Where are all the large Catholic families?

[fpt]

Yes, it sounds like government laws in France might make using NFP to have a smaller family valid.

No, no, it is not my idea. I say only that in the practice, the point of view of couples and of priests, in general, will be in function of local situation.

In my opinion, in general it is easier to have a large family in France than the USA or in Germany or in UK because the health care system and the law are better for wife.

Free for childbirth in the public hospital, no need to get private insurance, no limit of delay between two pregnancies for being taken in charge with the complementary health insurance (no surprime), C section is not seen like very dangerous like USA (modeation in the evaluation of the risk), the legal system is not like in the USA, no law suit like in the USA…, public School at 3 years old possible, sometimes 2 year, public kindergarden (no school) between 3 months to 6 months etc.

 

[fpt]

No, no, it is not my idea. I say only that in the practice, the point of view of couples and of priests, in general, will be in function of local situation.

In my opinion, in general it is easier to have a large family in France than the USA or in Germany or in UK because the health care system and the law are better for wife.

Free for childbirth in the public hospital, no need to get private insurance, no limit of delay between two pregnancies for being taken in charge with the complementary health insurance (no surprime), C section is not seen like very dangerous like USA (modeation in the evaluation of the risk), the legal system is not like in the USA, no law suit like in the USA…, public School at 3 years old possible, sometimes 2 year, public kindergarden (no school) between 3 months to** 6 years **etc.

 

[fpt]

No, no, it is not my idea. I say only that in the practice, the point of view of couples and of priests, in general, will be in function of local situation.

In my opinion, in general it is easier to have a large family in France than the USA or in Germany or in UK because the health care system and the law are better for wife.

Free for childbirth in the public hospital, no need to get private insurance, no limit of delay between two pregnancies for being taken in charge with the complementary health insurance (no surprime), C section is not seen like very dangerous like USA (modeation in the evaluation of the risk), the legal system is not like in the USA, no law suit like in the USA…, public School at 3 years old possible, sometimes 2 year, public kindergarden (not school, special place for kids) between 3 months to **6 years **etc.

France is not a paradise, there is a legal system for the families that is not always fair and good. But, about the price of exams during pregnancy and the cost of childbirth, it is almost free and the quality is very good. C section is not seen like very risky, in general.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

No, no, it is not my idea. I say only that in the practice, the point of view of couples and of priests, in general, will be in function of local situation.

In my opinion, in general it is easier to have a large family in France than the USA or in Germany or in UK because the health care system and the law are better for wife.

Free for childbirth in the public hospital, no need to get private insurance, no limit of delay between two pregnancies for being taken in charge with the complementary health insurance (no surprime), C section is not seen like very dangerous like USA (modeation in the evaluation of the risk), the legal system is not like in the USA, no law suit like in the USA…, public School at 3 years old possible, sometimes 2 year, public kindergarden (no school) between 3 months to 6 months etc.

Oh, I’m sorry. I misread. I thought France had imposed a spacing between pregnancies or you didn’t have coverage on the second pregnancy. USA doesn’t have this mandate either.

C section might not be seen as very dangerous, but I think the reality is that it is much better for mom to give birth naturally if she can. Despite this, C-section is relatively common in the USA too. The doctors just begin to become concerned about uterine rupture after a couple of pregnancies. You’re right, our ability to sue here is probably greater than in France, so doctor fear malpractice lawsuits.

It does sound like there is an ability to send children to school much younger in France. We have half-day pre-schools for 3-4 year olds. Kindergarten starts the next year and these are either half or whole days depending on the school. After that, the kids go full-time. I personally went to a younger pre-school as a 2-3 year old, but this was because my dad was in the military and they had them set up for military families.

There is the privatized healthcare issue, but most families with average income have it. If you are employed in a full-time position, privatized health insurance generally comes with your contract. Private business owners and people with minimum wage jobs are the ones that run into issues.

 

[fpt]

In France, there are a lot of direct and voluntary abortions, and a lot of direct and voluntary contraception: the using of the pill is huge. In USA, a lot of vasectomy, in France, not.

