The optimal number of children in the family. How many children should there be in a family? A family without children - what is the reason for the decision of modern couples not to have children

05.03.2020

If we pay attention to the past, the picture is as follows: before, there were not just more large families. There were many of them. Of course, first of all, there were many children in peasant families: work on the land always required a lot of hands. In addition, other factors influenced the number of children in families, but we are not talking about them now.

Over the past few decades, the issues of fertility and large families have been raised and discussed more than once. Sociological polls were also conducted to find out the reasons for the decrease in the number of large families and, in general, the views of parents on how many children in the family are correct.

Here are some of the results of sociological research on this issue. The study was attended by women between the ages of 26 and 40:

67.3% of women believe that two children are the best option
15.4% want three children
8.9% believe that it is enough to give birth to one child
5.7% of respondents do not want to have children at all
2.7% were in favor of four or more children.

Modern realities

In addition to the desire or unwillingness to have many children, socio-economic factors play a significant role today, without which family planning today is simply impossible.

All the same polls and studies provide the following information about the reasons why many families have difficulties with having children. The leading positions are occupied by the notorious housing issue, the size of wages and, accordingly, uncertainty about the future. A very large percentage are health and healthcare problems.

Employment problems after childbirth or career priority are also on the list of reasons why many families today limit themselves to one child. The participants in the already mentioned study spoke about the reasons for this decision as follows:

51.8% believe that the appearance of another child would significantly reduce the standard of living of the family
43.9% say it would add a lot of worries
34.7% cite difficulties with preschool institutions
20% talk about their health status or refer to the housing issue

However, in addition to purely material reasons, considerations of a different order often affect the number of children in a family. Many women who have gone through difficult childbirth, faced with the negative attitude of medical workers, having experienced postpartum depression, are simply not psychologically ready to repeat such an experience and decide not to give birth again.

In addition, there are other reasons: it is easier to pay attention to an only child, he will not be jealous of his parents for the younger or older. Some couples are not ready to "sacrifice" their free time and therefore decide to have even one child quite late.

One or two

Of course, each family decides on the number of children independently. But family psychologists believe that the best option is to have two children. Here are the reasons the experts give.

For an only child, the main social circle is made up of adults. And therefore, when he gets into a peer group, difficulties in socialization may arise. Difficulties in meeting and establishing initial contact, problems in games (inability to share toys, etc.).
Often the horizons of single children are broader than those of their peers with brothers and sisters. This is due to the fact that all the forces of parents are thrown into the development and upbringing of one child, and not several. Undoubtedly, a broad outlook is a plus. But often such children get the nickname "the good-for-nothing", because they "show off" too much. This is not very conducive to the development of friendly relationships.
Quite often, the only child becomes a kind of hostage to parental dreams and hopes: he attends several circles and sections at once and generally tries in every possible way to meet parental requirements. In addition, excessive guardianship cannot be avoided. In families where two or more children are growing up, such difficulties arise much less often.

From this point of view, the results of one of the surveys conducted by Czech psychologists are of interest. 45% of couples rated the changes that took place in the family with the birth of their first child as positive. The changes associated with the appearance of a second baby are already assessed as positive by 70% of families.

But of those who dared to give birth to a third person, only 54% perceive the changes as positive. From all this, the following conclusion can be drawn: one child is not enough, and first of all for the child himself; three or more - difficulties are already arising here, primarily for parents. And two children in a family seems to be the best possible option.

The statistics in Taldom district for 2000 was as follows: about 220 large families with about 660 children. Thanks to simple calculations, I made an amazing discovery for myself: it turns out that a large family is a family with three children. This discovery did not immediately fit into my head. Still, the word "a lot" is not somehow associated with the number "three". "A lot" - well, that's at least five.

Of course, there are studies by linguists that prove that in primitive times, people believed this: one, two, many. They did not have the number "three", allegedly due to primitive thinking. One can partly agree with this: one mammoth is good, two are even better, and three mammoths are already a bit too much. Researchers of the Slavic language note that the concept of "many" was used by the Slavs and their ancestors, the Proto-Slavs, if there were five or more objects. This can be seen in the modern Russian language as well. We say: one child, two children, three children, four children, but already five (and more) children, that is, many children.

Even in pre-perestroika times, I once listened on the radio to a speech by a woman, a specialist in demographic issues. She explained that to keep the population at the same level, 60% of families need to have three children. And that's a little more: if the remaining 40% of families will have two children, then 100 families or 200 parents will have only 260 children, that is, population reproduction will be only 30%. In fact, not all the remaining families have two children, and in reality there will be only 230 children in the next generation, that is, an increase of only 15%, these 15% can hardly cover the lack of people. Some of the children will die before reaching adulthood, and some of the grown children will never create families. And thus in the next generation there will again only be 200 parents, or 100 families.

