the onslaught that parents have to face today. All one needs to do is read these forums to see how families are pulled to brink. We do the best we can…but somehow years ago can’t be compared to today.

 

[Serap]

I understand. I hope that YOU can understand that one’s skirt can just easily be set afire when people judge those with larger families, as:

*not caring whether their children go to college
*having more children than they can deal with emotionally
*not caring whether their children receive the amount of love & care
that they each need, etc., etc.

Believe it or not, some of us actually CHOOSE to have a family of 4 or more Children. We provide them with love, teach them about God, feed & dress them well & educate them well & we aren’t all wealthy, either.

BTW.The total fertility rate for the United States is below replacement value

catholicnewsagency.com/news/population_expert_sees_dangers_as_u.s._birthrate_falls_below_replacement/

Washington D.C., Apr 8, 2010 / 06:37 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The U.S. birthrate fell from 2007 to 2008 and is now below replacement rate. One population expert, noting that children are the “only future a country has,” warns that a scarcity of children condemns a country to stagnation, bankruptcy and eventually death.

But I have never made those comments.

2 wrongs don’t make a right.

 

[Serap]

…and society itself is so very different than even 15 yrs ago, about when my oldest was born, that we parents are forced to wrestle with whether we have the strength to “fight” – so to speak. I can tell you, having a teen, 11 yo, 6 yo…it is not for the faint of heart, when your kids find out about Facebook and the entire family gets turned upside down.

I’m the first to say I don’t think we’re good parents, b/c we’re older and simply do not have the energy nor the support around us to do our kids justice. Now no job, illnesses, etc…life is not simple.

Those who years ago had multiple, healthy kids, a job (only one needed), and common values w/in the marriage really can’t compare to what is the onslaught that parents have to face today. All one needs to do is read these forums to see how families are pulled to brink. We do the best we can…but somehow years ago can’t be compared to today.

I’m going to be 40 next year and I will be retiring in 23 years. I don’t feel equipped emotionally to have anymore children. I’m tired and I want to focus on my 2 children emotionally and give them all of my love; not divided and distorted love, b/c that’s all I’d be able to give if I had more children.

Some say it gets easier when you go from 2 to 3, but I’m not going to test that theory b/c I’m too exhausted. Some can have many more children and still have high energy levels and are able to emotionallly provide for all of their family and I admire that very much.

I’m just tired tired tired and 2 is enough for our family. I am not emotionally equipped to have anymore. Neither is my husband. We are both from dysfunctional upbringings and we have a tendency to feel stress very easily.

I’m currently reading books on anger management b/c my temper has been flaring up lately with DH and the stress of my babies have brought that out in me. I’m a good mom; but just really stressed out.

 

[EasterJoy]

Ok first let me say that I’m single. I chose not to have children without being married and now it’s more than likely I will never have any but still I have to say I find all these threads about NFP troubling. It’s like everyone is out to do what they can to avoid children. I’m not for having 15 or 20 like the Duggars but whatever happened to the families of 5 or six kids. It’s like three became the norm and now only one or two is?? Just looking for thoughts on this. Do you think we’ve all lost focus on more important things?

I didn’t see anyone on this thread judging large families at all or saying that they are not desirable. All of the bashing I saw was directed toward those who have used NFP to limit the size of their family, which is why Serap made the comment that she did. I know I personally think that large families are great, I just don’t think it’s fair that the OP (and a number of others on the thread) implied that those who use NFP to postpone conception do so out of selfishness.

I want to know how exactly these questioners know that those of us who only have two don’t want to have more? How do they know that one spouse doesn’t want more and the other thinks it unwise and it is a huge source of stress in marriage? How do they know that the main breadwinner hasn’t spent the last several years in constant month-to-month worry that his job is going to be eliminated because his company is in distress and handing out pink slips right and left? I don’t think I need to go on further to make my point.

So, here’s my question: When did any of this become someone else’s business, particularly the concern of someone who by her own report “chose not to have children without being married and now it’s more than likely I will never have any”? What person who has no intention of ever marrying or having children spends that much time reading NFP threads? Don’t you have celibacy threads to read?