In France, the methods of NFP are not very well-known. If you ask to your doctor, many of them are not aware of this possibility. In the USA or in the English speaking countries,** it seems to me that NFP is more known by people, nurses and doctors…etc**.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

In France, there are a lot of direct and voluntary abortions, and a lot of direct and voluntary contraception: the using of the pill is huge. In USA, a lot of vasectomy, in France, not.

In France, the methods of NFP are not very well-known. If you ask to your doctor, many of them are not aware of this possibility. In the USA or in the English speaking countries,** it seems to me that NFP is more known by people, nurses and doctors…etc**.

Doctors know what NFP is, but I know my married friends have had many doctors “laugh” at them if they say they plan on using NFP to space/not have more children. The average American doesn’t believe it actually works.

 

[aragonjohn1]

There is a little of that. Twenty kids would have been an unusually large family in any century. But just look at 40 years ago. We weren’t facing high infant mortality and many Catholic families had 6 - 8 children. Growing up, my block had families of 9, 10, 12 and 14 kids - all Catholic families living in suburbia.

If you look at population statistics, the objective reasons that would limit family size, at least in an industrialized country such as the US - serious health conditions, late marriages, significant financial hardships - something seems to be missing. Either we have an epedemic of health conditions or Catholics are not generously welcoming children. With the advances in health care and treating infertility, and with a higher standard of living, without such an epidemic, you would expect average family size among Catholics to be rising. I don’t think it is.

I myself know 3 catholic families with 18-23 kids and most families in my home parish have 7 or more kids : )

It kinda makes me think that my family of 5 kids is small

Shalom
God bless

 

[Corki]

I myself know 3 catholic families with 18-23 kids and most families in my home parish have 7 or more kids : )

It kinda makes me think that my family of 5 kids is small

Shalom
God bless

Wow, I want to live where you live. We have so many small families that we can’t get enough altar servers. I was one of 5 and growing up, we were considered on the small end of medium-sized. Now many people are aghast at a family with five kids and I think the biggest family in my parish has four.

 

[BingoBoy]

Wow, I want to live where you live. We have so many small families that we can’t get enough altar servers. I was one of 5 and growing up, we were considered on the small end of medium-sized. Now many people are aghast at a family with five kids and I think the biggest family in my parish has four.

If you so publicly see large families as so superior and small families as so inferior, then may I ask how many children YOU have?

If living around people who have large families is so important to you for some reason, then why don’t you take the initiative and make your own family of 18-23 kids??

 

[Mrs_Sally]

If you so publicly see large families as so superior and small families as so inferior, then may I ask how many children YOU have?

If living around people who have large families is so important to you for some reason, then why don’t you take the initiative and make your own family of 18-23 kids??

I only have two and it is a source of regret to my husband and I. At one point we thought two was perfect - a girl and a boy! Then as we began to see a large family as a blessing, we also had to deal with medications that made contraception difficult, then two miscarriages, then age caught up with us.

I think that story is relatively common these days. People marrying relatively later have a shorter window of fertility and young couple from small families may be overwhelmed by a baby and a toddler and won’t have the family experience to know that it is perfectly possible to live through 3 under 3 and other “horrors” of large families.

 

[Corki]

If you so publicly see large families as so superior and small families as so inferior, then may I ask how many children YOU have?

If living around people who have large families is so important to you for some reason, then why don’t you take the initiative and make your own family of 18-23 kids??

You will have to ask God that. I certainly would have welcomed many more children than I have but it wasn’t to be.

I never said that small families were inferior to large ones, by the way. The Church does say that large families are a special blessing and I take that to be not only for the parents but for those around them. Personally, I like to be around all the blessings I can.

 

[BingoBoy]

I only have two and it is a source of regret to my husband and I. At one point we thought two was perfect - a girl and a boy! Then as we began to see a large family as a blessing, we also had to deal with medications that made contraception difficult, then two miscarriages, then age caught up with us.

I think that story is relatively common these days. People marrying relatively later have a shorter window of fertility and young couple from small families may be overwhelmed by a baby and a toddler and won’t have the family experience to know that it is perfectly possible to live through 3 under 3 and other “horrors” of large families.

Exactly!

