I only have two children and frankly, I don't think I have what it takes to have any more. I can't imagine the amount of patience required to parent more than two! I try not to judge large families, but I do often wonder about how the parents spend quality time with each of the children. I guess they find a way to make it work.

I'm having a hard time not judging a person who already has six children seeking fertility treatment. It seems to me that this treatment is for people who truly are having fertility problems. And given that the human population boom is having such a detrimental effect on our planet, it's also hard not to be judgmental of families that make conscious choices to have more than a couple of kids. I grew up in a family of four and it's nice having a lot of kids around, but this is not 1975 anymore and we now know that we have to think beyond the four walls of our own homes.

Regarding why the mother of octuplets was seeking fertility treatments, I agree that it's seems odd but who knows, there could be a perfectly reasonable explanation, such as male infertility factor, a tubal ligation or tube blockage, or vasectomy etc. that's none of our business. I would think that any clinic would be very conservative with the number of embryos transferred into some who obviously can have children but again, maybe they transferred the normal 2-3 and had some split? I don't know, and I won't judge.

On to the actual question - my husband and I have a blended family of four kids and if we could afford to, I would be willing to have at least one or two more (he wouldn't). I am one of five so a large family is normal to me. We live in a small house (3 bedrooms total) and we manage because both my husband and I are very hands-on parents and both have flexible jobs that allow us to work primarily from home. We use a mix of daycare and relatives to cover childcare during the week, I tend to do the morning routine and he usually does the end of day pick up. We both cook and do baths, he leads most of the evening/weekend play time and I cover more "serious" stuff like homework and chores. We shuttle to and from activities depending on who has less work to do. The kids entertain each other and there is usually someone to play with. The kitchen table dilemma was solved with a parson's bench replacing three chairs and taking up a lot less space, we use bunk beds for the kids who are old enough, keep a small amount of toys and seasonal clothes in rotation at any given time (the rest are stored in the basement until needed). As the kids grow and needs change, jobs change, circumstances change we do what we need to do to keep things running. It's all about flexibility and being able to constantly re-evaluate what does and doesn't work and tweak things here and there. It's a balancing act but it can be done, and done well, for a couple who enjoy having a houseful of kids.

And don't forget to mention the new mother of 14 is also a single parent, living with her parents. How a doctor could allow treatment is beyond me...

I was struck by that, too, Brittany. CNN's now reporting that her husband is an independent contractor who is about to go back to Iraq. Here's the link: http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/01/30/mother.octuplets/index.html?iref=mpstoryview. -- LMA

The "population boom" is a problem of the 1970s - statistics show that population growth has leveled out here in the US and is actually declining rapidly in Europe. As countries urbanize, populations drop, it is happening in India and China now. Since so many people are opting not to have kids I really do not think there is a moral argument that not having kids is a good thing. Also I don't think that anyone has the right to criticize another person's reproductive choices.

I am from a large family--5 children--but we only have one child and don't feel that we could handle more. It's not just that we're worried about the middle-of-night feedings or extra diapers another child would require--but who can afford another $1400/month for more daycare, or, alternately, another five years off from work? And while I absolutely agree that kids don't need all the playspace or solo rooms we've come to see as necessary, they do need good school systems, and today those are hard to come by on one income, or when dishing out nearly half of mom's take-home salary per child.

According to the LA Times, her father is the one going back to Iraq. Her martial status is unkown but a neighbor stepped forward and said she is a single parent who lives with her own parents.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-octuplets30-2009jan30,0,5460225.story

Thanks, Brittany! Hadn't seen the LA Times story yet! -- LMA

Anyway, it's a relief that none of these children are as small as Odera Chukwu was.

My thoughts, that's definitely true in some communities--but I think where you live and cost-of-living in that area are a huge factor. It is possible to find good school systems in relatively low-cost areas, and daycare isn't that expensive everywhere you go (definitely not in most places I've lived, all in the Midwest).

I work from home, which helps a lot--I still need some child care, but can be flexible with it, especially with older kids.

Katy F, well said! The fact is, even with the occasional large family, in the United States, fertility rates still hover around replacement rates. That's not likely to change, even if the occasional family has 4 or 6 or 14 kids.

I was able to have two children and that's it - but being a homeschooler has put me in touch over the past ten years with many, many large families. Eight children is very common, and sometimes more.

The best run and the happiest among them seem to be those where the children are taught from a young age how to pitch in, and have definite chores. From twelve and perhaps younger, some of them can cook - at least a few dishes - and do laundry well - boys too! Yardwork is a given. If there's a family business, they help with it. And these children are very happy indeed,and plan to have large families themselves. (When the parents don't train their kids this way, the families seem much more stressful, and the Mom sometimes seems depressed.)

