Guestblog: Overpopulation and the Environment
I’ve just found out that one of my friends is pregnant. Wey hey, congratulations and all that.
But she is in fact pregnant with her ninth child. Which rather changes everyone’s view of the whole thing. After all, people who are interested in cloth nappies (as she is) are generally also quite strong environmentalists, but bringing 8+ children into the world is rather incompatible with that cause, I feel.
- Image by BOSSoNe0013 via Flickr
Environmentalists the world over can talk about cars, cow farts or any other thing causing environmental chaos, but every one of them umms and ahhs on the subject of overpopulation. No-one likes to tell people that having more than the replacement figure of two children is, frankly, irresponsible in the long run.
Incidentally, I apologise to any of you who have three or more children, but you probably know me well enough by now to know that I speak my mind. 
It’s nothing personal. I’m talking about looking at the figures rationally and objectively.
Anyway, talking of not liking to hurt people’s feelings, let’s get back to my pregnant friend. There is also another factor. Not only has she so far had eight children, but she has also had eight miscarriages. They had great difficulty in conceiving their eighth child, and wanted the doctors to investigate why.
Now, I have a problem with this. In a world of limited resources, especially in the NHS, were she and her husband right to push for this? I mean, there are plenty of women out there who have not managed to have one child, and I’m sure someone would have lost out on treatment or investigation because those resources were being utilised by my friend.
On the other hand, having eight miscarriages is indeed indicative of a problem, and I can understand her grievance – why should they not be entitled to the same degree of investigation as any other couple? And yet it does not feel morally right to me. Mind you, her wish to breed a football team also seems pretty nuts to me – we are clearly not on the same wavelength!
Personally, after my second child was born, I had my tubes tied, because I knew I didn’t want to risk having anther one. I always knew I was done at that stage.
In fact, my gynaecologist was very reluctant to do the surgery for me at 40, because, as a widow, he felt I might fall in love again and want to have a baby. Obviously, I think he’s bonkers in imagining that a woman might want to start again with the nappies at that age, but presumably women do. Some people even seem to think that having a baby together is a good way to cement a relationship, though I’d have to disagree on that one.
When I rejected that argument, he suggested I might like to leave my fertility options open, in case one of my children died … like you’d want another as though you were replacing a can of beans!
The easiest way to control fertility is for the man to have a vasectomy, of course, but I was single and wanted to take control of the situation for myself. Many couple friends in stable relationships do not want any more children, but it is pretty rare for the man to have the snip. They seem to think it is unmanly, a lot of the time.
So, as a society, as far as I can see, we don’t seem to be a very responsible or rational lot. Some of us have unprotected sex and fall pregnant, some of us use terminations as a form of birth control. And then we don’t like to close off our options, to take control of our fertility. Not that we want to have more children, but that we might at some point change our minds.
What about you? Do you think about your own fertility options when planning your family’s future? Do you think people should be limited when they get to a certain number, and if so which number is that?
And when hearing my friend’s story, did you assume they were living on benefits? Because if you did, you are very wide of the mark. They just live a very organised and frugal life, albeit in a rather large house.
Morag
NB When my boyfriend and I got together, I knew we had the same take on things regarding families, what with my tubes tied and his vasectomy! And no, I’ve never once regretted having the surgery.
About Sarah ArrowSarah Arrow is the managing editor of Birds on the Blog, in real life she is the communications director of a same day courier service. She is an enthusiastic UK based pro-blogger and co- author of the soon to be published Zero to Blogger
View all posts by Sarah Arrow →
31 Responses to Guestblog: Overpopulation and the Environment
All that jazz – All in A Day
Review of: Cousin Alice Jazz Music by Cousin Alice: Elaine Sturgess Reviewed by: Elaine Sturgess Rating: 5 On January 21, 2012 Last modified: January 30, 2012 Summary: What makes Alice so distinctive is her wonderfully smokey voice, a quality that furniture designer William Yeoward found so arresting at a concert she was performing for the [...]
