When did children become an inconveniece?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sierrah
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
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?
Are you judging Catholics with small families as having shallow values? You never ellaborated on this statement.

I’d like to know where you are coming from.

Do you think I get my values from TV or “nonsense” sources b/c I want to have 2 children?
 
:bowdown:

I don’t know how you do it b/c I am finding 2 to be almost more than I can handle.
Oh please:rolleyes: I’m a disorganized mess, but I love my life!

Going from one to two was the hardest for us. After that, you just go with the flow!
 
Oh please:rolleyes: I’m a disorganized mess, but I love my life!

Going from one to two was the hardest for us. After that, you just go with the flow!
I guess also as they get older, they are less stressful to care for.
 
I’m not sure I am clear on the tone of this post. Are you trying to say that people who don’t feel they can handle a large family DON’T think children are a blessing and are getting their values from TV? I hope that’s not the intended meaning of this post.
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.
 
Are you judging Catholics with small families as having shallow values? You never ellaborated on this statement.

I’d like to know where you are coming from.

Do you think I get my values from TV or “nonsense” sources b/c I want to have 2 children?
You must have missed my post to you: in summary, I feel that tiny families are more stressful than normal-sized families. In other words, at two children, you are in the middle of the difficult part and do not yet perceive that the road becomes easier and easier at 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8… That’s all.
 
I can’t speak for anybody else but here’s why I only have three children:
  1. My husband and I did not fall in love & know we wanted to get married until I was 29. Think of how many years of childbearing that cost us.
  2. We were infertile for the first 5 years of marriage. Which was awful. Add that to #1. It’s a pretty devastating number of lost years for somebody who wants lots of kids.
  3. My last two kids were back-to-back (18 months apart) and I suffered a bit of heart damage with my youngest during delivery, when I was 39 years old. Any pregnancy from here on out is double high risk, first because of my heart damage and second because of my age.
  4. I’m 45 now, and I’m running out of (a) viable eggs and (b) hormones that will sustain a pregnancy.
  5. Since my youngest was born, my husband was laid off for 9 months, then right when he went back to work, he was struck by an armored truck as he was walking across a street in a crosswalk with the light in his favor and suffered a brain injury, then when he recovered from his brain injury and started back to school for retraining, I got laid off. To say that money is tight is an understatement.
 
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.
Or… they could have just *liked *the names? :rolleyes:

Are you implying those who purposefully choose outward “signs” of the faith (such as naming their children after Saints - which is wonderful, btw) are more influenced by their faith at heart?

I’m not trying to give you a hard time, just turning the idea around a little… as in, are you wanting others to judge your faith *BECAUSE *you named your children after Saints??

Outward appearances are rarely full representations of what’s at heart…
 
It’s a much different society today:

A) It used to be (1950s) that when dad went out to work in the morning he was making 3X what any other worker in the world was making for the same job. Those days are gone.

B) It used to be that dad, or recent son graduate could walk into any car manufacturing plant and get a job if he had any kind of connection. And with unions in place he made the kind of money with just a high school diploma that could support 3, 3, 4, or more kids and even send them through college. Those days are gone.

C) It used to be that state’s paid up to 70% of the cost at a state college. This meant a kid could come home, work hard over the summer, and have about enough to make it though the next year. Those days are gone

I think parents have an obligation to make sure their kids have at least as good a chance, if not better chance, to live a successful and happy life. It’s getting very difficult to do that with a large family.

Any gardner can tell you being fruitful and multiplying does not mean plant all the seed you can as close together as possible.
 
It’s a much different society today:

A) It used to be (1950s) that when dad went out to work in the morning he was making 3X what any other worker in the world was making for the same job. Those days are gone.

B) It used to be that dad, or recent son graduate could walk into any car manufacturing plant and get a job if he had any kind of connection. And with unions in place he made the kind of money with just a high school diploma that could support 3, 3, 4, or more kids and even send them through college. Those days are gone.

C) It used to be that state’s paid up to 70% of the cost at a state college. This meant a kid could come home, work hard over the summer, and have about enough to make it though the next year. Those days are gone

I think parents have an obligation to make sure their kids have at least as good a chance, if not better chance, to live a successful and happy life. It’s getting very difficult to do that with a large family.