If the person themselves had legitimate reason for only ending up with 2 or 3 (such as old age, health, etc etc), then why on EARTH would they be looking at other small families and thinking they are inferior??

 

[BingoBoy]

You will have to ask God that. I certainly would have welcomed many more children than I have but it wasn’t to be.

I never said that small families were inferior to large ones, by the way. The Church does say that large families are a special blessing and I take that to be not only for the parents but for those around them. Personally, I like to be around all the blessings I can.

But don’t you realize how hypocritical you sound??

Perhaps YOU have legitimate reasons for having a small family. But who is to say others don’t as well??

You talk with an obvious bias towards large families, and say you want to live in a place that has large families, yet you don’t have a large family yourself!

You of all people should understand why it’s hurtful and unfair to make such obvious prejudices/biases towards family size.

 

[Corki]

But don’t you realize how hypocritical you sound??

Perhaps YOU have legitimate reasons for having a small family. But who is to say others don’t as well??

It had nothing to do with my reasons. It had to do with what happened to my body. You know that the Church does not accept that medical problems are a result of one’s own sins or lack of faith, right? I don’t know why God did not make me more fertile but to attribute it to my “reasons” is crass.

You talk with an obvious bias towards large families, and say you want to live in a place that has large families, yet you don’t have a large family yourself!

Did you read my post? I grew up around much larger families and would like to have that for my own family. It’s no more biased than saying that I wish I lived in the state where I grew up even though I am currently stuck in Texas.

You of all people should understand why it’s hurtful and unfair to make such obvious prejudices/biases towards family size.

I did not make any judgements against any family based on its size. **You **are the one that brought forth the terms superior and inferior in reference to family size. I was very careful to speak about the **general trends **toward smaller family size which seems to be contrary to the Church’s desires for families. For all I know, a small familiy may have had a terrible health issue and the large family might be motivated by a desire to outbreed those different from themselves. **As a general application **of generously welcoming children and **as a general by-product **of seeing children as gifts and not burdens, such a downward trend should not be happening.

 

[babochka]

If you so publicly see large families as so superior and small families as so inferior, then may I ask how many children YOU have?

If living around people who have large families is so important to you for some reason, then why don’t you take the initiative and make your own family of 18-23 kids??

It can be really helpful to a large family to have other large families around. I find that I rarely take my 5 children to visit in the homes of those who have only 1 or 2 children, because we can be overwhelming. On the other hand, my friends with large families are used to having the chaos that comes with so many kids and are more able to take it in stride. It can also be affirming that we’re not “weird” and our kids come to see it as normal.

 

[babochka]

Doctors know what NFP is, but I know my married friends have had many doctors “laugh” at them if they say they plan on using NFP to space/not have more children. The average American doesn’t believe it actually works.

Doctors kind of know what NFP is. Most lump it in with “natural methods” when considering effectiveness rates. My first OB told me at my first postpartum visit that it is not as effective during breastfeeding. While it can be more challenging, it is not true that it is less effective. I’ve had other doctors refuse to use my dates for conception because they didn’t fit the mold from last menstrual period. I’ve been sure of my dates every time because I know when I ovulate. The science behind NFP is solid and so simple, I think it is amazing that doctors are not more supportive.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

The science behind NFP is solid and so simple, I think it is amazing that doctors are not more supportive.

Bad for business perhaps …

 

[babochka]

I do think it’s possible that modern medicine picks up on more health risks than they used to. For example, C-sections are pretty common now. A doctor is more likely to realize and tell you if your uterus is getting dangerously thin to conceive another child. Women are also more likely to be diagnosed with heart conditions and other factors for high risk pregnancies. I think the risks were probably always there, but now we know.