I do agree with you, Morag – doesn’t matter how much a cow farts it isn’t going to have as much of an impact on the environment as a person – especially a person in the rich west. In fact, most of the cows are there for our convenience, of course – not that many of them wandering around wild in Sussex, anyway.
Is it something we should legislate about though. like the Chinese? I think that brings problems of its own, especially when you start to investigate what happens with the resulting gender imbalances.
Over population is a problem, and one would hope that those people who choose to have children would consider that. It’s their children’s future that is going to be affected after all.
I don’t have any children, it didn’t happen when I was young, and by the time I thought I might make an okay mother, I wasn’t well – and I didn’t want to inflict that on a child, having seen what it was like for my husband growing up with a mother with MS.
On the other hand I did grow up with friends from large families, and I always kind of envied them. They always seemed to have very warm and loving homes, and open house too.
Ann
Oh absolutely, Ann. Population control the Chinese way is a nightmare, especially because of the way they like to “discard” girl babies, to enable them to have a boy baby later.
Personally, and I know I’m going to sound really fascist here, but I think women should have a contraceptive implant when they get to two kids. And if they want to be picky about who the father is, they should learn to take procreation seriously.
Of course, the massive irony about cow farts is that we only have so many cows because we westerners have this obsession with drinking cow’s milk, and an awful lot of baby boy calves are killed on the way.
As with all things, every problem and every solution beings with it further problems, many of which were unexpected. I don’t imagine anyone thought the Chinese would practice genocide on their young when they brought in the one-child rule.
I do agree with you, Morag – doesn’t matter how much a cow farts it isn’t going to have as much of an impact on the environment as a person – especially a person in the rich west. In fact, most of the cows are there for our convenience, of course – not that many of them wandering around wild in Sussex, anyway.
Is it something we should legislate about though. like the Chinese? I think that brings problems of its own, especially when you start to investigate what happens with the resulting gender imbalances.
Over population is a problem, and one would hope that those people who choose to have children would consider that. It’s their children’s future that is going to be affected after all.
I don’t have any children, it didn’t happen when I was young, and by the time I thought I might make an okay mother, I wasn’t well – and I didn’t want to inflict that on a child, having seen what it was like for my husband growing up with a mother with MS.
On the other hand I did grow up with friends from large families, and I always kind of envied them. They always seemed to have very warm and loving homes, and open house too.
Ann
Oh absolutely, Ann. Population control the Chinese way is a nightmare, especially because of the way they like to “discard” girl babies, to enable them to have a boy baby later.
Personally, and I know I’m going to sound really fascist here, but I think women should have a contraceptive implant when they get to two kids. And if they want to be picky about who the father is, they should learn to take procreation seriously.
Of course, the massive irony about cow farts is that we only have so many cows because we westerners have this obsession with drinking cow’s milk, and an awful lot of baby boy calves are killed on the way.
As with all things, every problem and every solution beings with it further problems, many of which were unexpected. I don’t imagine anyone thought the Chinese would practice genocide on their young when they brought in the one-child rule.
Hands up I am guilty. 4 kids and would love more but both me and the missus chosen career paths mean that having number 5 would put a halt to that. We provide for our own without benefits and even without babysitters so no one is put out.
Of course years down the line when I am old and grey (starting already, so maybe just older) over population may be a more sightful problem however I am greedy. I was an only child with a single mother up until the age of 15 and even when my brother came along it was not through a conventional relationship where as my children have the complete family lifestyle and only last night was looking through a photo album of the kids wondering what they will think when they are older when looking at the photo’s. Will they remember certain events, laugh at what their brothers or sisters were doing to tickle them at the time. My pics which are but a distant memory thanks to my mother were just of me and to some extent I led a very lonely life as I was not close to my mum as I was and always have been the mistake.