A reader once wrote to Miss Manners and asked how to handle the people who were constantly asking her when she and her husband were going to start a family. Miss Manners essentially replied that it would serve them fairly if the object of their snooping were to burst into tears and run sobbing from the room. I’ll second that right now.

OP: Unless you have a pastoral office that you have neglected to mention, this is not your concern, no one in this position is under your jurisdiction. Try minding your own business on this one. If that doesn’t work, try finding a couple with four children, and offer to babysit on a regular night, so they can have a date night. If you want to help a family want to welcome more children in the world, that is the most likely way to actually do it. Even if you don’t, you will be commended favorably to heaven!

Otherwise, you might keep your mouth closed about burdens you have not lifted a finger to help lift. Let the parents with twelve kids encourage those who have fewer. They are actually in a postion to offer positive encouragement.

To answer your original question: I think maybe we have put our focus on things that aren’t any of our business. In that way, yes, we’ve undoubtedly all lost focus of more important things. So, let’s get back to our own work.

 

[Serap]

I want to know how exactly these questioners know that those of us who only have two don’t want to have more? How do they know that one spouse doesn’t want more and the other thinks it unwise and it is a huge source of stress in marriage? How do they know that the main breadwinner hasn’t spent the last several years in constant month-to-month worry that his job is going to be eliminated because his company is in distress and handing out pink slips right and left? I don’t think I need to go on further to make my point.

So, here’s my question: When did any of this become someone else’s business, particularly the concern of someone who by her own report “chose not to have children without being married and now it’s more than likely I will never have any”? What person who has no intention of ever marrying or having children spends that much time reading NFP threads? Don’t you have celibacy threads to read?

A reader once wrote to Miss Manners and asked how to handle the people who were constantly asking her when she and her husband were going to start a family. Miss Manners essentially replied that it would serve them fairly if the object of their snooping were to burst into tears and run sobbing from the room. I’ll second that right now.

OP: Unless you have a pastoral office that you have neglected to mention, this is not your concern, no one in this position is under your jurisdiction. Try minding your own business on this one. If that doesn’t work, try finding a couple with four children, and offer to babysit on a regular night, so they can have a date night. If you want to help a family want to welcome more children in the world, that is the most likely way to actually do it. Even if you don’t, you will be commended favorably to heaven!

Otherwise, you might keep your mouth closed about burdens you have not lifted a finger to help lift. Let the parents with twelve kids encourage those who have fewer. They are actually in a postion to offer positive encouragement.

To answer your original question: I think maybe we have put our focus on things that aren’t any of our business. In that way, yes, we’ve undoubtedly all lost focus of more important things. So, let’s get back to our own work.

ouch!

Everyone’s a critic; that’s why. It’s easier to criticize someone else than to look at ourselves. It’s just human nature.

 

[mini_me640]

I want to know how exactly these questioners know that those of us who only have two don’t want to have more? How do they know that one spouse doesn’t want more and the other thinks it unwise and it is a huge source of stress in marriage? How do they know that the main breadwinner hasn’t spent the last several years in constant month-to-month worry that his job is going to be eliminated because his company is in distress and handing out pink slips right and left? I don’t think I need to go on further to make my point.

You quoted one of my posts that was defending couples who have smaller families and I’m not sure why. Since you referred to “these questioners” and the two quotes you showed were from the OP and myself, I’m a little confused. I was one of the ones saying that the OP and others had no business judging people who use NFP and have small families. Could you please clarify why you lumped me in with the OP? I have spent the whole thread arguing against the original post

 

[Serap]

You quoted one of my posts that was defending couples who have smaller families and I’m not sure why. Since you referred to “these questioners” and the two quotes you showed were from the OP and myself, I’m a little confused. I was one of the ones saying that the OP and others had no business judging people who use NFP and have small families. Could you please clarify why you lumped me in with the OP? I have spent the whole thread arguing against the original post

I’m sure it was just an oversight EasterJoy is right though. She hit the nail on the head.

I definitely don’t go around asking single women in their 40s why they couldn’t find a man and have children. That’s just very rude. It’s the same thing with other things like:

Why do you have such a big family?

or

Why do you have such a small family?

It’s all rude to do so. This thread was directed at Catholics who practice NFP. Only 2% of Catholics practice NFP OP has decided to attack the 2% of Catholics that are actually trying to keep God in their lives.