With this formulation of the question, it turns out that the majority of families (60%) should be large in modern terminology. Agree that it is illogical to call a family large, when more than half of all families should be such. Therefore, I would like you to know that 1-2 children are still a small family, 3-4 children are a normal family, and 5 or more children are a real large family. Unfortunately, now relatives and friends look at young parents who want to have a third child, at best, with a condescending smile, but rather they will twist their fingers at their temples: "They cannot feed two, but they still have a third."

Arguments in defense of large families

Now there are fewer and fewer large families. Almost no one wants to have many children now. Often the next child is unwanted, accidental. Protected, but something did not help. Thank God, they decided to give birth, and imperceptibly became a little happier, because the Lord adds happiness to the parents for each child. Having little children is one of the forms of selfishness. And it is difficult for a selfish person to be happy.

Selfishness

Selfishness should be understood as a special perception of the world, when a person evaluates everything that happens from the point of view of his personal interests.

If there is only one child in the family, then this situation is very conducive to the emergence of selfishness in the child. A child in a one-child family sees the manifestation of only one will - his own, only one desires - his own. Of course, the will of the parents is also present in a one-child family. But the desire of the parents for the child is far from the same as the desire of his brother or sister. Parents have power and indisputable authority, so they can achieve the fulfillment of their will by force. The child is forced to comply with the will of his parents. But taking into account the wishes of your brothers and sisters in your actions is already a voluntary matter. And if there is at least one more child in the family, then a lot of work can begin in the soul of a little person - each step can be measured against the interests of another person. But this work may, of course, not start - it all depends on the parents. But the more children there are, the easier it will be for parents to help their child overcome their selfishness.

Now you can often hear such words: I can provide a happy childhood (decent education, etc.) to only one (two) child. It sounds, if not convincing, then it seems logical. But the logic of life is different. If the child is alone, then they often want to make a prodigy out of her, if not a big one, then at least a little prodigy who could sing and dance, play the piano and guitar, know how to hold hands, understand law, management and marketing ( I still don't know the exact meaning of these creepy words). And the goal of the parents is to bring the child to life. "We may have one child, but he will not be an ordinary person." The desires of the parents, naturally, are passed on to the child, he absorbs them with all his soul and begins to sincerely live with the belief that he is definitely a special person. The interests of the child begin to play too large a role, and the child gets used to the fact that his interests are always put at the forefront. And this is, by definition, the upbringing of selfishness in a child.

Endurance

It's easier with the third

Many do not dare to give birth to more children, recalling with horror sleepless nights, dirty diapers, illnesses, visits to doctors, etc. Indeed, every child requires a lot of energy. But, as a rule, the second child is easier than the first, and the third is much easier than the second. On the first child, almost everything is filled with bumps. Only those who do nothing do not make mistakes. On the second child, mistakes are already beginning to be corrected, and starting with the third child, the woman becomes a "professional" mother.

How many mistakes can you make with your first child? The simplest example from my own life. The first child is born, everyone goes on tiptoe at home, all guests are strictly warned: "Shh, the child is asleep, speak in a whisper." Indeed, how can you speak loudly in front of a child, if even a passing truck can wake him up? A year and a half later, the second child is born, history is almost repeating itself, although it is already more difficult to create silence. Finally, a third, real "large" child is born. Silence is out of the question, since two loudly noisy motors are constantly running around the house. Parents are already relieved of the need to create perfect silence, and the newborn, in turn, no longer flinches at every noise and wakes up only if someone crashes into the stroller at full speed on a tricycle.

Free time (ponytail)

Every child needs attention. He is like a sponge that absorbs everything, he cannot live without communication. While the child is alone, the parents are the only source of communication for him. The child, like a tail, runs after them, or, if he still does not know how to run, he often asks for pens or wants to be at least next to them. You literally can't get away from the child, he will quickly notice the departure of his parents. But when there are already two ponytails, then they can be attached to each other. When our second child (daughter) turned a little over one and a half years old, she was already old enough to play with the eldest. We sighed at this time. Now they rushed not after us, but after each other. We only had to periodically sort out conflicts between children, reconciling them, teaching them to yield to each other and share everything among ourselves.

And the third child could be placed close to the elders already at six months, and he could watch their game with enthusiasm for at least half an hour. Was it conceivable that we would leave the older child alone for at least ten minutes when he was six months old?

Of course, worries with three children are increasing, but older children, even at four years old, can be helpers at least in playing with the younger ones, freeing you.

Loss of control

If there is only one child in the family, then the chance that the parents will lose control over their child is very high. Although, it would seem, keeping track of one child is easier than five.

We buy clothes for our children in the store. The saleswoman looks at our children with envy and says: “How easy it is for you with your children, they probably play with each other a lot. And we have one. He alone is bored, and we cannot constantly deal with him. But nothing - now we will send to kindergarten, it will be easier there ”.

