Author Topic: Why do Baby Boomer Catholics only have 3 or 4 kids? (Read 3704 times)

Matthew · « **on:** April 20, 2011, 12:49:18 PM »

I know many Catholics from the Baby Boomer generation -- including those who were traditional for the past 25 or 30 years -- who have 3 to 4 children.

I'll put it bluntly: How is that possible without birth control?

2 generations ago (the WW2 generation) seemed to have big families. My dad came from a family of 8. My wife's mom came from a family of 8. But the next generation down, we're talking 3, 4 or 5 at the most.

Why?

Has anyone addressed this glaring issue? It's not a simple discussion of birth control, because I hope the traditional Catholics I have seen were not using birth control. Maybe NFP, or complete abstinence?

Why the shrink in family size from families in the 1950s to families in the 1980s -- even among TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS?

Matthew

Telesphorus · « **Reply #1 on:** April 20, 2011, 12:50:29 PM »

Because of the college education of women. Because of feminism.

ora pro me · « **Reply #2 on:** April 20, 2011, 12:59:52 PM »

Matthew,
I may have a news bulletin for you: Not all women are as fertile as others or able to carry every pregnancy to term. I know a Traditional Catholic mother who had 9 or 10 children but had even MORE miscarriages than live births! I have other stories even more heartbreaking, but that's enough for now.

For those mothers who are able to get pregnant and carry their pregnancies to term, Blessed be God. For those moms and dads who are grieving for lost babies, my prayers are with you. May Our Lady of Sorrows comfort you and may you see your babies in heaven glorifying God for all eternity.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #3 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:01:33 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

I know many Catholics from the Baby Boomer generation -- including those who were traditional for the past 25 or 30 years -- who have 3 to 4 children.

I'll put it bluntly: How is that possible without birth control?

I would say multiple miscarriages, but that's uncommon. You couldn't make that excuse for a crowd (unless you found the food and water were poisoned or something like that).

Telesphorus · « **Reply #4 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:01:59 PM »

Quote from: ora pro me

Matthew,
I may have a news bulletin for you: Not all women are as fertile as others or able to carry every pregnancy to term. I know a Traditional Catholic mother who had 9 or 10 children but had even MORE miscarriages than live births! I have other stories even more heartbreaking, but that's enough for now.

For those mothers who are able to get pregnant and carry their pregnancies to term, Blessed be God. For those moms and dads who are grieving for lost babies, my prayers are with you. May Our Lady of Sorrows comfort you and may you see your babies in heaven glorifying God for all eternity.

It's one thing to judge individual cases, it's quite another to judge a group of people. Matthew's observation certainly applies to most "conservative Catholics."

Matthew · « **Reply #5 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:09:37 PM »

I'm not judging individuals *at all*

In each individual case, I'm going to assume the best.

But at a macro level, it's undeniable that family size has gone down, even among anti-birth control groups like Catholics and traditional Catholics.

Why?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #6 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:15:22 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

I'm not judging individuals *at all*

In each individual case, I'm going to assume the best.

But at a macro level, it's undeniable that family size has gone down, even among anti-birth control groups like Catholics and traditional Catholics.

Why?

Well the simple answer is that it's the influence of the world and that Catholics are not immune to customs.

However, one must explain why traditional Catholics are not able to resist this way of thinking. And I think the answer to that is that they accept certain modern customs (like college education of women and delay of marriage) of this time and society as a matter of course, without thinking of the reasons behind the adoption of those customs. Those customs are anti-Christian and anti-family.

And I think one must also consider the advice of confessors. It would not surprise me if many trad priests have liberalized over time, particularly in Europe.

ora pro me · « **Reply #7 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:44:27 PM »

Well, Matthew, your initial post didn't even mention the possibility of people losing babies early or not being able to conceive.

This is a sensitive issue because most people don't know that a woman is having a hard time conceiving or is losing babies in the first trimester unless she or the husband share their sorrow with others. It's been a sensitive issue for me at times when I knew that a couple were having these difficult issues and some nosey busy body assumed that the couple was using birth control.

Yes, even Traditional Catholics assume these things and then an assumption that is voiced turns into gossip and pretty soon, so many people believe it and don't realize that it was somebody's assumption to begin with. The accusation becomes "common knowledge" and is whispered around causing scandal. Please, folks, be careful of your assumptions.

One tradtional Catholic relative had a tragic end to a very difficult delivery and that was the end to having any more children so after having a small family, they grieved for the others that they would never have. Over the years I have set a few mutual aquaintances straight when they gossiped that this couple was using birth control. How hurtful is that kind of accusation? I just hope the couple never knew what busy bodies were believing and spreading. If only that were the only time I've heard this type of talk.