 

[mini_me640]

I’m sure it was just an oversight EasterJoy is right though. She hit the nail on the head.

I definitely don’t go around asking single women in their 40s why they couldn’t find a man and have children. That’s just very rude. It’s the same thing with other things like:

Why do you have such a big family?

or

Why do you have such a small family?

It’s all rude to do so. This thread was directed at Catholics who practice NFP. Only 2% of Catholics practice NFP OP has decided to attack the 2% of Catholics that are actually trying to keep God in their lives.

Oh I agree with basically everything that EasterJoy (and you) said, I just can’t figure out why she quoted my post (which was basically saying the same thing she did) and included me with the OP. As you know, Serap, I am clearly NOT in agreement with the OP.

 

[ac_claire]

I didn’t see anyone on this thread judging large families at all or saying that they are not desirable. All of the bashing I saw was directed toward those who have used NFP to limit the size of their family, which is why Serap made the comment that she did. I know I personally think that large families are great, I just don’t think it’s fair that the OP (and a number of others on the thread) implied that those who use NFP to postpone conception do so out of selfishness.

FWIW, the only actual bashing I have read on this thread so far has been toward the OP. And Easter Joy, no offense because I normally really enjoy your posts, but your last post to the OP was incredibly judgemental…Seems like a double standard. Is being judgemental only wrong when the very, very pro-NFP posters in this thread are accusing others of it?

 

[mini_me640]

FWIW, the only actual bashing I have read on this thread so far has been toward the OP. And Easter Joy, no offense because I normally really enjoy your posts, but your last post to the OP was incredibly judgemental…Seems like a double standard. Is being judgemental only wrong when the very, very pro-NFP posters in this thread are accusing others of it?

I’m not sure that I think the OP has been bashed, maybe some of us have been a bit critical in our responses to the proposal that NFP to limit family size is a selfishness issue, but people who use NFP to limit their family size have definitely been bashed. Posters have said they are selfish, lack fortitude, get their values from TV, and don’t think of children as gifts from God, and aren’t “real Catholics”. I have copied a couple of my “favorites” of these:

Post # 51
Children are blessings from God - at least, that’s how all real Catholics look at them.

Of course, if you get your values from the wonderful folks who make your popular tv programs, who knows what kind of nonsense you will believe?

Post # 64
Well, it could be other things. For example, they might just lack fortitude. Or they might have fallen victim to sloth. However, if their children have names chosen from popular tv shows rather than from Christian saints (as is often the case in my parish), I would be inclined to perceive a certain influence of TV in their intellectual and moral lives.

I do agree that we all need to be charitable toward each other and show respect to those with differing opinions.

 

[Serap]

FWIW, the only actual bashing I have read on this thread so far has been toward the OP. And Easter Joy, no offense because I normally really enjoy your posts, but your last post to the OP was incredibly judgemental…Seems like a double standard. Is being judgemental only wrong when the very, very pro-NFP posters in this thread are accusing others of it?

You haven’t noticed the bashing towards NFP’ers that are stopping at 2 or 3 children b/c you are still on #1 (congratulations btw!!!) and it doesn’t really hit you personally yet.

You may find after 2 or 3 that you will change your mind and discern that you too have been called to have 2 or 3 and not a big family and when someone challenges you by saying you are selfish, etc.; you too will get a little offended and will feel judged.

 

[Julianna]

have as many as your family can handle. We had two…we’re done.

 

[ac_claire]

You haven’t noticed the bashing towards NFP’ers that are stopping at 2 or 3 children b/c you are still on #1 (congratulations btw!!!) and it doesn’t really hit you personally yet.

You may find after 2 or 3 that you will change your mind and discern that you too have been called to have 2 or 3 and not a big family and when someone challenges you by saying you are selfish, etc.; you too will get a little offended and will feel judged.

Perhaps so. I definitely can’t predict right now how exactly how I’d take something under different circumstances.

 

[EasterJoy]

You quoted one of my posts that was defending couples who have smaller families and I’m not sure why. Since you referred to “these questioners” and the two quotes you showed were from the OP and myself, I’m a little confused. I was one of the ones saying that the OP and others had no business judging people who use NFP and have small families. Could you please clarify why you lumped me in with the OP? I have spent the whole thread arguing against the original post

I started replying to yours in agreement, and then went back and thought that the whole thread was based on a faulty premise. I think the OP’s original premise is too sweeping, and since she is not coming from the position of someone who has her own large family and wants to encourage others to do likewise, not particularly likely to have the result intended.