A child with his enormous energy and imagination, of course, lacks one communication with his parents, he requires communication with his own kind. But it is one thing if he communicates a lot with brothers and sisters with whom he receives the same upbringing, and it is quite another thing if he spends most of his time among friends who are far from your ideas about morality and your principles of life. By the age of 14-15, when a child becomes an adult, parents realize with horror that their son or daughter is becoming a completely stranger to them. "Where does it come from in him?" - parents will be surprised. And the whole point is that the child spent most of the time outside the family and formed his character somewhere on the side.

The role of the elder

The first child is often spoiled. Getting rid of whims is not easy. But there are conditions that contribute to the fight against whims.

Here is one real life illustration of this. Due to our inexperience, our oldest child was very sick at the age of one to two. This further contributed to the child growing up spoiled. Once we bought a big watermelon, brought it home and went about our business. The eldest child, who was then three and a half years old, followed us for half an hour and whined: "Dad, when will we eat the watermelon?" He knows from experience that if you whine for a long time or even cry, you will soon achieve your goal. Finally, after waiting a while, I agree. But when I came to the kitchen with my son, I see that it is completely untidy there. "Wait, we will clean up now, then there will be a watermelon." The child begins to whine and pester with a vengeance. A daughter, who is not yet two years old, appears in the kitchen: “Dad, Albus,” she starts her demands. “It’s going to start now,” I think with horror * But the eldest son suddenly comes to the rescue: “Well, Ulyana, can't you see that dad is cleaning up? Now she will clean up, and there will be a watermelon. " I continue to clean up and watch with amazement how the eldest son from a capricious and aching child in one second turned into an older brother who, for the next ten minutes, importantly persuaded his sister to wait a little longer.

How to deal with them?

I talked to two priests with many children and asked how they were coping. One of the answers was: “After five children, you no longer notice how many there are. In terms of difficulties, you no longer notice that you have become one more ”. This was spoken by the priest who had seven. When the fifth child appears, the oldest is usually about 10 years old. This is already a full-fledged assistant. By the sixth child, the second full-fledged assistant is growing up, etc.

Once guests came to us and stayed with us for several days. And my mother and I noticed that we have to pay a little more attention to discipline. With three small children (two of ours and one small guest), we had to change the order of food. When Gregory (the eldest child) was alone, naturally, we satisfied his whims. He doesn’t want to eat now, he’ll eat later. With two, history repeated itself. As a result, you feed one, after half an hour the other, an hour later the first one is hungry again. This is not very convenient anymore, but we still coped with two. When three children gathered, we realized that we were no longer able to feed each one separately. Then we began to put all the children at the table at once, and as soon as someone tried to show their character, they immediately flew out from the table or got hard on a soft spot. Feeding three children soon became much less time consuming than two. Here we remembered the stories of old people about their childhood. Everyone is sitting at the table, no one makes a sound. The father eats first, then everyone else. For laughing and talking, you will immediately get a spoon on the forehead, so much so that the crackle is heard. In the old days, a child grew up in a completely different environment, where there was no room for any liberties. When the child is alone, it is easier for mom to wash, wash and sweep herself. What kind of child will grow up with this is clear. But when there are many children, the mother is forced to educate them to be industrious simply because she herself can no longer cope.

The conclusion is simple - a large environment forces parents to raise their children correctly, saving them from any kind of indulgence to them. And soon parents with many children will receive a whole brigade of assistants.

How to feed such a crowd?

This topic, apparently, should be devoted to a separate conversation. So far, one phrase can be answered as follows: if someone wants to have many children, he will have them, even if the family's income is not great. And if a person does not want to have children, then, even if he is rich, he says to himself: no, I cannot feed them. For some, a child is an extra mouth, but for others it is a source of joy.

The idea that we are not living well is a myth. Of course, we could live better, but we live well. I recall the stories of older people that they could buy sugar for the first time in the 50s, and meat - only in the 60s. And they lived and survived, and even stronger than our generation several times.

If you think about how we live and how we spend our savings, it becomes scary. A grandmother came to us from Krasnoyarsk. As soon as she arrived, we were half as likely to buy new clothes for children. Now all the sliders, tights were repaired, patched up and their service life increased two to three times. At first it was unusual for us to look at tights with huge patches, before we just threw them away without repair. It was even a shame at the beginning that our children were walking around like poor people. But then we got used to it and we don't see anything terrible or shameful in this.

Good quality clothes can last a very long time. Our youngest child still uses winter pants, in which five children have already grown up - two of my sister's children and our older three. That is, the youngest is already the sixth who wears them. Good-quality shoes can easily withstand three or four babies. True, at an older age there are no more than two children.