It does also puzzle me as to why families who have children will then use valuable NHS resources as and when there is a problem whilst at the same time there are families who could not afford treatment who are childless but then we all pay in so to put a clamp on who can and can’t be helped would be extremely hard to implement although the NHS postcode lottery seems to have no problem so who knows.
Would it stop me having more children? No. 7 means I can field a 5-a-side team with two rolling subs. Seriously though I would have more even though the over-population arguement could be valid but then life expectancy is on the rise so we are entering a period when the elderly will live and extra 10-15 years which brings problems with regards caring for them as increased life expectancy does not mean they will be fully fit for those extra years.
I often wonder, Shamus, whether people who have large families tend to be only children, who are somehow making up for their own lack of childhood family. I think China must be a fairly sorry place in some ways, as they are now well into the cycle of children having no cousins, aunts or uncles, let alone siblings.
Hands up I am guilty. 4 kids and would love more but both me and the missus chosen career paths mean that having number 5 would put a halt to that. We provide for our own without benefits and even without babysitters so no one is put out.
Of course years down the line when I am old and grey (starting already, so maybe just older) over population may be a more sightful problem however I am greedy. I was an only child with a single mother up until the age of 15 and even when my brother came along it was not through a conventional relationship where as my children have the complete family lifestyle and only last night was looking through a photo album of the kids wondering what they will think when they are older when looking at the photo’s. Will they remember certain events, laugh at what their brothers or sisters were doing to tickle them at the time. My pics which are but a distant memory thanks to my mother were just of me and to some extent I led a very lonely life as I was not close to my mum as I was and always have been the mistake.
It does also puzzle me as to why families who have children will then use valuable NHS resources as and when there is a problem whilst at the same time there are families who could not afford treatment who are childless but then we all pay in so to put a clamp on who can and can’t be helped would be extremely hard to implement although the NHS postcode lottery seems to have no problem so who knows.
Would it stop me having more children? No. 7 means I can field a 5-a-side team with two rolling subs. Seriously though I would have more even though the over-population arguement could be valid but then life expectancy is on the rise so we are entering a period when the elderly will live and extra 10-15 years which brings problems with regards caring for them as increased life expectancy does not mean they will be fully fit for those extra years.
I often wonder, Shamus, whether people who have large families tend to be only children, who are somehow making up for their own lack of childhood family. I think China must be a fairly sorry place in some ways, as they are now well into the cycle of children having no cousins, aunts or uncles, let alone siblings.
You raise an interesting point Morag, resources are scarce the world over and I am afraid the reality of the situation is an increased population will over stretch these.
In some parts of Africa families are still very large indeed this is sometime due to child mortality rates( have as many as possible as some will not survive) but some are catching on and realising having huge families costs a lot of money so they are restricting themselves to 3.
I only have the one and I think that is my lot!
Twitter: ethnicsupplies
I completely understand why large childhood mortality rates, and the economic advantage of working children, affect a family’s size.
There are also times when I think I’d be a pretty good mother with only one child, whereas I’m a rubbish one for two! Good for you at sticking to one, regardless of environment issues!
You raise an interesting point Morag, resources are scarce the world over and I am afraid the reality of the situation is an increased population will over stretch these.
In some parts of Africa families are still very large indeed this is sometime due to child mortality rates( have as many as possible as some will not survive) but some are catching on and realising having huge families costs a lot of money so they are restricting themselves to 3.
I only have the one and I think that is my lot!
Twitter: ethnicsupplies
I completely understand why large childhood mortality rates, and the economic advantage of working children, affect a family’s size.
There are also times when I think I’d be a pretty good mother with only one child, whereas I’m a rubbish one for two! Good for you at sticking to one, regardless of environment issues!
The biggest obstacle we face in changing attitudes toward overpopulation is economists. Since the field of economics was branded “the dismal science” after Malthus’ theory, economists have been adamant that they would never again consider the subject of overpopulation and continue to insist that man is ingenious enough to overcome any obstacle to further growth. Even worse, economists insist that population growth is vital to economic growth. This is why world leaders continue to ignore population growth in the face of mounting challenges like peak oil, global warming and a whole host of other environmental and resource issues.