I'll confess that I never figured out how they homeschool. I homeschool ONE and I don't know how they do it. However, when I take my daughter to homeschooling clubs, like science and geography club, the kids from large families seem to know as much as she does. I also know they go on to be accepted by schools like U. Va., Notre Dame, University of Dallas, Providence College and Thomas Aquinas. One went to Princeton, another to Harvard. It's the rare child from one of these large families that does not get a college degree.

I'm not saying raising all these children is a snap. First of all, these families aren't rich people. They never use day care - too expensive! - so Mom stays at home. Consequently, they live very simply but certainly look as if they have enough to eat! Their clothes are largely bought second-hand or are hand-me-downs. Yet they usually seem to like how they grew up, and, as I said, start having their own large families right away. You can find many families like this in central Massachusetts area and I've always been a little surprised that reporters aren't more interested in them. Perhaps they don't realize such successful large families exist. The Waltons aren't gone - they simply moved to central Massachusetts.

I'm the eldest of ten children, and loved growing up in a large family. It takes very unusual parents to raise so many children, but my mother loves raising kids, and my father was willing to shoulder the responsibility of being the sole breadwinner in the family. We all made sacrifices to make ends meet, both financially and in terms of parental availability to shuttle kids to various activities, etc., but I wouldn't trade the enjoyment we all have together for any of the opportunities I might have missed due to limited resources. We've all been blessed with good educational opportunities, both in academics and music. I'm undoubtedly biased, but so far I feel that those of us old enough to make our own way in the world are contributing in a very positive way to the greater good of society, and many of the skills we learned growing up in a large family serve us well in all areas of our lives, including the discipline to live responsibly within our means, the willingness to pitch in and help out where needed, and the ability prioritize those things that are most important to us.

I have 3 kids (7, 5, 1) and that is fine for us. I have to say it is definitely more challenging with 3 than 2. Even with 3, our house is always noisy and chaotic. I enjoy late at night or early mornings when it is so peaceful. We are managing OK but we are constantly busy. Someone is always having a crisis - if it's not them, it's us! :) We do not have help from anyone on a regular basis and we just depend on each other to run the daily operations of our family. My husband definitely pulls his weight around the house. Our goal in life is to enable our children to be self-sufficient and we deploy a team mentality. They do things around the house that are appropriate for a 7 and 5 year old and can build self-confidence. We do not think we can handle any more children and since I had my last child, my desire to not have any more children is as great as my desire once was to have children (and that was pretty great). I absolutely love and cherish the children that I have and I am so happy with the 3 of them just they way they are and we try to give them the attention that they need and be the best parents we can be. But let me say, I am a very positive person, and this is not always easy. It is the most challenging and rewarding job on earth.

My thoughts, that's definitely true in some communities--but I think where you live and cost-of-living in that area are a huge factor. It is possible to find good school systems in relatively low-cost areas, and daycare isn't that expensive everywhere you go (definitely not in most places I've lived, all in the Midwest).

I work from home, which helps a lot--I still need some child care, but can be flexible with it, especially with older kids.

Katy F, well said! The fact is, even with the occasional large family, in the United States, fertility rates still hover around replacement rates. That's not likely to change, even if the occasional family has 4 or 6 or 14 kids.

Our family has 4 children, all adopted. I find it funny that people consider us a "large" family. It doesn't really feel large to me. I do find that our society is geared toward a family of 4 and that those nifty travel deals etc are not for our size brood. But it's all good; we do a lot of camping and have a lot of low tech fun. People have to make choices, no one kid is going to play every sport because everyone needs a bit of the pie, but I think we have a happy loving family--and a lot of playmates!

"Yet they usually seem to like how they grew up, and, as I said, start having their own large families right away."

I hope you didn't mean "right away" literally, because if it's literal it would mean as soon as the kids turn fertile...

I believe a large family is the greatest gift you can give your child. To grow up belonging to one is a wonderful thing. Currently one of my five children has this own room and this makes me sad. You haven't lived till you've battled over the imaginary line drawn down the middle of a bedroom.

Leandra write: "I do often wonder about how the parents spend quality time with each of the children."

In larger families, children build stronger bonds with their siblings and depend and work together much better. I've known families with only 2 kids that barely interacted. They each had their own friends, activities, schedules, etc. And they each demanded special time alone with the Mom or Dad. In short, they were quite selfish and didn't see/know/experience any value from their sibling. Really quite sad.

We have 7 children. I believe it is about lifestyles. Lifestyles are expensive, children are not. We do very well for ourselves even at $40K a year with a large family of 9. We make things work. Day care, private schools, top notch cothes, luxury vehicles are all luxuries.