It is easy for parents to pamper one child. Sweets, cookies, ice cream, etc. All this ends with expensive medicines for allergies, dysbiosis, ulcers (in Taldom there have already been cases when children of 14-16 years old had an ulcer). On the other hand, I have before my eyes several large families with extremely modest incomes, where normal, healthy children grow up. The limited funds make them eat modestly, children do not see delicacies every day. As a result, it turns out that a liter of milk taken from a milkman for 10 rubles is much more useful than a bag bought in a store for 16 rubles. And meat or fish cooked with your own hands is many times more useful than sausage or crab sticks, in which the amount of real meat or fish is very small.

The same can be said for clothing. Does an adult urban person have a lot of things that are really worn out now? There are practically very few of them! Clothes, as a rule, change not because they have already fallen into disrepair, but because the fashion has changed, the style is already outdated. The slightest patch on a jacket or raincoat is simply unacceptable, otherwise you will look like a beggar or a bum.

What do I need in order to walk along the central village street? I think tarpaulin boots, work pants and a shirt with a couple of patches on the sleeves are enough. Quite a decent look. What will I need to wear to walk along the central city street? Everything that will be on me will cost two to three times more.

Therefore, in fact, we are still very far from real poverty or hunger. And all the talk about poverty is caused simply by the habit of a comfortable and carefree life, which, of course, will not exist with the birth of several children.

To have many children, you just have to make up your mind, you have to be ready to live for your children and forget about yourself. As long as you think only of yourself, a large family will seem like hell. And when all thoughts and desires are connected with their children, a large family will be the only condition for happiness.

Pension

Misconceptions about certain objects are often widespread among people. For example, almost everyone believes that we provide ourselves with the pension contributions that go to the Pension Fund. That is, we kind of earn, accumulate a pension for ourselves, as if saving our money in a bank, from where later, in due time, when we grow old, we will receive a pension.

Alas, alas, alas !!! Everything happens differently. The money we earn and transfer to the Pension Fund goes not to our future pensions, but to the pensions of our modern pensioners. They gave birth to us, raised us so that we, the next generation after them, would feed them. The next generation will feed us and reassure our old age.

So what of this? What changes from this? One generation or another, but they will feed, they will not go anywhere! We list, and they will be!

But not everything is so simple. According to the estimates of specialists in the demographic problem, if the birth rate remains the same, then by 2030 there will be two pensioners for one working person. Now the average birth rate is 1.17 per family instead of the required 2.2-2.3. In Europe - 1.7, they also degenerate, but not so quickly. Indeed, if there is an average of one child in a family, how many children will help their parents in old age? It is clear that one, the second has nowhere to come from. Two old men will sit on his neck, while for every worker there should be one elderly person. Contributions to the Pension Fund in 30 years should double.

Now they often give birth to one child, convincing themselves that this is the only way to provide him with a happy childhood. And what is being prepared for the dear child for his 30th birthday? Then the parents will just be preparing for retirement. They will prepare a good gift for their son or daughter - double the amount of pension contributions.

Every working generation feeds the elderly and children. Indeed, it is easier to feed one child or not have children at all. Today, mom and dad provide a happy childhood for one child (I'm not talking about the spoiledness of this child), and tomorrow (that is, after 30 years) this pampered happy child will take care of both of his parents?

Are there not many lonely old people now? And tomorrow there will be twice as many. If you have not given birth and raised two or three children, get ready for a nursing home, where there will be one nurse (or nurse) for ten to fifteen old people.

Why is the question of the possibility of euthanasia being actively discussed now, when a sick old man can be killed with his consent? Because someone prepares our minds and hearts for the right decision. Soon there will be many old people, and they want to teach us how to kill the weakest - the sick. Killing is also easier than caring for a sick old man. Everything is interconnected. First, we are taught the idea that only the desired children should be given birth. But in 30 years, these coveted children will be ready to kill their own (or strangers - it doesn't matter) sick old people, because they are unlikely to want to feed twice as many old people. It's scary, but these old people in 30 years will be us - those who refused to give birth to children.

Why is almost no one talking about this now?

The Church not only speaks, but outright cries out lately about what is happening to us. And outside the Church, there is, indeed, almost silence. The older generation will not live to see those terrible times. It honestly gave birth to us, the middle generation, and is confident that somehow we will feed them. The younger generation is still growing up and does not understand anything. And we, the middle generation, where are we looking, what are we thinking about? The sheer size of the entertainment industry turns a blind eye. We are not allowed to see and hear, and we do not want that.

