With modern infant mortality rate and fertility, if everyone dropped birth control and NFP, how many children would people have? This is with the natural space of time that a woman is not fertile due to breastfeeding and according to the WHO ideally she should be doing that for a year at least. How many supersized Duggar families, 7-8 families, 2-3 etc.?

The Duggars are trying to win a prize.

They have their older kids take care of the newborns, so mom & dad can "get started" on the next baby...
Not to mention "breastfeeding? What's that?".

And I agree with most of the preceding post, except for the implication that getting married in one's 30's is enabled by the consequence-free fornication that only birth control can provide.

The American economy has changed, our culture has changed, the maturity expected of a child at age ___ has changed, and so on.  It's easy for youths to be employed when 95% of the economy is agriculture. But what about more advanced economies, with jobs that require skills? Either one needs a degree to be qualified for a job, or at least the education required to be able to work in a given profession.

Even if degrees were mostly bunk, I don't think most 16 year olds could write software professionally, or do any other professional job for that matter. You have to learn somehow, and it takes time. And children need to spend their school days on the basic well-rounded education, which only allows so much time for hobbies, side subjects, and side projects.

Kids under a certain age just need to play -- that's an absolutely ideal case for children. In other words, if you only have 1 child and you have 500 billion in the bank, and you want your child to be as successful as possible: then you really need to let him play. Creative, unstructured play is the best thing by far for children under a certain age.

Basics like farming and homemaking are "free" if the child is raised practicing these arts. But modern careers require more schooling -- on one's own and/or in a formal setting.

But even when the man's career is set, then young couples have to find each other. It's not easy. Traditional Catholics are so spread out. And even some Trads at your local chapel can be quite unsuitable -- they might have social, emotional, spiritual, physical, or psychological issues. And some might be Trad in name only. And even a young man and a young woman at a Trad chapel might be healthy in every way -- but just not be suited for each other. That happens too. You are comfortable with what you're used to, etc.

So finding a suitable spouse often takes time measured in years.

And as the saying goes, Irish birth control is "getting married late". (Ireland used to be a very Catholic country. Another related term: "Irish twins" which means a person has 2 children in the same calendar year.)

Under normal circuмstances, I'd say about 8 children, if the wife is young. 

Don't buy into the hype that the Middle Ages were dark, that people didn't bathe, and the average lifespan was half what it is today. I think some people actually believe the average person expected to live to 38 years old back then. No, it's just that infant mortality brought the average way down. If you survived childhood, you'd live about as long as you could expect to live today.

But nevertheless, the late 1800's were not the middle ages. Cities -- at least in 1st world countries -- dealt with sewage in a proper manner, and generally had good hygiene by that point.

And I agree with most of the preceding post, except for the implication that getting married in one's 30's is enabled by the consequence-free fornication that only birth control can provide.

The American economy has changed, our culture has changed, the maturity expected of a child at age ___ has changed, and so on.  It's easy for youths to be employed when 95% of the economy is agriculture. But what about more advanced economies, with jobs that require skills? Either one needs a degree to be qualified for a job, or at least the education required to be able to work in a given profession.

Even if degrees were mostly bunk, I don't think most 16 year olds could write software professionally, or do any other professional job for that matter. You have to learn somehow, and it takes time. And children need to spend their school days on the basic well-rounded education, which only allows so much time for hobbies, side subjects, and side projects.

Basics like farming and homemaking are "free" if the child is raised practicing these arts. But modern careers require more schooling -- on one's own and/or in a formal setting.

But even when the man's career is set, then young couples have to find each other. It's not easy. Traditional Catholics are so spread out. And even some Trads at your local chapel can be quite unsuitable -- they might have social, emotional, spiritual, physical, or psychological issues. And some might be Trad in name only. And even a young man and a young woman at a Trad chapel might be healthy in every way -- but just not be suited for each other. That happens too. You are comfortable with what you're used to, etc.

So finding a suitable spouse often takes time measured in years.

This is all true of course, but I was talking about the scenario of the average irreligious American giving up birth control, etc. For them there is no drought of eligible marriage candidates since they don't care about the beliefs of who they marry, and if women were to be getting pregnant every year then they'd likely drop out of the workforce again, opening up so many jobs that men could once again find good steady employment in their early 20s. 

My husband and I got married in our early twenties, never practiced NFP and we’ve only had six children. We’ve had a few miscarriages unfortunately and being in our mid forties now, don’t expect any more children as I am going through the early stages of menopause.
So we are actually quite grateful never having practiced NFP, because if we had spaced our first ones we may have only had two or three children because our later years have been less fruitful.

I do know of a few young Catholic couples trying to conceive but without success so far. One couple even spending thousands of dollars to increase their fertility. Another couple suffering multiple miscarriages in a row.

Another thing I noticed is when visiting my children’s pediatrician the other day, he was discussing with the nurse the number of children he has (two little ones so far) and when asked by her why he hasn’t had another child in a couple of years he said, ‘we’ll it’s not like we haven’t tried.’ Now I know he is Protestant but even he is openly discussing the struggle to conceive.

I’m just putting my experiences out there as an example of some trying to have children but without success. Seems to be more often than not these days because I knew so many big families growing up and now there are so few. And I’ve also found that it isn’t always on purpose.

As a couple who are profoundly opposed to NFP your story is wonderful to read ! 
The truth is that if everyone followed Christ some families would be large, others smaller and many people who seek a more religious live would have no children.  Overall God would give us the perfect number of children ! 

These stories are very encouraging for women who are scared of ending up with more than they can handle because of modern thinking. I know that I struggle with this a lot and it is comforting to think that things will work out the way they should. It’s very important to share stories like these. Feeling inspired!

In the meantime, I live in the country so I am hundreds of feet from the nearest house, which probably isn't using Roundup either. One of my neighbors doesn't even mow his property -- just a small sliver around the trailer house she lives in. I think her ex-boyfriend (and father of her 2 kids) comes over once in a while and mows a little bit. But most of the acreage is completely wild (unlike my land, which looks more like a golf course -- albeit a brown, dried up grass version of one, since we have frequent droughts, but I digress...) So you know that neighbor isn't using Roundup.

But in the country people aren't uptight about a having a little nature here and there. Some grass around this or that tree, bush, or building isn't a huge deal. We also don't live in a Homeowners Association. I'd rather live in Communist Russia. Ok, I'm exaggerating a bit, but honestly it would be a toss-up. When you have local government telling you how to live, what you can put on (or around) your house -- who needs far-off national dictatorships?

Matthew