Any gardner can tell you being fruitful and multiplying does not mean plant all the seed you can as close together as possible.
Thank you!! Well put! 👍

My MIL and FIL had 9. DH is #5. Both worked for the auto industry. FIL was retired Navy. It wasn’t all rainbows and sunshine…as the 70’s waned on…layoffs became the norm.

My DH and I have 2…21 mths. apart. If you asked me what my name was between 1983 and 1995, I couldn’t tell you. DH and I were like ships passing in the night. I remember my MIL saying she had 4 cribs in one room! Calgon, take me away. I couldn’t do it and I’ll freely admit it. The 80’s were rough for us economically. Now they are 26 and 24. Son is away at college…and daughter has returned home from a failed marriage and big lesson learned.

My DH and I are enjoying time with each other…and looking forward to the empty nest years. Grandchildren may come…one day. If it’s not today…I’m fine with that.

Those who want to have a dozen…great. I hope you can feed and educate them in this economy.🤷
 
It’s a much different society today:

A) It used to be (1950s) that when dad went out to work in the morning he was making 3X what any other worker in the world was making for the same job. Those days are gone.

B) It used to be that dad, or recent son graduate could walk into any car manufacturing plant and get a job if he had any kind of connection. And with unions in place he made the kind of money with just a high school diploma that could support 3, 3, 4, or more kids and even send them through college. Those days are gone.

C) It used to be that state’s paid up to 70% of the cost at a state college. This meant a kid could come home, work hard over the summer, and have about enough to make it though the next year. Those days are gone

I think parents have an obligation to make sure their kids have at least as good a chance, if not better chance, to live a successful and happy life. It’s getting very difficult to do that with a large family.

Any gardner can tell you being fruitful and multiplying does not mean plant all the seed you can as close together as possible.
I’ve only read about half of this thread, but I like this post and think there is a lot of discernment here.

Our U.S. culture and government have gradually become more and more “child-unfriendly”, putting families under tremendous negative pressure. It is obvious that many marriages and families crumple under this pressure and do not survive.

The support systems that used to exist for families with children aren’t around anymore. It used to be that most moms stayed home and took care of children, so there was plenty of company in the neighborhood and always a friendly face to lend a cup of sugar or a bit of advice about teething, fever, or the best way to handle a child’s sassiness.

Or there used to be wonderful parishes and churches where everyone knew each other and got together outside of church to help each other out.

And the teachers in schools were parental allies instead of enemies–they actually used to back up what parents taught at home about morals and behavior. Now the teacher will turn you in to Child Protective Services if they see any evidence that you are “abusing” your child. (Just talking sternly could be considered abuse nowadays.)

And the media used to support a parent’s efforts, too. How many of us remember when television shows were “child-friendly” until 9:00 p.m.? (10:00 p.m. Eastern Time). Now the gratuitous sex and violence starts up at 7:00 p.m., or since most people have cable, it’s on constantly. And anyone who dares to suggest a little reigning-in of the dirty stuff gets labeled a “extremist” and accused of censorship, and is told to “just turn it off.” Well, that would be fine except that all the other kids in the neighborhood are watching it.

And it used to be that most of us lived somewhat close to extended family, but not anymore. Even if we live close, our parents are still working! No time!

So with no support system, it is necessary for many parents to go it almost entirely on their own. That is really hard,

And there’s more.

Taxes take a monstrous chunk of a family income. I’m not just talking federal income taxes. My husband and I have the “privilege” of living in a city with some of the highest property taxes (percentage) in the U.S., mainly due to a deseg lawsuit that destroyed our public schools.

In many families, just to make ends meet (no luxuries), both spouses have to work, and sometimes at least one of the spouses will work two jobs. And gone are the days when a man settled into a job after high school or college and stayed at that job for 30 years, earning a nice pension. Most men and women change jobs several times during their working years. This is tough on kids, BTW–the moving and the insecurity.