But back to the question of retirement. It is sad that the size of the pension does not depend on the number of children even now. Two people receive the same salary, make the same transfers to the Pension Fund. But one brings up three children, and the other - none. The first spends less money on himself, spending it on children, and works twice as much at home. Raising children is the second and more important job. The whole society will benefit from this work, but each family carries this feat on its own initiative, receiving practically nothing from the state for this hard work. The second person, who does not have children, spends all the money on himself, has a lot of free time, generally lives happily ever after. And after that they will receive the same pension? With a clear conscience, I would double the pension of parents with many children, and at the same time it would be possible to answer their indignation to those with few children like this: "You have already wasted yours on yourself in your youth."

In different countries and in different eras, special taxes were introduced to support the birth rate. For example, in Soviet times there was a tax on bachelors "single and small-family citizens. What a pity that there is no such tax in modern Russia. The funds received from this tax could be used to support large families.

Even the Soviet state, introducing such a tax, understood that the more children, the more workers, the stronger the country. And modern man is more and more afraid of an extra mouth that will eat a piece of him. Before, when there were no funds, everything was simple and clear. Children are God's blessing. The fewer working hands in the family, the worse. "My children will rest my old age, let there be more of them!" If you do not give birth to children, the time will come, you will die, and there will be no one to bury.

The low birth rate will be bad for everyone in 30 years, except, perhaps, those rare families who were not afraid to be large. Their children will not leave their parents further in the most difficult circumstances.

Now children are often looked at as a punishment of fate. But the true punishment will befall us if we do not wake up from that spiritual dream that prevents us from seeing the simplest things.

Priest Ilia Shugaev
According to the brochure "Marriage, Family, Children" (Conversations with high school students)
Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow, 2004.

“Come also for the girl” - with these words the midwife handed the long-awaited first-born child in an elegant envelope to the happy husband. "Well, no, no more, I'm not here anymore" - I thought, one baby is enough.

This opinion was significantly "strengthened" with each subsequent day: sleepless nights, endless crying of children, lack of free minute ... almost a year and a half passed, and I began to think about the second child. But there are doubts: how many children do you need to be happy?

Download the checklist "Resolving children's conflicts the right way" and learn how to end arguments without aggression and physical force.

There is safety in numbers

Until recently, I was sure that even one baby is a completely worthy continuation of the family. The husband dreamed of his son so much, the task is completed. "When for the second?"- asked relatives and friends, when I had not yet retired from the first birth. "Never"- I thought. And it's not just postpartum depression and sleepless nights. A vivid example of "how to live one shouldn't" was learned even before pregnancy, the idea of increasing demography was too strongly promoted around, and it was too difficult for familiar large families to live. And the difficulties, above all, were financial.

If the child is the only one, then his chances of a decent future are much higher: his own room, the best toys, sections, travel, and then education. In addition, he will not have to share parental love and attention with anyone. As a rule, high hopes are pinned on such babies. We gave you to the best coach, we are waiting for only the first place in the competition! Studying at an expensive private school, try not to go on a budget! Alas, not every child is capable of becoming a professor or an Olympic champion, even if he is the only one in the family.

One child, all alone ... Even in the happiest family, an only child will sometimes feel lonely. He will undoubtedly have friends in kindergarten, and then at school. But fighting with his brother for candy, begging his parents for identical bicycles or banging pillows before bed - these joys will remain unknown to him. And, watching on the set for a couple of cute sisters who play with dolls, your daughter will probably ask: "Why don't I have a brother or sister?"

"Will we pull?"- such doubts are most often among parents who are thinking about their second baby. The question is, indeed, very important, one must understand that every child needs not only their own outfits and toys, but also education. And good sections, English courses or even just a private kindergarten are not cheap today. And you will also have to think about expanding the living space, especially if the children are of different sexes.

According to psychologists, parents feel much more free in large families, since the elders can look after the younger ones, play with them or feed them. In addition, in such families, children develop faster, adopting unfamiliar skills from each other.

Study the course "" (free to)

Three heroes

Have you noticed that in Russian folk tales, families often have exactly three children: three heroes, three girls-sisters under the window? Is this a coincidence? I think not, because in Orthodox families today there are “seven in the shops”. The life of modern large families is not easy, although everywhere they only trumpet about the support of the birth rate.

“When the children were small, there were no problems with money, one was on breastfeeding, the other was taken to the nursery early, clothes and toys were inherited from the elders. But when the eldest went to school, the middle one had to be sent to a private kindergarten, and the maternity payments for the youngest were no longer, it became difficult. It is not so easy for a mother of three children to get a job, ”my friend, mother of three boys, Victoria, told me.

Despite the difficult times, the couple never regretted their decision to have three children. They just enjoy their little ones, and what children really need - the love and attention of their parents - they get in abundance.

