Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: 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
-
Because of the college education of women. Because of feminism.
-
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.
-
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).
-
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."
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
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
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.
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!
-
Ever heard of the conspiracy involving contrails distributing contraceptive chemicals into the air?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
You mean you know Baby Boomers who have that many children? Wow.
I know several trad Catholic Baby Boomers who had 4 kids. That seems to be common, or even the maximum.
-
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.
And even then Matthew, they wouldn't be able to give you much advice. Families used to stay in one place. Multiple generations lived in one town,muliple branches of the same family lived near each other. Women had sisters, mothers, aunts and cousins to rely on, almost no one homeschooled except for the ultra-rural. After 5 their children were sent away to school. The Catholic mom of 1930 never had more than a couple small children with her all day and she had a large support network. She could walk to the church on the corner for confession and some time in Adoration whenever she had a free few minutes.
A woman raising her Catholic children back then wouldn't know how to advise a woman today whose life is so completely different.
-
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.
While I believe the trend Matthew pointed out is legitimate, those of us who have seen or shared the pain of couples desperately trying to conceive (while being ostracized by other trads) are quick to suppress a perceived judgmental attitude. I'm sure no "guilt-trip" was intended.
-
CathMomof7 said:
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.
You mean Catholics, I assume.
When I was obsessed with the idea that NFP was a heresy or near-heresy, I read lots about this subject. The birth rate began declining dramatically in France at the time of the Revolution or maybe before, the average family had something like 3 kids even then.
There's obviously something with Catholics though, or nominal Catholics. The birth rates in Catholic countries are lower than anywhere else, generally speaking. NFP is definitely a huge part of this, as well as artificial birth-control. Matthew is speaking of "trad" Vatican II Catholics though, who presumably would only use NFP in grave circuмstances. Maybe they have a very loose interpretation of grave circuмstances, or perhaps he just knows lots of infertile Vatican II trads.
The site will be glad to hear that the birth rate in -- guess where? -- France has gone shooting up recently.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/16/AR2007011600720_pf.html
The grand total is 2 children per woman, which believe it or not, puts France at or near the top of all countries in the EU when it comes to the birthrate!
The army of the Monarch is growing ( like Tele, I have my obsessions ). Yesterday I read a French newspaper article about the quasi-Catholic new Constitution in Hungary, and the comment section was full of people calling for a return to Catholicism in France and saying that they've had enough of multiculturalism and political correctness... I love to monitor France, you can see the people slowly waking up. One day they will explode, mark my words.
-
The site will be glad to hear that the birth rate in -- guess where? -- France has gone shooting up recently.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/16/AR2007011600720_pf.html
The grand total is 2 children per woman, which believe it or not, puts France at or near the top of all countries in the EU when it comes to the birthrate!
Unfortunately that rise in the birthrate can be attributed almost entirely to the French having the largest Muslim population in Europe.
-
I can think of two friends, traditional Catholics - one has only one child and the other has four children. Neither one was blessed with more. They do not practice birth control or NFP. God chose that number for them. Both of them were very upset for a long time that no more children came along. But now, both of them seem to have come to terms with it (and are beyond child-bearing age).
-
Another thing may be diet. Soy is in so much food today, and it can wreak havoc on a woman's hormones. There are more additive type of things but that one comes to mind. Population control via the food chain...
-
Ok, so we're talking about Baby Boomers, the generation born between 1946 and 1964 and we're talking about both NO families and Traditional Catholic families, right? Well, of the Catholic families that I know in that generation, there are lots and lots of very big families, even more families that I would call fairly large, and then some families of the 3 to 5 kid range, so I'd say the families that I know are just all across the spectrum in terms of sizes.
I don't know many NO Catholics since I'm in a traditional Catholic parish. Our parish has lots of very big vans in the church parking lot. Some of those parents are baby boomers, but doing the math on the ages of baby boomers, there are more that are now either empty nesters and then the younger boomers are out of the pregnancy years. The youngest boomer would be 47 this year, and it's pretty rare for a woman of that age to have a baby, although I do know a handful over the years who did.