I know other situations where couples had miscarriage after miscarriage or simply couldn't get pregnant. One poor woman was reduced to tears when a Traditional Catholic busy body went right up to her after church and said "You know that it's wrong for you to put off having children." The poor couple had been desperately praying for a baby for a few years. She began crying and went to get her husband and they both left and I wondered if they'd ever come back. Thank goodness they did come back to church, but the husband had strong words for the busy body and she was pretty embarrassed when she found out the real situation, but do you think that caused her to stop thinking the worst of folks? Nah.

I wish I could say that's the only time that I know of this happening, but it's not. I've been around in tradtional Catholic parishes for a long time. Please folks, ALWAYS THINK the BEST of OTHERS. If you can't do that, then pray for them. If you are blessed with lots of kids I'm sure that you thank God for them every day. We were very blessed ourselves, and the grandkids keep coming, but I have been in a position to know of others' pain and I can tell you that it's a very deep sorrow. Let us all pray for others and make it a habit.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #8 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:45:07 PM »

Some people don't like to hear FACTS. But it is simply a fact that the college education of women does reduce fertility. Some people have a real hatred for the truth - it's evident by the way they downrate posts.

Spouse of Jesus has told us about the mandatory contraception courses for women in Iran at the university - the birthrate is collapsing in the Muslim world too - in large part because of the ubiquity of college education.

Here's an example:

Under Communism educated women had a higher birth-rate but once the values in education shifted to be "western" then the birth-rate of college educated women was sharply reduced.

Quote

This study demonstrates how broad societal-level change not only alters the composition of individual-level characteristics in a population, but also affects the relationship between mechanisms and behavior. Focusing on Ukraine during the transition to a new economy, this paper examines how massive economic, political, and social transformations changed individual-level childbearing decision-making. Specifically, I investigate how social change in Ukraine altered the effects of one institution – education - on the timing of first and second births and marriage. By employing a period-comparison research design, I find that the effects of higher education on the timing of first births reversed after Ukrainian Independence. Whereas previously more highly educated women would have had higher first birth rates once school enrollment and marriage were controlled, after Independence women with higher education delayed childbearing. Social change also had an effect on the timing of second births and marriage and altered the relationship between education and second births. Explanations for the changing effects of education on family formation include , shifting opportunity costs, exposure to new ideas and values, and a restructured educational system.

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/3/0/4/p103042_index.html

Quote

Education, especially female education, seems to reduce fertility. Economists standard explanation is that women's foregone earnings are the leading cost of children. If you raise women's education, you raise their potential income; and as you raise their potential income, you raise the cost of fertility.

This story sounds good, but economists rarely notice that there are several other plausible mechanisms for female education to reduce fertility:

1. Education changes values in an anti-natal direction.

2. Education correlates with stricter self-imposed rules for parenting.

3. Both education and fertility depend on foresight.

I addressed these stories in an earlier draft of Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, but in the end the material seemed too wonky for public consumption. But not for EconLog...

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2010/07/from_the_cuttin_2.html

So another factor at play is that college education can cause parents to have more worldly ambitions for their children - and can cause them to be more controlling. Pride really warps the parents' perceptions of what is important.

Quote

Using survey data collected in rural Ghana during the 1980s, this study examines
whether a woman’s interest in fertility regulation and contraception is influenced by the
education of other women in her community. The study finds that, net of her own
characteristics, a woman’s interest in limiting fertility and using modern contraception
increases with the percent of women with education in her community. The finding
suggests that female education has a greater capacity to introduce novel reproductive
ideas and behaviors into rural areas of Africa and thereby transform the demographic
landscape in the region than is currently believed. Other community characteristics that
increase women’s interest in regulating fertility and contraceptive use in this setting
include access to transportation and proximity to urban areas. However, these are not as
powerful as women’s education in transforming reproductive behavior

http://www.demographic-research.org/Volumes/Vol14/20/14-20.pdf

As Catholics we need to use reason. If we're against small families then we should be against public college education of women. It is without a doubt a corrupting influence.

That may hurt the pride of certain women and certain fathers, but it's the truth. The people who disapprove of me saying it simply HATE the TRUTH when it hurts their pride. That's what it's all about!

Jitpring · « **Reply #9 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:47:58 PM »

Ever heard of the conspiracy involving contrails distributing contraceptive chemicals into the air?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #10 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:48:58 PM »

Quote from: ora pro me

Well, Matthew, your initial post didn't even mention the possibility of people losing babies early or not being able to conceive.

His initial post mentioned the change that has occurred since the baby boomer generation. If the rate of miscarriages and fertility problems has increased overall it is a result of changes in behavior. He's not obliged to mention that some people have such problems in noticing a trend.

I'm sorry, but your remarks are a completely unfair criticism of his observation - an attempted "guilt-trip" that is a common tactic for shutting people down when they make an observation.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #11 on:** April 20, 2011, 01:51:52 PM »

I'd like to re-iterate something about the liberalism of priests. As I think that is really the fundamental reason for the dramatic shift.

People really need to disabuse themselves of the notion that Trad priests do not adopt liberal views on many issues.