 

[EasterJoy]

FWIW, the only actual bashing I have read on this thread so far has been toward the OP. And Easter Joy, no offense because I normally really enjoy your posts, but your last post to the OP was incredibly judgemental…Seems like a double standard. Is being judgemental only wrong when the very, very pro-NFP posters in this thread are accusing others of it?

I meant that someone with no children and no pastoral office is not likely to be in a position to encourage others to have large families unless she pitches in and helps with the work. I’m sure she’s well-intentioned. It is better to be effective, or else let those who can be more effective deal with it.

 

[EasterJoy]

Something I struggle with very much myself when coming here is that we walk a very fine line on these forums. We are here to help each other, to understand each other, to learn from each other, to encourage each other, and so on. In other words, we come here to build each other up and to be strengthened ourselves.

Perhaps because of having read The Screwtape Letters, I think it axiomatic that whenever someone pursues a virtuous path, the tempter will try to either twist it, sterilize it, or replace it with something else more glamorous. In our case, I think the temptation will be to come here and either gossip about others or else to write and say a lot of true things that could be useful but never come to anything. Either one means we’ve only wasted time that we could have used to do something that really serves God and readies our souls for Heaven. That’s what the tempter wants. We want our time here to have some real fruit in service of God.

I know there are those who have their issues with Thomas Merton, but I think this is a good quote of his:
"*One of the first things to learn if you want to be a contemplative is how to mind your own business.

Nothing is more suspicious, in a man who seems holy, than an impatient desire to reform other men. A serious obstacle to recollection is the mania for directing those you have not been appointed to direct, reforming those you have not been asked to reform, correcting those over whom you have no jurisdiction. How can you do these things and kep your mind at rest?

Renounce this futile concern with other men’s affairs! Pay as little attention as you can to the faults of other people and none at all to their defects and eccentricities*."

I’m not saying the thread isn’t worthwhile, but we do need to stick to what our business is in the question, that’s all. We need to ask not “what should they be doing, what should their priorities be”, but rather “considering where they are, what should I be doing and what should my priorities be? Is this something I should concern myself directly, or is it really someone else’s work and not my affair?” The eyes need the feet, but the eyes can’t do the walking. The eyes look for splinters and help fix blisters at the end of the day, watch where the body is going, that kind of thing. The eyes can’t judge how many miles the feet can do in a day. That is between the Head and the feet.

As for me, I am neglecting my housework. Gotta go!

 

[TedDC]

Well, it could be other things. For example, they might just lack fortitude. Or they might have fallen victim to sloth. However, if their children have names chosen from popular tv shows rather than from Christian saints (as is often the case in my parish), I would be inclined to perceive a certain influence of TV in their intellectual and moral lives.

Yet another example of the harsh, ignorant judgmentalism that plagues this forum.

 

[ManOnFire]

When did children become an inconvenience? after the invention of the Pill

Before that, people enjoyed intimacy = had large families = struggled = parents and kids learned strength, fortitude, patience, delayed gratificaition = learned to appreciate the little things and the depth of personal sacrifices for each other (True Love) and Faith.

But with the Pill, free will, and the media fantasies, we learned to dream and lust for the easy life. Birth control = less or no kids = more for me = more selfishness = less tolerance for the things I don’t want, which leads some people to the extremes of:

1.: “Let the kids do whatever they want (become unruly) because I just don’t feel like putting any more effort into it because it’s more work for me,” or

2A.: “I’m going to make sure these kids turn out exactly as I want them to turn out, because I went through great pains to plan this predictable, well-designed life for us,” where the parent is too scared, too tightly wrapped to let go enough to acknowledge that life is a gamble and that they must learn to make their own decisions and mistakes, so they can learn how to make their own decisions and get themselves out of trouble as adults.

2B.: “My goal as a parent is to always see the kids smiling and having fun.” Well, that’s not adulthood. If they don’t learn to occasionally struggle as kids, they’ll be perpetual adult children who never grow up, and don’t want to surrender their lives for a spouse and kids.