The older boomers that I know are now grandparents and those with big families that come to mind have lots and lots of grandkids. I remember talking to one of the grandpas and he didn't even know how many grandkids he had. He said he'd have to ask the wife. He said he also only knew the names of the first grandkids. The rest he calls by generic names like "kiddo" or "sweetie", or else he'll ask the mom or grandma. When they want to all get together they all go to a very big park or they rent a grange hall for reunions. Weddings are huge affairs.
Olive, are you talking about the GMO foods? I have heard or read that some of them can harm fertility. But GMO foods are a recent thing, so if they do hurt feritility it'll be the current generation of parents who are hurt and I am still seeing lots and lots of babies at church.
-
It is a planned parenthood myth that every act would end in a pregnancy if there are no birth control. Not everybody can reach a double-digit number of children whether or not they use contraceptives.
In an other forum there was a lady who said that she had just two kids and she was using no birth control natural or unnatural.
Some women get fertile only once in seven years. It is rare but happens.
-
It is a planned parenthood myth that every act would end in a pregnancy if there are no birth control. Not everybody can reach a double-digit number of children whether or not they use contraceptives.
In an other forum there was a lady who said that she had just two kids and she was using no birth control natural or unnatural.
Some women get fertile only once in seven years. It is rare but happens.
While this may be true- it seems that the marital act exercised in my marriage would bring about a child immediately everytime it seems... and in the last case twins! :laugh1: I thank God for them though and hope and pray to lead them all to heaven :pray:
-
Our parish has lots of very big vans in the church parking lot. Some of those parents are baby boomers, but doing the math on the ages of baby boomers, there are more that are now either empty nesters and then the younger boomers are out of the pregnancy years. The youngest boomer would be 47 this year
I think pretty much ALL Baby Boomers are well out of the childbearing years. My parents were right in the middle of the baby boom years you listed, and I'm in my mid-30's!
If you're seeing large vans in your church parking lot, they belong to thirty-somethings whose PARENTS were baby boomers.
I started a thread a few weeks ago about how we need to update our thinking on "what a 40 year old is", today in 2011. For example, some of us assume that a 40 year old remembers Richard Nixon, Vietnam, Elvis, etc. but actually a 40 year old would have had computers at his middle school (1982). He would have been dating in the LATE 80's or early 90's.
-
In my personal circle of friends that do not use ABC I have found family size on a bell curve. I have friends with 14-15 kids and I have friends with 0-2. Most families fall in the middle usually with an average of 6 I'd say.
I have a LOT of friends that have had 4+ miscarriages and almost all of them have had at least one. I am in the distinct minority that I have never had a loss. 9 pregnancies, 9 children. That is statistically pretty rare.
There is so much that must be 'just right' for a woman to get pregnant and carry and birth a healthy baby. Every baby is a real miracle.
The mother of a two well known SSPX priests had 15 second trimester losses. 15. She is an amazing woman and I call my self fortunate to know her.
P.S. My husband and my mother are both technically baby boomers although at the extreme ends of the range of years.
-
Our parish has lots of very big vans in the church parking lot. Some of those parents are baby boomers, but doing the math on the ages of baby boomers, there are more that are now either empty nesters and then the younger boomers are out of the pregnancy years. The youngest boomer would be 47 this year
I think pretty much ALL Baby Boomers are well out of the childbearing years. My parents were right in the middle of the baby boom years you listed, and I'm in my mid-30's!
If you're seeing large vans in your church parking lot, they belong to thirty-somethings whose PARENTS were baby boomers.
I started a thread a few weeks ago about how we need to update our thinking on "what a 40 year old is", today in 2011. For example, some of us assume that a 40 year old remembers Richard Nixon, Vietnam, Elvis, etc. but actually a 40 year old would have had computers at his middle school (1982). He would have been dating in the LATE 80's or early 90's.