Speaking of public schools, it is a rare Christian family who can actually send their children to public schools these days. We tried for five years in our city, but were continually challenged by belligerent teachers (members of the local union) who actually told parents, “You aren’t qualifed to take care of children–we teachers have the training.” I did NOT want my children in such a toxic, irreverent, and at times, evil atmosphere.

So that meant a huge chunk of our income had to go to private schools. Or we could have chosen to homeschool. Either way, it’s not the way it was back when I was growing up and Mom could have a few hours of quiet every day while we were at the free public school down the road learning the same values that she would teach us at home.

And there’s the loneliness that families endure. When I was growing up, my parents had friends over all the time, and we had picnics with them, and just sat and talked on the porch. Now most of us don’t know our neighbors, and don’t have time for friendly get-togethers. And many of the people we do know do NOT share our values or our faith. For many of us, we are around people and noise and cacaphony all day long, so we would rather just hide in our houses when we get home.

And houses–they cost a fortune! It’s almost impossible to buy a house nowadays that doesn’t cost at least a tenth of million dollars!

Anyway, I could go on and on, but the point is, this world and this country are not friendly to children and families. It is extremely difficult for parents to raise children with Christian values and train them up in the way they should go while at the same time, giving them the appropriate freedom to grow up and become mature adults. I don’t think parents avoid having children because of the inconvenience. I think that many parents are exhausted and scared and simply can’t find the resources to adequately raise more than a few children.
 
…and add to this having a special needs child, and you’re blown completely out of the water in terms of having any more kids. We have 3, and I’d love to have more…but I know that i know that I know…that would NOT be prudent of me. We can’t handle what we have now, let alone more. I mean financially, emotionally, mentally…the ones I have now are lacking. It’s NOT 1955…😦
 
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.
Your posts come across as horribly judgemental. Maybe it could just be that not everyone is called to have a large family… Maybe some struggle with physical, emotional, financial, or other issues that make it not good to have 6 or 7 children. How can you presume to know the factors that enter in to a couple’s choice to use NFP? Couples using NFP (which is what was specifically mentioned in the original post) are obviously concerned about God enough to not use contraceptives, why would you assume they are not focused enough on God to consider Him in discerning family size? And I’m not even sure the name comment deserves a response. Maybe people just like certain names… The Church doesn’t require use of a Saint’s name, what gives you the authority to do so?
 
Our society is changing, as societies do.
So society is changing. Absolutely, that’s undeniable.
People who want many children and have them are very blessed and lucky. But not everyone is called to have many children and to be pregnant year after year after year.
Here’s where I don’t see a consistent reasoning. How would the rate at which society is changing affect how God is “calling” people to have more or less children? To be married, to be fruitful and multiply, etc…these principles have been around since the Bible was put to paper. Has the “call” actually changed after however many thousands of years now that we have NFP?

It’s just hard to think about God (the creator of the Universe, who is without beginning and end, who doesn’t change, etc.) being affected and swayed by social tides.
It’s hard to manage a home with many children, and it’s expensive too. One has to be able to provide for all of them spiritually and emotionally, not just financially. It’s not just a matter of having kids to increase the Catholic population, you have to actually spend time with and CARE for these little people.
That’s true. But it’s always been true, even before modern birth control came about.
 
The point of this discussion is to recognize that there is a cultural/societal phenomenon happening, which results in many more families having fewer children than you would see if the culture as a whole was seeking to follow God’s Will.
I have to agree with this, because I believe it’s true. It rings true. And you know what? I’m someone who has used NFP and probably will again. Just because I am doing something doesn’t mean I am “called” to get defensive about it. People aren’t perfect, our judgements aren’t always perfect. This culture is diseased in so many ways, I can’t just say that it hasn’t affected me because I happen to *be in *the culture. To me, that’s like saying, “hey- wait! I use NFP to limit my children, therefore I won’t accept any commentary on the subject (as it relates *in general *to society) that makes me feel in any way guilty or forces any kind of introspection! I’ll just come out and say that the commentary is *wrong *because I’m taking it personally.” I think that’d be way too self-serving.
 