Something to chew on. A mini-lesson in sacrificial love is the answer, imo.

 

[EasterJoy]

When did children become an inconvenience? after the invention of the Pill

Before that, people enjoyed intimacy = had large families = struggled = parents and kids learned strength, fortitude, patience, delayed gratificaition = learned to appreciate the little things and the depth of personal sacrifices for each other (True Love) and Faith.

But with the Pill, free will, and the media fantasies, we learned to dream and lust for the easy life. Birth control = less or no kids = more for me = more selfishness = less tolerance for the things I don’t want, which leads some people to the extremes of:

1.: “Let the kids do whatever they want (become unruly) because I just don’t feel like putting any more effort into it because it’s more work for me,” or

2A.: “I’m going to make sure these kids turn out exactly as I want them to turn out, because I went through great pains to plan this predictable, well-designed life for us,” where the parent is too scared, too tightly wrapped to let go enough to acknowledge that life is a gamble and that they must learn to make their own decisions and mistakes, so they can learn how to make their own decisions and get themselves out of trouble as adults.

2B.: “My goal as a parent is to always see the kids smiling and having fun.” Well, that’s not adulthood. If they don’t learn to occasionally struggle as kids, they’ll be perpetual adult children who never grow up, and don’t want to surrender their lives for a spouse and kids.

Something to chew on. A mini-lesson in sacrificial love is the answer, imo.

The divorce of sexuality from parenthood was not something that could be realized in the past as it has been since the invention of the Pill, but if there had never been people who saw children as less than a blessing, the Pill would never have been invented. It would be more believable to blame Social Security…that is, the idea that you don’t need a family to take care of you in your old age.

Even in the Bible, the blessing of children was expressed at least partly in terms of enlightened self-interest:
Children too are a gift from the LORD, the fruit of the womb, a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children born in one’s youth.
Blessed are they whose quivers are full. They will never be shamed contending with foes at the gate. Psalm 127: 3-5

Until these times of fame, children were also the only means most people could hope for in order to not be forgotten in death. By children, people’s lives did not end with their own death. Now the ancestors are forgotten in many families, and people see widespread fame as their way to live on. There are many societal changes like this that have nothing to do with the Pill.

We could go on all day about what got us to where we are, but perhaps a better question is this: where do we go now? What does God want from me?

Matthew Kelly brought up an interesting way of looking at this. He said we never ask children what God is saying to them. Instead, we ask them what they want to do with their lives. What do you want to be when you grow up? What do you want to do in college? What do you want to do when you graduate? Then, because that is the question they’ve been asked their whole lives, they grow up and do what they want, and it doesn’t make them either happy or good, and they can’t figure out why. No one realizes that since our answers come from the questions we ask, the problem is a lifetime of asking the wrong questions.

Maybe that is what needs to change?

 

[Serap]

When did children become an inconvenience? after the invention of the Pill

Before that, people enjoyed intimacy = had large families = struggled = parents and kids learned strength, fortitude, patience, delayed gratificaition = learned to appreciate the little things and the depth of personal sacrifices for each other (True Love) and Faith.

But with the Pill, free will, and the media fantasies, we learned to dream and lust for the easy life. Birth control = less or no kids = more for me = more selfishness = less tolerance for the things I don’t want, which leads some people to the extremes of:

1.: “Let the kids do whatever they want (become unruly) because I just don’t feel like putting any more effort into it because it’s more work for me,” or

2A.: “I’m going to make sure these kids turn out exactly as I want them to turn out, because I went through great pains to plan this predictable, well-designed life for us,” where the parent is too scared, too tightly wrapped to let go enough to acknowledge that life is a gamble and that they must learn to make their own decisions and mistakes, so they can learn how to make their own decisions and get themselves out of trouble as adults.

2B.: “My goal as a parent is to always see the kids smiling and having fun.” Well, that’s not adulthood. If they don’t learn to occasionally struggle as kids, they’ll be perpetual adult children who never grow up, and don’t want to surrender their lives for a spouse and kids.

Something to chew on. A mini-lesson in sacrificial love is the answer, imo.

We are using NFP What does the pill have to do with an NFP argument?

You are on the wrong thread with that message.