ANSWERS: 4
-
I would not have that many kids because I don't have enough money to support that many - that would be the primary reason.
-
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/presence-oct06.html I hadn't seen this story, but there is a US senator with 17 or 18. I've also known an Amish family with seventeen and a Mennonite family with 17. As long as the kids are loved and well-raised, I'd rather see a loving family have seventeen than seventeen people who didn't want the responsibility each having one.
-
18? No way, I don't think I would put my body through that. Even if I had the money to support that many, you would never have enough time to do or be anything but a mommy. That is not a bad thing, I would just want more.
-
(http://www.canada.com/abbotsfordtimes/news/story.html?id=0dfc3c0c-da7b-46e3-9b13-c267ec025fef) You mean Canadian woman? She left Romania and is now Canadian. Canada's fertility rate is about 1.5 (http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2007/09/21/oh-baby-canada-s-fertility-rate-is-up.aspx). For any society to maintain its population it requires a fertility rate of 2.1. That's 2.1 offspring for every woman in that society. Any less and the population is in decline. Canada is in decline. Therefore Livia Ionce would be seen by some Canadians as doing the work other Canadian women have forsaken.
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

by 