That's taking things too far. As long as you can take care of your kids on your own you should be able to have as many as you want.

Even if you have like 17 and want to give them all names that start with J

Keeping families small is worth thinking about, but just because someone says it's a must doesn't mean he's right.

oh he needs to check himself on the abortion part. I'm pro choice but it irks me when people want to use abortion as a form of fall back contraception so to say. If you can afford it by all means you should have as many or as few as you want but if you can't afford then don't have 14 children!!!

Actually, even if I had all the money in the world I'd still stick to my plan of having no more than three. Two is the ideal number because they basically replace the parents in terms of mouths to feed.

I agree nyardzom. Abortion should be rare. However I do think that contraception should be free for all women - that would cut down the number of abortions in addition to dealing with population growth.

I do think that the world needs to seriously address the overpopulation problem, and not just because of global warming, but also in making it easier to set up programs such as universal healthcare and deal with unemployment and the food crisis in the long-term

Hey has a scientific point but however his remedy lacks any bed side manner what so ever. To suggest abortion as a pursued method of population control is outragious.

I don't think it is the government's place to stop people from pro creating, but I do agree with the sentiment that is environmentally iresponsible to have large numbers of offspring.

This is precisely how people like this shoot a legitimate concern in the foot by going off the deep end taking the legitimacy right along with them and in turn not doing much good at all.

The way he used abortion as a part of his debate, is a turn off to pro lifers and pro choicers a like he may want to rething his argument and use better terms. I also don't think the goverenment should be sticking there nose into how many children people have unless the government is taking care of them. However I do agree on some level that having that many children is a strain on our enviroment. I also don't think the human body as some have said is made to have a "liter" of children which is a whole other topic entirely.

liter = litter

Look while I think he has a point, I'm all for 2 children per household rules, his methods are what's bunk about it.

I have two children, and don't plan on having more, but I think it's a bad policy to say that families can only have two children. Look at what is happening in countries where there are limits to the amount of children you can have, like China. There are orphaniges full of Chinese girls, because every family wants a boy.

Well we know that UnDave, but that policy also help slowed down the growth of population. China was ravaged with famine and diseases at the time the policy went into effect because they had already over 1 billion people population. Lack of resources and medical supplies. The 1 child policy worked but as you said it also had it's drawbacks. However China at the time didn't implement more methods to prevent pregnancies in their policies and those in rural areas and the poor did end up abandoning their girls.

At least now they recognize their mistakes and are much more open and are offering more contraceptives to those who can not afford it and those who are only child now maybe qualified to have 2 children, if they can prove that they are able to provide for two children.

It a free country, so do what you want with your family/uterus. I guess what makes me question having a large family is I understand that people do this for religious reasons ( which should be respected), but then I don't understand why some people have invitro and other procedures that aren't "of God" to concieve it's seems to be so opposite to the religous argument.

look the female body wasn't design to have a litter of children as you said before bastyfile. I dont care how many children people want to have however that's an unnecessary toll to take on your body. 17 Children? This woman has literally spent the past 22 years of her life pregnant and doesn't look like she's planning on stopping anytime soon.

Although I'm heavily pro-choice, like nyaradzom, abortion is not another common form of contraception. It's basically an extreme option and it should be utilized in cases of rape, molestation, incest and so on. If a baby is born out of love, then it should not be a matter of global warming, but a matter of bringing it up eco-friendly so it sustains the earth. However, the Duggar family totally creeps me out LOL. Maybe it's because of their ignorance of evolution.

Also, I kind of agree with the British environmental advisor, over the fact that we should have some sort of limit but I don't think the limit should be 2. It should be 10 or something large. Also, I don't want thousands of orphanages filed with children, so obviously, if a baby is born and is eleventh child, it should not be mandatory to give it up like I think it is in China.

Michelle Duggar spoke of her family's environmental impact on a show recently. She said that although more kids will have a bigger impact, she said that each of the people in her house are more friendly to the environment than most. They don't drive everywhere. Their food is purchased/made in bulk, lessening waste. They only buy used. They don't watch tv often if at all and limit computer time. they are also self sufficient, not depending on the government for handouts.

even with women like Michelle Duggar
To find an exact statistic you might want to narrow your question down to "How many children are born to each woman in her reproductive cycle?"
This is known as the Total Fertiliy Rate (TFR). The TFR for Americans is 2.09 in 2006.
This usually means that there are about 2 children for every mother.
Here is the CIA Factbook http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html

Seems like we are putting our money where our mouth is, to me.

But limitting the number of children can have a horrible impact on the money needed to continue the social programs you all seem to love. See Japan and China where the have upside down population pyramids. Meaning that they have 1 young person to take care of 2-3 elderly people. ( or more, I don't know exact statistics) Where it should be 2-3 young people taking care of 1 elderly.

Considering we have no natural predators in our environment and childbirth and disease aren't huge threats anymore we really should take into consideration population control, especially in the first world. Now government regulation can get tricky, but I don't think we should let the controversy shy us away from talking about it as a society.

I personally agree that it is irresponsible to have more than 2 children. I will even push it to 3. But I would NEVER force my beliefs onto another person. But I think that the US and the Uk are already doing a good job at this, so not sure why they have to bring it up. If a women has 17 kids but our average in the US is still 2, who the heck cares?

My problem is when these huge families get sensationalized and it becomes a ticket to stardom. Having (previously) uncommon multiple births or multiple pregancies seems to becoming more and more popular, maybe these people think they'll get to go on Oprah or be given their own tv show.