"You will not be full of love"- you will say, and you will correctly notice. But it’s not about the whole family sitting without money and admiring “hungry” happiness. No, they try to overcome all difficulties as amicably as possible, dad takes on any job, mom sews custom-made children's clothes. In their house you will not find branded items or expensive equipment; there is no luxury foreign car in front of the entrance. But I don't want to leave this small cozy apartment at all: the laughter of happy children is heard, there is the aroma of homemade baked goods, and a shaggy dog curled up into a ball on the old carpet underfoot.

Go through (free to)

How many children do you need to be happy?

The answer to the question will directly depend on the feeling of your personal happiness. After all, for one mom it is really important to have all the best, from groceries to holidays in the Canary Islands. Another mother will cook a delicious lunch of vegetables from her own garden and will gladly patch up her leaky children's coat. What is the connection with the number of children? The connection is direct: the more children, the more money is needed. But this should not stop you if the true values for you are not in the financial solvency of the family, but in its mental balance.

Before deciding on a second or third child, you should honestly answer yourself the question - can you do it?

After all, finding an additional job with a lack of money is not so difficult, it is much more difficult to find a lot of love, patience, attention for every little person who will reappear in your family. Children are a huge work, they absorb "like sponges" not only knowledge, but all parental forces. But remember that when deciding on a second child, you will give the firstborn a best friend, with whom he will be inseparable in children's pranks, and then in adulthood.

And in which family will the child himself be happier? In the one where he will have a best friend who does not go home at nine in the evening, or in the one where all the parents' attention goes only to him?

Download the checklist "Resolving children's conflicts correctly"

Growing up children often quarrel over various little things, so parents should teach them how to properly resolve conflict situations. Download the checklist and learn how to end arguments without aggression and physical force.

Dear readers, today we will talk about how many children should be in a family. Probably, each of you has already formed your own opinion. And, perhaps, someone doubts his decision, ponders the question of whether children are needed at all for happiness.

Reasons for absence

The desire to build a career often becomes a hindrance to having children.

Here I want to talk not about cases when young couples want to have a baby, but they do not succeed due to health conditions or their incompatibility. Here we will talk about situations that are increasingly observed among young people. Why do young families refuse to continue offspring?

The categorical reluctance of one of the spouses to become a parent.
Lack of a personal apartment.
The desire to live for your own pleasure, which will be difficult to achieve when a child appears.
Lack of financial capacity. Young couples are afraid that they will not be able to provide for the future of their baby.
The desire to make a career, and not devote his life to the little one.
The complete absence of the natural instinct of motherhood.
Unfavorable situation in the environment or instability in the state.
Fear of becoming a parent associated with psychological trauma.

One child in the family

If you ask how many children to have in a family, then most often you will hear this answer - one child. What are the positive and negative aspects of such a decision?

the baby has a greater outlook compared to children in large families;
as a rule, a child growing up without a sister or brother has a more developed intellect;
all the time and attention, also the manifestation of the warm feelings of the parents, is directed to the only toddler;
the child grows up healthy and cheerful;
there is no jealousy on the part of brothers and sisters.

What are the cons?

Such children grow up spoiled and capricious.
The baby may have serious difficulties when getting into the children's team. The child is used to always being alone. In addition, everyone courted him and took care of him, and now he has to share with someone, and sometimes get punches.
The kid receives overprotection, which can lead to the formation of children's fears, and their consolidation. Often such children cannot become independent.

I have one son. It's good that I realized in time that my excessive care and anxiety for him is doing great harm. The child himself began to ask for more freedom, to be allowed to be independent.

Parents concentrate all their desires on a single baby to raise a person in their own image, to embody all unrealized dreams in him. Under such circumstances, parents put serious pressure on the growing body. And this often leads to the formation of psychological problems.
In a family with one baby, there is no sense of competition, which is so necessary in adulthood. Also, the child does not need to strive to achieve any goals. He gets everything anyway.
The only toddler in the family has every chance of growing up to be a selfish nature. He does not have to share his childhood with anyone, everything is done for his sake.

Today I understand that raising an only child in a family can really lead to the fact that you will grow up an egoist. If earlier my son grew up with his aunt, who is five years older, and then a cousin also appeared, then he did not feel lonely, he got used to sharing with everyone. After moving to a new city, where we have no relatives, all the attention, all the gifts and sweets began to get only to him. Now I begin to notice that he often thinks more of himself than of anyone else. I can imagine what would have happened to him if he had grown up in such conditions since his birth.

Two toddlers are not enough?

Not every parent decides to take such a crucial step as giving birth to another baby. For many, this is due to a fear of childbirth or memories of a difficult pregnancy, difficulties in upbringing. If you nevertheless decided to replenish the family, then you must take into account the age difference between your child and the unborn baby. The fact is that there are some features that are based precisely on this indicator.

The gap between children from one to two years:

such toddlers almost always become friends, play with toys together;
convenient to transfer clothes;
jealousy may not manifest itself strongly, because the older baby has not yet had time to realize his exclusivity;
the mother still remembers how to take care of a small child;
there is a risk that the body of women will not have time to fully recover and gain strength, so it will be difficult.