Here’s where I don’t see a consistent reasoning. How would the rate at which society is changing affect how God is “calling” people to have more or less children? To be married, to be fruitful and multiply, etc…these principles have been around since the Bible was put to paper. Has the “call” actually changed after however many thousands of years now that we have NFP?

It’s just hard to think about God (the creator of the Universe, who is without beginning and end, who doesn’t change, etc.) being affected and swayed by social tides.
People had no reasonable means to avoid children morally until very recently aside from total abstinence. Additionally, when most societies were agrarian, the more children the better from a strictly practical standpoint - more hands to work the farm. In modern societies, that isn’t the case. So it isn’t certain that all families 200 years ago were “following God’s call” with regard to family size - first, they had no morally licit way to limit size, and second, limiting size wouldn’t be actually be helpful to them from a worldly perspective either.
 
Anyway, I could go on and on, but the point is, this world and this country are not friendly to children and families. It is extremely difficult for parents to raise children with Christian values and train them up in the way they should go while at the same time, giving them the appropriate freedom to grow up and become mature adults. I don’t think parents avoid having children because of the inconvenience. I think that many parents are exhausted and scared and simply can’t find the resources to adequately raise more than a few children.
Wow, Cat, awesome post! So much to think about here…Things I had noticed before but not put together. Christian families are so challenged today, and as with most things we must all discern what we are called to “fight against” and live/work through, with God’s grace, and what things must make us change our courses of action so that we do what is best in serving God and our families. Since children ARE such a gift from God, we need to find ways in the church to support parents and develop the resources to help them raise their children. Even developing stronger parish communities would be a start!
How would the rate at which society is changing affect how God is “calling” people to have more or less children? To be married, to be fruitful and multiply, etc…these principles have been around since the Bible was put to paper. Has the “call” actually changed after however many thousands of years now that we have NFP?

It’s just hard to think about God (the creator of the Universe, who is without beginning and end, who doesn’t change, etc.) being affected and swayed by social tides.
I see what you’re saying, claire. I don’t think anyone is saying that God’s call to people to be married, be fruitful and multiply, etc. is changing. These are fundamental principles. What is being said here is that how God’s call to married couples at different times throughout history is lived IS shaped by their circumstances–personal, societal, cultural.

Just like discerning when to get married, deciding/discerning when to have a child takes place deep in the practical messiness of life. In one sense, it’s in this decision that the Gospel of Life is “inculturated,” or incarnate…it is when the abstract promise a couple makes to God to welcome the children He chooses to send and to raise them up for Him enters into the real world. Living out our love for God in this area requires that we act responsibly as parents, for the good of our families and the children He sends.

Every couple discerns what is or is not responsible for them, based on their particular, ever-changing circumstances. So yes, societal circumstances that make it easier or harder for parents to raise children would definitely affect parents’ discernment of God’s will–AND, I’d think, God’s individual vocational plan for each and every one of us. I’m not saying that God’s will conforms to ours (indeed, sometimes He sends “surprises” that we have not planned for or asked for, but which are wonderful gifts given to us), but simply that it’s reasonable to say that His will for our lives is based upon the concrete circumstances of each one of our lives. I don’t think we can or should say that as a general rule, God’s will for Christian families in 2010 is to have fewer children–just that this very well might be His will for many Christian families in 2010, and that it’s up to parents to discern.
 
Children are no longer a normal part of everyday life. They are not welcome where we work (the office vs. babies on the backs of women laboring in the fields), where we go to enjoy ourselves (theaters vs. communal gatherings, village dances), heck, judging from some threads here, they’re not really even welcome at church!

Nuclear families become dreadfully isolated from the adult world unless they choose to hire others to mind their young ones while they’re out - something that is sad and expensive. There’s no one to help or even chat to, unlike the olden days, when you’d be living with or at least near the older women in your family/village, some relatives, close neighbors, anyone.

Yes, children have become inconvenient.

Not that they were exactly easy before, but they were useful as laborers, and it’s not like the parents felt they had the responsibility for each of them to learn and develop properly and know what every other kid knows at their age so they won’t fall behind and keep them safe in traffic and in the neighborhood and at home and everywhere else when it’s usually just one person doing all this most of the time, with no help. Children before were mostly ignored, no guilt about it.

