katie allison granju

wow. again? wow.

I am not fascinated and find it, actually, repulsive in a weird way… little bit freaky…

I find it creepy.
It sounds like a group home instead of a family.

I hope they don’t give too many people ideas–our world would be even more insanely overpopulated.

Except that it is the older children that spend much of their time taking care of the younger children which does not seem all that fair. I know two women in their 50’s who had 10+ brothers and sisters and both are childless by choice because they feel they spent their pre-teen and teen years being a mom. I believe she just likes the attention now more than anything. Plus the impact on the planet. I think she said they have used about 90,000 disposable diapers so far! I’m sure she will have another, too.

How come no one is ever willing to discuss the environmental/economic impact of large families? Why is this verboten? I’ve noticed on the Internets if I bring it up and try to get a respectful, but thoughtful and educated dialog going, well, that I pretty much get ignored. So that kind of dialog is impossible. Once, I got feedback, but that person assumed that I was talking about eugenics and dismissed me.

When in fact, I want to talk about how 9 billion and exploding really can’t be sustained by Mother Earth. I’m not just talking about oil or energy, I’m very concerned about clean air and water (you know, we actually need this for our species to live ) and then god forbid, wild places and … gasp … space.

The carbon footprint left by the Duggars is enormous. What they consume in terms of resources, regardless of how economical or thrifty they are, is staggering. Imagine what their garbage bins look like. Imagine how much plastic “stuff” they have to consume to keep the group going. Imagine their water and electric bill.

Imagine all the Duggar children growing up and starting families (exponential population growth, not just simple addition) and buying more stuff and driving cars. Electronics, plastics, toys, knicknacks, and things made in third world countries That ultimately wind up in our landfills. And they don’t biodegrade. And they poison our air and water.

And what about food and sustainable agriculture? What about food for the world?

I just wish those who are determined to large families (and I’m not going to get into any definition or debate here on what that is) would consider the impact to the planet and not just their own reproductive desires and hormonal surges and Walton-esque ideal.

Yes, babies are cute. Children are adorable. Siblings playing together is sweet. Families are comforting.

But 18. Really? If we lose more native species, if our air becomes even more unfit to breath, if our water becomes even more unfit to drink, if wars continue to be about resources like food, is all this worth a large family for the moment (cause you know we die and stuff)?

Would love to get some respectful, thoughtful opinions, educated responses on this.

You don’t want to be like the Duggars. The only difference between them and some other cult is that they have so-called media respectability.

It seems to me that your home runs just fine the way it is. How else could a baby get so happy and chubby, otherwise?

Happy Mothers’ Day

LL

Reply to Luster,

You imply that I lumped Katie in with the Duggars. While I do think Katie has a good-sized family, I cannot compare it with a family that is more than four times bigger.

I guess what I’m hoping for is some reassurance that the Duggars’ reproductive excess (there I said it) isn’t a model to copy or a way of living that should be idealized. Also, for those with “good-sized” families out there, do you consider the environmental/economic aspects of your choices prior to? If so, what did you come up with?

Last, the Duggars are fascinating to me too, but in the same vein as Mormon polygamists who marry off teens. I just don’t get it. I understand the concept of everyone is different and unique, but the Duggars are not in the spectrum of what most people do. And in my somewhat educated opinion, their choice has impact on me, you, this country, the world. I wonder, do they ever think about it in terms of resources? I can promise you they think they are putting more good Christian people into the world, but do they ever think about population size and sustainability? I’m guessing no. Or if they do, I’m guessing the answer is–God will take care of it. In my opinion, that’s as irresponsible as it gets.

I’m thinking Micaela, that no one wants to justify their choices to you. Your opinion is already set in stone. Sometimes people (as luster said) make different choices than you. You may see them as uninformed or irresponsible, but they’re making their choices based on what they think is important just like you are.

So how many is too many? When does my larger-than-yours family become “overbreeding?”

Blanket training is pretty messed up.
As a Catholic I have no problem with larger families, but, God gave us a whole system of pregnancy and breastfeeding that works well most of the time. Many “quiverfull” people take the procreating part very seriously, but they don’t do child led weaning or attachment parenting –which could delay their fertility & allow their babies to really be babies.