Age difference of four to six years:

the mother has time to fully recover after childbirth;
the firstborn has already outgrown the first age crisis, which is observed at the age of three;
the presence of an older child contributes to the accelerated general development of the younger;
the first toddler is already quite independent, can help babysit the second child;
situations of jealousy or hostility are not excluded.

Long gap between births. If the first child is already seven years old, but adolescence has not yet arrived, then the ideal time for the birth of a second baby.

The crisis of adolescence is still absent, which means that the elder will not shake his nerves.
The firstborn will not be so jealous, because he is already old enough, in the circle of his interests are not only parents, but also friends, classmates.
An older baby can become a good helper.
There is a risk that with strong neglect of an older child, you can get big psychological problems.

Even as a child, I decided that I would have only one baby. Perhaps growing up with my brother and sister had a big impact on my choice. I always wanted to be an only child. In addition, I saw how hard it is for my mother to raise us all. Today I already have a desire to give birth to a second baby. But I cannot say that fears of a different nature are not overcome, ranging from worries that I cannot cope, ending with anxiety about possible diseases and pathologies of intrauterine development.

From three children and more

If you are wondering whether a large family is how many children, then the answer is as follows: after the birth of a third child, you can talk about such a status.

Large families are very rare today. This is largely due to the lack of financial capacity.

You will find people who will support large children, and you will also meet opponents who talk about an increase in poverty.

If we consider the advantages of a large family, then these include the following:

children grow up independent due to the fact that parents physically lack the opportunity to pay much attention to each child;
children, without leaving home, get the opportunity to adapt in society;
parents do not put a lot of pressure on each child with the hope of being realized in descendants;
the state pays benefits;
from early childhood, the habit of being generous is formed;
a woman who decides to have a third and subsequent child is already quite experienced, insured against many mistakes;
the ability to leave elders with younger ones or shift some of the housework onto their shoulders;
children grow up in constant communication, they have someone to play with.

What difficulties await parents who have many children:

frequent quarrels, conflicts;
the need to spend a lot of time maintaining order;
great financial needs, since everyone needs to be fed, clothed, and provided with a normal education, medical care;
responsibility falls on the mother's shoulders, most of these mothers completely devote themselves to raising children, forgetting about their careers;
quarrels between children, which are manifested due to strong jealousy of their parents;
dad and mom will no longer have the opportunity to normally relax or sit in silence in their apartment.

In my life I have met two large families. My classmate had 4 brothers and 5 sisters. They lived very poorly. The boy wore clothes that he wore after the fourth child. He seemed to be constantly hungry. This case does indicate that in the absence of financial well-being, children can suffer in large families. But the same picture could be observed in a family with one baby in the absence of means of subsistence. The second example of a large family is my son's former classmates. The family has eight children: three girls and five boys, the eldest is finishing school, and the youngest is three years old. All the children look well-groomed, beautifully dressed, they always help each other, the elders look after the younger ones and they have beauty and order at home. So, do not think that parents who decide on a large addition to the family can only breed poverty.

Social support

If you are wondering how many children are needed in a family to count on some kind of benefits from the state, then we are talking either about large families, therefore, from three or more, or about cases when a mother is raising a child alone or low-income families , then the number of children does not matter.

Let's look at what benefits are provided to parents with many children.

30% discount on communal apartments.
If a doctor prescribes a drug for a baby under six years old, then the pharmacy will give it free.
Children under 18 years old will be provided with free travel in public transport.
A 50% discount for children under 18 years old when paying for a ticket by rail, water or air transport is given once a year if it is necessary to visit places of treatment without leaving the country.
Children from large families are admitted without a queue to kindergartens.
These children are provided with free meals at school or other educational institutions.
They are primarily sent to sanatoriums and health camps.
Children are provided with uniforms, both school and sports.
Providing free assistance in medical institutions.
Once a month, kids are allowed to visit museums free of charge.
Large families are provided with land plots.
They are given a loan to set up a farm.
Parents can be sent to study new specialties that are in demand in their region of residence.
Employment of a mom or dad, taking into account the presence of a flexible schedule.

Statistics

Despite the fact that there are ardent opponents of having many children, in our time you can meet families with a large number of children, although not as many as in the days of our great-grandmothers.

I bring to your attention the data on the average number of children in a family (small statistics for Russia).

As you can see, according to the table, at the age of 26 to 35 years old, a larger percentage is the presence of one child in the family, and already from 36 to 45 - two, this picture persists up to 55 years. So we can conclude that most families decide to have two children.

How many children are in the family is a personal matter for everyone. You must take into account various factors that can affect babies, contribute to their correct or poor development. Remember that a child is the most precious thing you will ever have in your life. How many babies you give life, let it depend only on how your heart feels. I wish you to be happy parents!

