The reaction to high kid count

For the first time since Reed was born, I'm able to get on the computer before 9 p.m. (it's 8:58) and devote my time to something other than skimming day-old emails and uploading photos. In this newfound window of web time, I thought I'd share some of the reactions I read to the Babble story referenced in the previous posting.

The responses to the piece, written by a woman who harbors dreams of having a large family, really covered a wide spectrum of opinions. Some were aggressively disparaging, others cautiously supportive. What was most apparent from reading the replies is that people are eager to tell the story of their own upbringing -- the forgotten child among many, the daughter engulfed by the love of older siblings, the somber son with no siblings to share memories with.

It reminded me of a conversation that came up at a New Parents Group meeting I would go to on Thursdays when Ben was an infant. One day, one of the new mothers (our children were mostly sub-three-months old at the time) expressed an interest in having another baby, soon. The ensuing debate occurred after nearly every parent told of their own experience with siblings -- a brother so much younger that they had nothing in common, a sister just a year older who barely acknowledged her younger sister's presence (and still doesn't), three siblings each three years apart who were inseparable and remain the best of friends to this day.

No clear answers emerged from this share-fest (only aghast expressions that the woman who sparked the conversation could be considering another night-waking, breast-sucking, loud-yelping baby at the point when most of us were still questioning our decision to have the child nestled in our lap). There was evidently no right way to space your children in order to create the perfect family dynamic. Every story was different.

And so was the case with the replies to the Babble article, although a few common themes did arise, some of them which I hope to spend more time discussing in future entries. A smattering of folks lamented that a larger family means a larger carbon footprint, or more negative impact on the environment (and an equally large group made the opposite claim). A few brought up the over-population argument and some naysayers referenced the NY Times Magazine piece I talked about a few posts back on the low birth rate in Europe. Others argued that having more than two children is a selfish act on the part of the parents. One Christian woman said she feels the pressure from her community to have more than two children, while parents who only have one kid said that they are constantly critiqued, and criticized, for not having more. A few women said they felt validated by the story, which conveyed their sentiments as well; feelings they keep mum in their real lives.

The bottom line: it felt like judgment after judgment after judgment, leaving me with a lot of fodder for thought, but not one centimeter closer to defining an optimal kid count, and all the more aware that if that if your kid count edges anywhere up or down from two, it's sure to spark controversy.