Unfortunately, a doctor can not really know if you uterus is dangerously thin. I have had 4 c-sections. It used to be that doctors strongly advised that a woman have no more than 3. When I was having my 2nd c-section (a non-emergency transfer from an attempted homebirth) the very angry doctor told me during the surgery that I was lucky I had not ruptured and that my uterus was dangerously thin. Of course my uterus was thin! I was 42 weeks pregnant, I had been in labor for 18 hours and my cervix was dilated to 10cm, so it is expected that it would be very thin. He told me that if I was foolish enough to get pregnant again, I should have a scheduled c-section at 37 weeks, as experiencing labor or going to term would be very dangerous. When it came time for my next baby, I found a supportive doctor, went to 41 1/2 weeks and labored safely at home. This ended up being another c-section, but my doctor this time said that she thought another (4th ) surgery would be fine, as I had very little scar tissue. For my 5th baby, I had my first scheduled c-section at 39 1/2 weeks. At my request, this doctor again looked at my uterus and said that she believed another c-section would be safe. She told me this during the surgery, and the assistant surgeon said “maybe safe, but not advisable” to my doctor. My doctor correctly told that the decision is mine to make, and I wanted to know.

Childbirth is always dangerous. Some risk factors we can know ahead of time, such as the relatively small risk of uterine rupture after a c-section. Others, more common, such as cord prolapse, we cannot predict.

Doctors are in the business of reducing risk when they can, and many have the attitude, especially if you already have children, that there is no point in taking unnecessary risk. Their own bias toward family size certainly comes into it. I recently miscarried, but while I was pregnant I went to see my family physician (not my OB) and told him that I was pregnant. He happens to be on the board of our state NFP organization, is Catholic, pro-life and does not prescribe birth control. We were talking about my pregnancy, my age, and the number of c-sections that I’ve had. I told him that my last OB thought it was fine to have another c-section. His response was that they really can’t tell and it is all just their best guess in individual cases. Statistically, there is increased risk overall, but for an individual, either you will have a problem or you won’t. It is either 100% or zero.

 

[Corki]

My Catholic mom comes from a family of 5 children. My non-Catholic dad comes from a farming family of 9. Those are not unusual numbers for the times.

I agree that there is something going on besides prayerful consideration by Catholic couples of true hardships or health concerns. The general idea in society of what a baby/child “needs” and what constitutes a hardship has changed over the years. Even a couple who is using NFP is probably not using the same criteria for limits or spacing that a couple in the early 21st centuary did.

I have a small family and so do my relatives. My children only have 4 cousins. When we gather the entire extended family, it is barely more people than some had in their birth families! :bighanky:

My kids regularly remind me that their kids will only have one uncle on our side of the family and see that as very unfortunate. As of now, they are determined to make up for this in the next generation - God willing.

I do think it’s possible that modern medicine picks up on more health risks than they used to. For example, C-sections are pretty common now. A doctor is more likely to realize and tell you if your uterus is getting dangerously thin to conceive another child. Women are also more likely to be diagnosed with heart conditions and other factors for high risk pregnancies. I think the risks were probably always there, but now we know.

I think you are partly right. However, undetected maternal health issues were probably more linked to maternal death in times past than to large families.

 

[babochka]

In France, there are alot of C-sections not because there are real medical issues, but because it is a mean for doctor to have better pay (an act of surgery with money in pocket of doctor) or because it is also a mean to avoid a judicial law suit if the baby has a minor problem during the natural childbirth.

In France, it seems to me that C-section is not seen like being a huge higher risk for the future pregnancies. There is a diffrence between France and the USA, it seems to me. May be, I make a misunderstanding, a mistake!!!

In conclusion, In France every woman can birth in the hospital without to pay a lot of money. The health care system is very different. The health insurance can not oblige to have a delay between two pregnancies, otherwise no insurance during the gap of time. In France, It is not licit.

This is also true in the US. Many c-sections are performed for convenience of the mother or the doctor, or to just be on the safe side. Many are also performed because doctors and mothers choose to induce labor, which put the mother at an increased risk for a c-section.

In the US, they are not really considered as a significant risk for future pregnancies, but it is a rare woman who has had more than three. Then again, families with more than three children are fairly uncommon. What is erroneously perceived as a great risk is that of uterine rupture during labor after c-section. For that reason, many doctors won’t take a patient who wants a vaginal birth after a c-section, and many hospitals place unreasonable restrictions on women and doctors who are wiling to try this. This mostly comes down to fear of lawsuits, not actual evidence based medicine.

As one doctor said, “I’ve never been sued for a c-section I performed, just for the one I didn’t do.”