Oh yeah blue-- i can totally see that happening. I wonder if that is why we see so many. The lady that just had 8 babies is getting free diapers for life..... I bet they think that will happen and so its not that big of a deal to have so many.

Garg...it's not the government's place to tell me how many kids I can have. What business is it of their's if I want to have 20 kids? (I don't...I'm just saying it for argument's sake...I'd say I'd like to have 2-4 kids.) The only thing that irks me about large families is when the parents cannot afford to take care of the amount of children they are bringing into this world. If you can't afford to have more than 1 child, or any child for that matter, it is your responsibility to stop at a certain point.

I guess it just bothers me that it's becoming "cool" to have huge families. All the tv shows and media attention. Endorsements like free diapers for life or a free vehicle just for having a million babies seems wrong to me.

And I can't imagine any of those kids will get the parent/child time that they need.

I think some people are missing some of the points. These large families of this size, eventually do a become a burden to the government when they are older. Medicaid, medicare, social security benefits. They take a tax. I commend the Duggars for being debt free and doing everything on their own, but eventually we will be eventually supporting all of their children.

"To find an exact statistic you might want to narrow your question down to "How many children are born to each woman in her reproductive cycle?"
This is known as the Total Fertiliy Rate (TFR). The TFR for Americans is 2.09 in 2006.
This usually means that there are about 2 children for every mother."

That's an interesting point but what about the amount of children men produce? My uncle, for example, had three children with his first wife and two with his second. So while the women stayed on average, he is at double the average. Are there statistics for how many children men father?

"...and abortion must be at the heart of anti-global-warming policies."

That is a very scary statement to me. And messed up in so many ways.

And this statement: "People cannot reduce their total environmental impact without reducing the number of children they have" makes me seriously wonder what this person thinks about those of us who already have more than 2 children. Should we just get rid of the overflow? And how would he suggest a family do that?

>Two is the ideal number because they basically replace the parents in terms of mouths to feed.
Not true! Not true! It's just math!
Unless you give birth and then immediately die, this is not true. If one couple has two children, most likely they will be a family of four for the next twenty or thirty years and that the couple will likely live to see grandchildren. So if each of their two has just two, then they've created six more people to "replace" their two before they even pass away and need replacing.

I don't think the government should tell people how many kids to have, but maybe they could start by halting incentives for people to have kids. Stop making them a write-off!

How about not giving welfare to moms who continually pop out kids like popcorn.....

True Song- What do you think we should do. Have no kids? 1 ? I am curious what the solution is to this. We have this amazing healthcare that is a "right" so people keep on living.... But if you look at it this way right now there is a set of grandparents/parents/kids As 1 grandparent dies 1 kid is born, so that would be a replacement.

I don't know about a government enforced limit, but people who have more than 2 kids are irresponsible. These mega-families really piss me off. And Michelle Duggar could do all those conservation tricks with one child, so I'm not sure what her point is. If people absolutely have to have a family of 15, ADOPT!!!! There are kids out there with nothing. It's so selfish.

javs, two kids add to the overpopulation problem, too! Why are we acting like it's okay to create two new children while there are so many who need homes, but more than two, that's when the craziness sets in?

oh, I know. i don't want any children at all because I don't think I could deal with the eco-guilt. I'm a big fan of adoption.

wow Im surpirsed at some of the comments on here.

I think its crazy for the government to tell us how many kids we want. I personally only want 3 ( 2 down one to go), but I can't imagine not being able to have another one because of population?!
Give me a break. I agree that there are many women out there who "pop" them out like nothing and get all the help they can (and more) from the government...but not every woman is like that.
I personally dont think it would fair.

We have an overpopulation problem? I didn't realize that. I knew that China was having problems, but I didn't think we had a problem here.

It's a worldwide issue. Smog and other envioronmental harms don't recognize international borders.

But are these environmental harms caused by overpopulation? No.

Yes, environmental harms are caused by or exacerbated by overpopulation. Can you name one that isn't?

I just am not sure how you would enforce something like this here where so many children are born out of wedlock. Could a woman only have two children but a man maybe have six children with four different women? Would all children conceived outside of wedlock have to be aborted? I just can't see something like this ever being enforced here.

We could start by reversing tax breaks. Give them to people who don't have children.

drought, flood.
So, what your saying is we should give tax breaks to the people who need it the least? That makes real sense.

What the hell? People without kids are those who least need tax breaks? Just because I don't have kids, you think I'm rolling in it? And just because you do have kids, you think you automatically are someone who needs a tax break the most? Everyone gets to write off their boink-trophies, regardless of need or income.
Malarkey!

And our tax system currently is basically based around the government giving breaks to people who do "good" things and taxing those who do "bad" things. Hence, a tax break for driving a hybrid car, an extra tax on cigarettes.
.
So what I am saying is that if the government wants to discourage having children, put a tax consequence on it. You have to pay a birthing tax or something.

I agree with TS. Award those of us burdening the world the least.
I also think sterilization should be more readily available to adults who have made the sound decision to not procreate. At 22, I'm NOT mature enough to decide that I don't want kids, but I AM mature enough to go ahead and have 10 of them if I so choose? Absurd.

YES. Yes. This.
.
There was a doctor who was quoted regarding the stupid, selfish, moron who just had the octuplets, and he said something like "It's not up to me to dictate the size of someone's family." Oh, REALLY? Then let twenty-somethings sterilize themselves if they want to! If Dumbass McGee gets to make the ridiculous choice to have 14 kids, then I get to make the responsible one to have zero.