I’ve heard that in some US states you’re not allowed to rent a house to a family if there’s not a sufficient number of rooms for boys and girls to be separated, or even for every child to have their own room! Te expectations are so much higher now. We have two kids so far and plan to stop at three. When we’re able to afford it, we’ll remodel the tiny apartment we live in so there’s a nursery in there! The kids don’t have a rom now at all. I didn’t have one until I was 15 and my grandparents died, vacating theirs.
 
I see what you’re saying, claire. I don’t think anyone is saying that God’s call to people to be married, be fruitful and multiply, etc. is changing. These are fundamental principles. What is being said here is that how God’s call to married couples at different times throughout history is lived IS shaped by their circumstances–personal, societal, cultural.

Just like discerning when to get married, deciding/discerning when to have a child takes place deep in the practical messiness of life. In one sense, it’s in this decision that the Gospel of Life is “inculturated,” or incarnate…it is when the abstract promise a couple makes to God to welcome the children He chooses to send and to raise them up for Him enters into the real world. Living out our love for God in this area requires that we act responsibly as parents, for the good of our families and the children He sends.

Every couple discerns what is or is not responsible for them, based on their particular, ever-changing circumstances. So yes, societal circumstances that make it easier or harder for parents to raise children would definitely affect parents’ discernment of God’s will–AND, I’d think, God’s individual vocational plan for each and every one of us. I’m not saying that God’s will conforms to ours (indeed, sometimes He sends “surprises” that we have not planned for or asked for, but which are wonderful gifts given to us), but simply that it’s reasonable to say that His will for our lives is based upon the concrete circumstances of each one of our lives. I don’t think we can or should say that as a general rule, God’s will for Christian families in 2010 is to have fewer children–just that this very well might be His will for many Christian families in 2010, and that it’s up to parents to discern.
That makes some sense, Rach. I see the situation as the same. Only, when looking at I have to believe that the priorities and personal choices of families in 2010 (in general) have changed, because of the changing culture. Because all the rest of the evidence in our modern society and culture indicates that, as well. You’re right of course that it’s up to parents to discern…it always has been. There’s simply no other way that it could work. There can’t just be a one-size-fits-all rule from the Church, right? But I think that individual parents are, nowadays more than before, influenced more and more by the cultural shift and that that gets confused sometimes with God’s actual will. I don’t see how that *couldn’t *be the case, how families today could just be at the same time more immune to the cultural shift but yet more in tune with what they believe God is telling them personally.
 
People had no reasonable means to avoid

children morally until very recently aside from total abstinence.

There is still no moral reason to “AVOID” children. We might be physically unable to bear children (or more children). We might worry about sending a large family to college. We might not be emotionally healthy enough to have 6, but the Catholic Church has always taught, & still does teach, that there are dual purposes of marriage. They consist of the procreation and upbringing of children and the mutual love, welfare, unity and support of a couple who loves one another. Neither of these can be deliberately excluded, without a very good reason & without the agreement of both husband & wife.

This is what makes married love different from any other love. The Church teaches that the use of sex should be reserved to marriage so that children can be brought up in a stable home where the parents are committed to them and to each other
Additionally, when most societies were agrarian, the more children the better from a strictly practical standpoint - more hands to work the farm.
I, 68 yrs. of age & at one time a farm wife, have heard that statement just one time too many. My 4 children have been the greatest Joy in my life. My parents had 5 children…I remember my quiet, affable Father’s anger when a “friend” once said, “you poor guy, all those kids to raise”. Dad told him in no uncertain terms that there might be reasons to pity him…but “Don’t you ever feel sorry for me because of my children”. This was SO unlike him to say something in anger, with such vehemence , that I’ll never forget it.