I suppose the most infamous case is that of Father Cekada on Terry Schiavo.

It's the liberalism of the priest in the confessional that is the #1 threat to the preservation of Catholic family life.

Liberal priests need to be exposed and held to account. The seal of the confessional binds the priest - not the confessor. If a priest gives bad advice he should be reported to his superiors.

CathMomof7 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 20, 2011, 02:02:03 PM »

You mean you know Baby Boomers who have that many children? Wow.

Of the Baby Boomer's I know or have known, the largest family has 5 children.

Most I know have had 1, 2, or no children.

Families declined, even among Catholics, since the 60s because women are marrying later and using some form of birth control.

In the 70s, there was a common practice of Dr's giving a woman a hysterectomy after her 2nd or 3rd child with the thinking she didn't need/wouldn't want more children anyway.

I know this because my mother was a nurse. It was common practice in some areas.

While I don't think it is a fair assessment to conclude that all Catholics are using contraception, it is a fair assessment to conclude that many Catholics are.

Family sizes are smaller because it costs a lot to pay for your children to go to daycare while both parents work. Or the family suffers loss of income for mother to stay home.

NFP is reported as "morally neutral" so NO Catholics use it with a good conscience to limit their family size. I know, because that is what we were taught in a class. Those who find the practice of NFP "gross" are happy to find they can follow their consciences.

I have scoured census records for decades and normal family size for most families was 6 to 8. There were some families with 1 or 2 children, others with 10 or 15. But those were exceptions.

Matthew · « **Reply #13 on:** April 20, 2011, 02:03:36 PM »

Quote from: ora pro me

Well, Matthew, your initial post didn't even mention the possibility of people losing babies early or not being able to conceive.

This is a sensitive issue because most people don't know that a woman is having a hard time conceiving or is losing babies in the first trimester unless she or the husband share their sorrow with others. It's been a sensitive issue for me at times when I knew that a couple were having these difficult issues and some nosey busy body assumed that the couple was using birth control.

Yes, even Traditional Catholics assume these things and then an assumption that is voiced turns into gossip and pretty soon, so many people believe it and don't realize that it was somebody's assumption to begin with. The accusation becomes "common knowledge" and is whispered around causing scandal. Please, folks, be careful of your assumptions.

One tradtional Catholic relative had a tragic end to a very difficult delivery and that was the end to having any more children so after having a small family, they grieved for the others that they would never have. Over the years I have set a few mutual aquaintances straight when they gossiped that this couple was using birth control. How hurtful is that kind of accusation? I just hope the couple never knew what busy bodies were believing and spreading. If only that were the only time I've heard this type of talk.

I know other situations where couples had miscarriage after miscarriage or simply couldn't get pregnant. One poor woman was reduced to tears when a Traditional Catholic busy body went right up to her after church and said "You know that it's wrong for you to put off having children." The poor couple had been desperately praying for a baby for a few years. She began crying and went to get her husband and they both left and I wondered if they'd ever come back. Thank goodness they did come back to church, but the husband had strong words for the busy body and she was pretty embarrassed when she found out the real situation, but do you think that caused her to stop thinking the worst of folks? Nah.

I wish I could say that's the only time that I know of this happening, but it's not. I've been around in tradtional Catholic parishes for a long time. Please folks, ALWAYS THINK the BEST of OTHERS. If you can't do that, then pray for them. If you are blessed with lots of kids I'm sure that you thank God for them every day. We were very blessed ourselves, and the grandkids keep coming, but I have been in a position to know of others' pain and I can tell you that it's a very deep sorrow. Let us all pray for others and make it a habit.

Thank you for the stark example of what I was talking about on here the other day -- the nerve of some Catholics who call themselves traditional, being judgmental and utterly devoid of charity, preferring to think of themselves as good and most others as bad (which is the OPPOSITE of how the saints acted and believed).

But I am not talking about individuals. I am NOT one of those busy-body Catholics you mention. I am keeping this at a macro level, very much on purpose.

Miscarriages, infertility are reasons for a small family. But why would those reasons suddenly come into play in 1980, but not in 1950? Is it something in the air or water? Maybe so. That's what I'm trying to wrap my brain around.

I think Tele is on to something though (in this particular case).

I know *so many* families in the WW2 generation with 7, 8, 9 or more children. But growing up I don't remember any of my peers being from a large family -- even at my independent Trad chapel there was only one big family -- all the other families were 4 or 5 kids.

Is it economic? NFP? Feminism being in the air we breathe? Some combination of the above?

Matthew · « **Reply #14 on:** April 20, 2011, 02:07:38 PM »

I mean, I'm certainly on to something here.

Here are my wife and myself, having children 1 1/2 years apart, and we'd have to go back TWO generations to be able to get any advice, someone who can relate to us, etc.

Unfortunately, many from that generation are either deceased or in a nursing home. The people we can see more easily (parents, for example) lived a whole different lifestyle from us -- and I'm not talking about computers and technology either.