But because they are blind to population growth, there’s one obstacle they haven’t considered: the finiteness of space available on earth. The very act of using space more efficiently creates a problem for which there is no solution: it inevitably begins to drive down per capita consumption and, consequently, per capita employment, leading to rising unemployment and poverty.
If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit my web site at http://PeteMurphy.wordpress.com.
Pete Murphy
Author, “Five Short Blasts”
Thank you, Pete. I shall pop over there shortly.
As you say, land is in limited supply, and once we’re overpopulated, we’re going to be tipping over to poverty once more.
The biggest obstacle we face in changing attitudes toward overpopulation is economists. Since the field of economics was branded “the dismal science” after Malthus’ theory, economists have been adamant that they would never again consider the subject of overpopulation and continue to insist that man is ingenious enough to overcome any obstacle to further growth. Even worse, economists insist that population growth is vital to economic growth. This is why world leaders continue to ignore population growth in the face of mounting challenges like peak oil, global warming and a whole host of other environmental and resource issues.
But because they are blind to population growth, there’s one obstacle they haven’t considered: the finiteness of space available on earth. The very act of using space more efficiently creates a problem for which there is no solution: it inevitably begins to drive down per capita consumption and, consequently, per capita employment, leading to rising unemployment and poverty.
If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit my web site at http://PeteMurphy.wordpress.com.
Pete Murphy
Author, “Five Short Blasts”
Thank you, Pete. I shall pop over there shortly.
As you say, land is in limited supply, and once we’re overpopulated, we’re going to be tipping over to poverty once more.
I’m pretty much in agreement that folks should in general take a more responsible attitude towards the number of children they have. It isn’t just a case of whether they are a burden on the State because there are benefits involved, there are wider considerations on the environment and an even greater burden on scarce resources in general.
I suppose there are a whole range of reasons for having larger families – carelessness being one of them – but also tradition, strong sense of family and so on – but one that seems to crop up quite regularly is the need for a girl or boy – I wonder how many couples carry on having children just because they haven’t yet had one of the opposite sex – you know, I’ve got three girls but I’ll give it another go because I really want a boy? I’d guess that adds quite significantly to our population.
Pete offers a fascinating insight into the attitudes of economists above – and then there is also the issue of the pro-life campaigners which adds to it being a pretty hot political potato too.
I have three girls, I would love a boy just to knock my three off their pedestals!
Boys are rare in my family, they marry in rather than are born into it. The last boy born was 23 years ago and we have had 17 girls since then! I think it’s a hormone thing.
As to how many kids I would have liked, I would have liked none. But in having three I have learned to share more, to be a little less intense, to have my privacy invaded and to be forced out of the house at least three times a day for the school run! I didn’t choose it but I wouldn’t swap it, my girls are so precious and bring so much joy – life would be dull without them!
Hmmm, so at the risk of being controversial – does that contribute to a case for gender manipulation? Ooooh shoot me down!
On the how many kids, I have none, but would have liked two. But that’s another story. It’s lovely to read of how precious your girls are to you:)
Elaine, I would sprog another in a heartbeat if it was a boy
. If it turned into a her I’d love it any less, but given the choice of another child and knowing it would be a she, I would decline (no, I have not seen any of the gorgeous little girls recently born to change my mind 
).
In Spain you can have IVF and choose the gender, and that is an option that we considered but ruled out when we realised what would happen to the remaining embryos.
A number of my team at The Nappy Lady kept having children until they got the sex they wanted, and I have read that this approach (which I consider to be pretty short termist, to be honest, given the long term investment that kids are). Interestingly, Nappy Ladies tend to have boys rather than girls, and we have discussed this at some length.
I read somewhere that it is indeed a hormone issue, and the more dominant the woman is (more testosterone?), the more likely she is to have boys. I have two boys, and I’d certainly agree that all the Nappy Ladies who have just boys are pretty dominant.