My Grandfather immigrated from Denmark in 1870. My Grandmother"s people came from England many generation earlier. My Grandmother had undiagnosed Scoliosis as a child, & it worsened as she became an adult. In fact, she spent a year in the hospital when she was in her early twenties, while doctors tried the “latest” treatments ( weights & balances to “stretch” one side, braces, etc., etc.) The poor little thing never weighed over 100 lbs., & died in her sleep at age 70 because her heart had been so crowded all of her life. It just failed. Her spine was a complete S, one hip jutted out & her dresses had to made with the hem on one side 6 inches shorter than on the other side. Every step she took was painful. The doctors said it would be better for her to remain childless, & NO ONE would have though a thing about it had she done so. Yet she successfully delivered & raised 3 healthy children. She came from a family with 8 children & OH, how she wanted more. Though her & Grandpa lived on a farm, she did not go through what she did in order to “produce farm hands”.
In modern societies, that isn’t the case. So it isn’t certain that all families 200 years ago were “following God’s call” with regard to family size - first, they had no morally licit way to limit size, and second, limiting size wouldn’t be actually be helpful to them from a worldly perspective either.
I have two questions. You seem to be an expert on this. How many siblings do you have? How many children do you have?
 
There is still no moral reason to “AVOID” children. We might be physically unable to bear children (or more children). We might worry about sending a large family to college. We might not be emotionally healthy enough to have 6, but the Catholic Church has always taught, & still does teach, that there are dual purposes of marriage. They consist of the procreation and upbringing of children and the mutual love, welfare, unity and support of a couple who loves one another. Neither of these can be deliberately excluded, without a very good reason & without the agreement of both husband & wife.
I agree there is no moral reason to AVOID children, but there are moral reasons and means to POSTPONE and/or SPACE children. Big difference. I’m not suggesting that marriage is not to be focused on procreation. I’m just saying that it is not prudent for everyone to a large family for various physical and emotional reasons. All I have been saying in my posts is that it isn’t fair to judge that all couples who use MORALLY LICIT means (NFP/abstinence) to limit/space children are doing so out of selfishness. There are many reasons a couple might use NFP, and we don’t know what’s going on in the life and health of others to say that they are all being selfish.

This is what makes married love different from any other love. The Church teaches that the use of sex should be reserved to marriage so that children can be brought up in a stable home where the parents are committed to them and to each other

I agree with this completely. I’m pretty sure I never said anything to indicate otherwise.
I, 68 yrs. of age & at one time a farm wife, have heard that statement just one time too many. My 4 children have been the greatest Joy in my life. My parents had 5 children…I remember my quiet, affable Father’s anger when a “friend” once said, “you poor guy, all those kids to raise”. Dad told him in no uncertain terms that there might be reasons to pity him…but “Don’t you ever feel sorry for me because of my children”. This was SO unlike him to say something in anger, with such vehemence , that I’ll never forget it.
My Grandfather immigrated from Denmark in 1870. My Grandmother"s people came from England many generation earlier. My Grandmother had undiagnosed Scoliosis as a child, & it worsened as she became an adult. In fact, she spent a year in the hospital when she was in her early twenties, while doctors tried the “latest” treatments ( weights & balances to “stretch” one side, braces, etc., etc.) The poor little thing never weighed over 100 lbs., & died in her sleep at age 70 because her heart had been so crowded all of her life. It just failed. Her spine was a complete S, one hip jutted out & her dresses had to made with the hem on one side 6 inches shorter than on the other side. Every step she took was painful. The doctors said it would be better for her to remain childless, & NO ONE would have though a thing about it had she done so. Yet she successfully delivered & raised 3 healthy children. She came from a family with 8 children & OH, how she wanted more. Though her & Grandpa lived on a farm, **she did not go through what she did in order to “produce farm hands”. **
First, I don’t consider your 4 children to be a “large family” - my mom was one of eight and my dad one of six. Second, I never intended to suggest that all people who had large families back in the farming days did so soley to produce farm hands. I’m just saying that large numbers of children are in a practical sense more helpful in agrarian societies than they are in industrial societies. So there is a practical benefit to having children in agrarian economies that doesn’t exist in most modern societies.
I have two questions. You seem to be an expert on this. How many siblings do you have? How many children do you have?
The tone of this question comes across somewhat snide, which I hope I am misinterpreting. At any rate, I have never claimed to be an expert on this, I’m just expressing my observations on the issue like everyone else. I have no siblings and I am currently expecting my second child.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top