If you look at older family trees,when breastfeeding and cosleeping was the norm, kids would be spaced 2-3 years apart, which is healthier for everyone-especially the mom.

Katie,

I cannot completely answer your question (how many qualifies as overbreeding, a term I did not use by the way), because it’s partly a matter of opinion, it’s subjective.

There is another factor, however. In terms of sustainability (you know, leaving a decent planet for your great grandchildren to live on and a global community that isn’t fighting for resources), I know for a fact that EXPONENTIAL population growth is not going to work. Period. That’s scientific, that’s statistics, that’s math. So, in terms of replacing you and your spouse, and one left over due in case of disease/accident, etc., the way to limit growth to simple addition (instead of exponential math) is to limit it to 3.

[Note aside, God forbid we actually have a dialog about zero population growth ... that's another topic. I can hear all the disagreers now "but then we'd have no people!" which is not true. Or that's nihilistic! --Depends on where you are coming from. ]

So keeping it to simple additional growth, you know, 9 billion today, 9.5 billion tomorrow, and continued growth of homo sapiens sapiens would average out about three kids per person. As an aggregate, we as a species are not doing that. We are growing at a pace that can’t be sustained, regardless of your political, social, religious beliefs. The planet isn’t going to grow any bigger, clean air and water aren’t going to be created from nothing, and the amount of arable land isn’t going to expand.

But, and this is a big but, I know real-world family size decisions aren’t made that way. I certainly don’t make mine based on that math.

What I wish is that more reproductively active men and women (and really, men are critical participants) would consider the environmental/social impact of their choices. When we reproduce (myself included, I’ve got a child and I’m of childbearing age), it has long-lasting consequences in a world with finite resources. I believe in infinite love and grace and beauty and kindness, but it’s tempered by the fact that there is a very fixed amount of air, clean water, land and food. Man doesn’t live on good intentions and kindness alone.

No matter how much your children recycle, those children (including mine) consume more energy and resources than they are able to return to the earth. Seven children in public housing in an inner city is better than 1.2 children in a large house in the ‘burbs, but those seven children are still going to leave a big carbon footprint.

I want everyone’s great and great, great and great, great, great grandchildren (or relatives and friends, if you don’t have children) to have enough room and space and resources. I believe that my reproductive decisions, like a pebble in a pond, has an impact on existing and future humanity. I your children and mine to have enough clean air, water and food (and wild places) to enjoy their humanity. I want your great, great, great, great granddaughter to be able to be marine biologist if she choses, because there is still marine life to learn about. I want your great, great, great, great grandson not to be drafted into a war over fresh drinking water.

I don’t believe God or Jesus is going to come and wipe the slate clean, so to speak.

Sarah, I’m not asking anyone to justify their choices to me. What I’m looking for, is that in the face of excess (as in the Duggars), that there are thoughtful families out there that do consider other people than their family unit, and do consider long-term consequences. I want to know that people are educating themselves about the planet, this home that really doesn’t belong to any of us.

And I disagree with the commenter about the influence of the Duggars–one of my neighbors recently said to me that if she could only have triplets next (she has twins and a single) that she could get on T.V. and people would feel sorry for her and then she could write her own ticket. Also, statistically, wealthy Americans are having more babies–the 2.2 average is rising. So I think the media attention the folks like the Duggars get do influence public opinion and trends.

I’m just saying that there are probably extra large families who have considered the long term enviromental consquences and just come up with a totally different conclusion than you.

Dewi, there are probably a ton of people out there who think someone being gay or someone having an abortion does have an impact on them. There is a parent of one of the Columbine victims who believes that the legalization of abortion caused people to disrespect the value of life so much it led these kids to think it’s ok to kill people. Yeah, seems like faulty logic, but people like this would definately curb your right to an abortion because in their mind your choice impacts them.
I actually find the Duggars kinda creepy, but I really have no clue about how they raise their kids. And I really don’t know if having an extra large family is hard on kids. Have there been any studies about how kids from families of 10 or more fare compared to smaller families?