TO HAVE A FUTURE, YOU NEED TO HAVE CHILDREN We must learn one simple truth: to have a future, you need to have children. This means that children should be constantly born in our country, i.e. those who will inherit it. No "standard of living" or "high technology" will save the country from collapse if it follows the path of degeneration. For who is it all for?

And do you know what is most striking about this question? That you can EXACTLY answer it by determining the minimum required fertility. After all, the population is a quantitative value. It is clear that this will be objected to: the main thing is not quantity, but quality, therefore it is necessary not to “produce poverty”, but to ensure the “standard of living”, to raise education, etc. And then, you see, "women give birth" - and then what to do with this "material"?

Such misanthropic comments appear on every article on a similar topic (moreover, the same people manage to accuse visitors and those who call for an increase in the birth rate of the Russian people). Nasty words appeared: “quality of human material”, “human capital”, “invest in a person”, etc. All of them are designed to instill in people a minute consumer thinking, to erase the memory of the past and concern for the future. After all, childbirth is precisely a concern for the future, it is nothing more, nothing less. birth of the future.

It is those who want the Russian civilization not to have it, and propagandize childlessness, justifying it with fears for their “standard of living”. But the goal is the same - to instill an attitude of childlessness for reasons of selfishness. Some kind of “theories” are being invented that in “developed countries”, too, they say, they give birth to little, but they “live like people” there. Unfortunately, this affects the immature consciousness.

But we must be able to clearly and distinctly substantiate our position. And its essence is this: we need to continue to increase the birth rate, and to do this as soon as possible. To what extent - that's what the article is about. More precisely, there can be no limit here, we are talking about minimum required fertility... It doesn't matter for Russia or other parts split off from us. It is very easy to set this minimum level.

This is how it is done. It is generally believed that if two parents leave behind two children, then this is a simple substitution. And here the first delusion awaits us. The principle “two parents, two children” is a very slow extinction. Why is that? Because not all children live to be of childbearing age. Isn't there child mortality? Has anyone canceled accidents? Doesn't sterility exist? All this is there. Therefore, for the reproduction of the population, there should be 2.1-2.2 children per woman.

Just think, someone will say. One or two tenths of the weather do not. Do! They change the direction of our thought. We must clearly understand: two children in a family is not enough for the reproduction of the population. But how much is enough?

To do this, we need to take into account our current situation. Already gradually approaching the end of childbearing age, a large generation of the 80s, when the birth rate was on the rise. This means that the number of potential mothers is decreasing. And it will decrease for another 15 years. Indeed, in the 90s, the birth rate fell enormously - almost twice. Therefore, we will have to solve the demographic problem with smaller forces. This means that one woman should now have more than 2.1-2.2 children.

According to my calculations (I will not give details, those who wish can familiarize themselves with the technique used here: http://www.demographia.ru/articles_N/index.html?idR=22&idArt=2166), we need a total fertility rate of 2.5... The longer the increase in the birth rate is delayed to the required level, the greater the increase in the birth rate will be required in the future.

Therefore, I am personally very glad to hear from V.V. Putin that the demographic problem is far from being resolved: we have only retreated from the brink of the abyss. I am glad not because the problem has not been resolved, but because he understands the full gravity of our situation: the current equality of absolute fertility and absolute mortality may become a “farewell greeting” to the currently favorable demographic structure. Since it will inevitably worsen in the next 15-20 years (the demographic process is very inertial), then we should not rest on our laurels, reveling in the fact that in some month the birth rate exceeded the death rate, but strengthen the systematic demographic policy of increasing the birth rate.

Does this mean that there is no need to reduce mortality? No, mortality must also be reduced. But the main resource for overcoming the demographic problem is birth rate. After all, no matter how much you reduce mortality, young people should come to replace the old.

So, these “young” should be 2.5 per woman (unfortunately, the total fertility rate refers to a woman, and not to a family, because they give birth outside the family as well). But 2.5 is on average. Ask yourself: Do all women have children? Unfortunately, not all of them. And this means that those who have, must have them with a "safety factor" for those who have no children.

Means, one woman should have three children... Now answer: can a woman give birth to three outside the family? Of course it cannot. Therefore, in order for our woman to give birth to three, she must have a family. Was this not what V.V. Putin in his message to the Federal Assembly? Let me remind you of his words: a family with three children should become the norm in Russia! Away from all doubts, liberal superstition and other cowardly fabrications! Our goal is a family with three children.

Childbearing is a God-pleasing and all-worthy business. A large family should become an example for us, a source of our inspiration, a symbol of a reviving Russia.

It should become - and it will definitely become! This is our sacred duty.

Evgeny Chernyshev, Donetsk