So maybe you’re just a wilting mumsy wallflower, Sarah?
I’m pretty much in agreement that folks should in general take a more responsible attitude towards the number of children they have. It isn’t just a case of whether they are a burden on the State because there are benefits involved, there are wider considerations on the environment and an even greater burden on scarce resources in general.
I suppose there are a whole range of reasons for having larger families – carelessness being one of them – but also tradition, strong sense of family and so on – but one that seems to crop up quite regularly is the need for a girl or boy – I wonder how many couples carry on having children just because they haven’t yet had one of the opposite sex – you know, I’ve got three girls but I’ll give it another go because I really want a boy? I’d guess that adds quite significantly to our population.
Pete offers a fascinating insight into the attitudes of economists above – and then there is also the issue of the pro-life campaigners which adds to it being a pretty hot political potato too.
I have three girls, I would love a boy just to knock my three off their pedestals!
Boys are rare in my family, they marry in rather than are born into it. The last boy born was 23 years ago and we have had 17 girls since then! I think it’s a hormone thing.
As to how many kids I would have liked, I would have liked none. But in having three I have learned to share more, to be a little less intense, to have my privacy invaded and to be forced out of the house at least three times a day for the school run! I didn’t choose it but I wouldn’t swap it, my girls are so precious and bring so much joy – life would be dull without them!
Hmmm, so at the risk of being controversial – does that contribute to a case for gender manipulation? Ooooh shoot me down!
On the how many kids, I have none, but would have liked two. But that’s another story. It’s lovely to read of how precious your girls are to you:)
Elaine, I would sprog another in a heartbeat if it was a boy
. If it turned into a her I’d love it any less, but given the choice of another child and knowing it would be a she, I would decline (no, I have not seen any of the gorgeous little girls recently born to change my mind 
).
In Spain you can have IVF and choose the gender, and that is an option that we considered but ruled out when we realised what would happen to the remaining embryos.
A number of my team at The Nappy Lady kept having children until they got the sex they wanted, and I have read that this approach (which I consider to be pretty short termist, to be honest, given the long term investment that kids are). Interestingly, Nappy Ladies tend to have boys rather than girls, and we have discussed this at some length.
I read somewhere that it is indeed a hormone issue, and the more dominant the woman is (more testosterone?), the more likely she is to have boys. I have two boys, and I’d certainly agree that all the Nappy Ladies who have just boys are pretty dominant.
So maybe you’re just a wilting mumsy wallflower, Sarah?
Being an only child I was always adamant that I would not wish that on any child of mine, if it was possible not to. However I did decide to stop after two children and was lucky that my husband was willing to have ‘the snip’ to ensure two stayed our limit. However, in an act of impecable timing, my husband also remarked part way through my second pregnancy that it would have been more responsible to stop at one child…
Yes, but Aaron has always been responsible! He’s the only person I know who tracks all the household utilities on a self-designed computer program, both actual and ideal (ideal being based on only 2 adults, since you two adults are supposed to absorb extra resources taken up by your children)!
Being an only child I was always adamant that I would not wish that on any child of mine, if it was possible not to. However I did decide to stop after two children and was lucky that my husband was willing to have ‘the snip’ to ensure two stayed our limit. However, in an act of impecable timing, my husband also remarked part way through my second pregnancy that it would have been more responsible to stop at one child…
Yes, but Aaron has always been responsible! He’s the only person I know who tracks all the household utilities on a self-designed computer program, both actual and ideal (ideal being based on only 2 adults, since you two adults are supposed to absorb extra resources taken up by your children)!
And I thought you were going to tackle the over population of the planet
which is going to affect us soon. At some point in the future, the not too distant future, there will actually be too many human beings on the planet. Whilst, in my opinion, you must be nuts to have 8 kids, there is a much wider implication here, can the planet we live on actually support many more human beings, after all at some point the food is not going to go round any more.