Some of the youngest baby boomers at my church that come to mind (very late 40s or early 50s) still have big vans because even though their oldest kids can be starting families of their own, or at least college age, they still have plenty of school age kids. One couple with a big van comes to mind who still have 2 at home and at least 7 in school. They had their last baby 2 years ago when the mom was 45 or 46. We know a handful of traditional Catholic moms over the years who had babies in their late 40s, even 2 who had babies at age 50 and 1 at age 49. When the subject comes up, someone invariably wonders if they ate what we used to call a "health food diet". Back in the 70s those kinds of folks were considered a bit odd, but now I know more people who eat "health food" or at least keep sugar and junk food :ready-to-eat:out of the house, and take various nutritional supplements. But then maybe it's just normal for healthy moms to have babies into their mid 40s and the ones who don't are just not as healthy? :confused1:
Some of the baby boomers at our church who have big vans are beginning to downsize back to the minivans because their older kids have their own cars, and with the price of gas those big vans are a real drain on the budget. Even the older minivans now don't get good gas mileage, but it's not always an economical move to buy another car just to get better gas mileage. You have to do the math. Then, too, those young baby boomers might need those big vans if they have to babysit the grandkids and fit the car seats back into their vans.
The baby boomers are often in the "sandwich generation" but that's a topic in itself. :thinking:
-
I don't necessarily mean GMO foods. However, sugar started to creep more and more into diets, even with the BB. It started with them because the mothers were enticed to work out of the home while the food companies came up with convenience foods to encourage and offset the mother being away. Now, we have tons of convenience foods, loaded with all kinds of not-so-healthy things.
Sugar, though, can definitely cause problems with fertility. For anyone who has suffered from infertility, one of the first things that the RE will tell you is to cut sugar out of your diet as much as possible.
Also, for women, especially those from the BB generation, who had progesterone problems to maintain pregnancies, certain hormones were given to them. We now know that some of those hormone-cocktails, even though they helped maintain the pregnancy, caused problems for them later in life. In fact, if you are pregnant nowadays, one of the questions the doctor asks is whether your mother was on these prescriptions because they may cause you problems with your fertility and pregnancy.
Thus, I think the answer to BB Catholics having/not having oodles of children is not necessarily cut-and-dry.
-
I think this is interesting and thought I'd share this with regard to "what is normal?" for family size. This is from the opening pages of a book on the geneology of my family. The patriarch here was born in 1815. He actually had 11 children, but the two who died before marrying are not included on the chart. It's just one extended family, of course, but the smallest group was 7 children. (Incidentally, Bernhard is the guy who brought my family to Texas -- smart man! :cowboy:)
-
If you looked at a similar chart of my maternal grandparent's families you would rarely see more than 3-4 children. At this point you start wondering about genetics and such.
For example, my great-grandmother was only able to have 2 children. Two girls over four years apart. One of her daughters was never able to have children and the other had 3 over a 15 year period (a husband in the Pacific in WWII played a part in some of that).
We have a letter from my grandmother to her sister from early 1945. In it she talks about 'her little secret' (my mom) and not to tell their mom yet and maybe by the time she returned Marie would have 'a little secret' too. It is a sweet little snapshot of sisters sharing their love/desire of babies. Sadly, my great-aunt was never able to have a child despite seeing the specialists of the time etc....
-
I believe the smaller families are due to all the above factors. Miscarriages, high cost of living, getting married later, lower fertility, over use of NFP, some catholics unfortuanatly use birth control.
Im expecting #6 and that is alot of work but is their anything compared to life itself? So I keep going. I have read though as Catholics there are 3 major reasons to space your children and even then the option is abstence.
#1 Due to major health problems
#2 Due to emotional/physicology problems
#3 Due to major financial problems
Those are the only 3 I am aware of for keeping the families small if you are a person who is able to conceive and is of course married.
-
Hypothyroidism which leads to infertility caused by flouride in the water. In women for sure but maybe also in men.
and
Exposure to a chemical found in food packaging and other plastics, BPA, can reduce the quality of men's semen, according to the findings of a five-year study .....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39888170/m/videos/
also
In the package insert for Fluarix (polysorbate 80), GlaxoSmithKline specifically mentions that they cannot guarantee that their flu vaccine will not damage your fertility: "FLUARIX has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility." Thanks to foolishly passed laws by the U.S. government, you will not be able to sue anyone if it does leave you infertile.
http://organichealthadviser.com/archives/polysorbate-80-in-swine-flu-vaccines-infertility-in-humans
etcetera, etcetera, etcetera
-
A friend of mine with connections at St. Mary's says many families there are having tons of kids with no means of supporting them, creating real problems. Also says there is a problem with many kids rebelling. Any truth to this, anyone? Thanks.