We choose to homeschool our children too, and yet we aren't doing it for religious reasons either. I am FAR from a religious zealot, very far from it. I do it because I believe it is right for our family. I can even boast about my 3yo reader! I personally enjoy having the extra time with my children. I think I know them better because I spend and extra 7-8 hours a day with my children compared to some. We still go out ans socialize with our group of home schoolers too.

What it all comes down to is, we all do what is right and best for our families and ourselves. Personalities and personal priorities are what drive individuals to do different things. No two families will be the same.

I agree that family size is a personal choice. I've always wanted a large family because I am crazy and really do love the chaos it brings. I was the oldest of 6 and baby sat for many large families as well. We would even like to have more in the future if the future hold it. I however would NOT persue fertility treatment since I do believe I have already been blessed with 7 miracles. If I have become infertile I would rather open my home to foster children instead.

As for the one who questioned on how couples find quality alone time? Well if you truly love each other, you make the time and you simply find it. Obviously we find the time or we wouldn't have children! LOL

As for the challenges our family face, that tends to be the harsh stereo typing that many place on larger families for not being attentive to their children, or being selfish, or over populating, or resoure hogs, etc etc etc. I can counter each argument. Still at the end of the day I have 7 sweet smiling faces telling me they love me as they go off to bed. I wouldn't give up a single one of them for the world.

The previous poster stole my standard response to how we afford 7 children. "Lifestyles are expensive, children are not." My kids are very happy, bright, successful humans. I'm not really too interested in anyone else's opinion.

I think what people forget is just as they never believed they could love another child as much as they loved their first and then they fell wildly in love with the second one... so one falls wildly in love subsequent children - so love isn't a problem.

I do think people mistake giving their children expensive lifestyles with loving them... does the kid in the mercedes 4x4 feel more loved than the kid in the second hand van?

If we only had one or two kids and they were in private schools or daycare I would have to work full-time to support them and I would only see them at breakfast time and for putting them to bed - which kind of defeats the idea of spending time with them. As it is I get to spend time with all my kids all day long and I for one like my kids and I like spending time with them. I don't dread the school holidays because my kids will be home all day - I relish the holidays when we won't be "doing" school and we can just play and craft - so time isn't a problem.

I certainly don't schedule one-on-one time with my kids, but they all get it - everyday, but while I am busy with one child the others aren't sitting around bored or lonely there is always someone to play with and hang out with. They are each other's champions. So loneliness and encouragement are not a problem.

Let's have a look at the fashionable social concern at the moment, and that isn't overpopulation anymore but rather green issues and the carbon footprint. Well my kids need less stuff - I don't buy se7en of each toy! We recycle and only put out two bags of garbage a week (that's for nine of us), we eat locally grown organic food. When we do travel by car (once a week, mostly we can walk where we need to be) there are nine of us in the car as opposed to one or two people in a car using it everyday. When we snuggle on the couch to read at night we are using one light for all of us as opposed one light in each room for each of us. Basically, the carbon footprint is spread more evenly. So greening, while there is always room for improvement, is not a problem.

I could go on... but I really need to get on with my brood!

se7en, I loved your post and could have written it myself. I, too, look forward to the children's school holidays and the time we can spend together uncluttered by outside commitments. Unfortunately, homeschooling in my country is illegal so, not an option.

Your carbon footprint comment is spot on, that has always been my argument, too. The fact is, 7 kids in a conscientious family can be raised with a smaller footprint than those same 7 kids distributed amongst 3 or 4 households/families! And overpopultion? Not here in Europe! Quite the opposite.

I am a Mom of one, from a previous marriage. I plan to have 2 more children oneday, when the time is right, and honestly I would love to have 3 or four all near the same age. Here's the reason:

My son is now 6 yo and I've noticed that when he is home with us he tends to get bored easily. He likes to play video games & watch TV, but we limit that. He has a room full of toys that he barely touches, and lots of arts and crafts that he will only do if I am doing them with him. He can sit and play quietly in his room when he wants to, but most of the time he is following me around seeking my attention. I am his playmate, which I don't mind, but it means he often either has to wait or find ways to amuse himself, and he doesn't like to play outside since we live in the city and space is limited. We live pretty simply...don't have cable TV, internet, or a landline phone. My son takes TKD and soccer and attends a great public school.

When we go to visit my family in the country it is a totally different story. I usually end up keeping my nieces who are 4 and 8 for the entire weekend because my son loves to play with them. The house is a loud chaotic mess, they run from one game to another, they are inside, outside, using their imaginations. They make up the best games and my son just glows. I also feel I am a better mother to 3, rather than 1. I prefer to cook for a group of kids over one pickly little eater, I love organizing activities and crafts for them, and I love that when I need to wash dishes or cook dinner that my son is so busy playing with the other kids that he doesn't even notice. He just seems to thrive in this environment. I love nothing more than snuggling them all into their beds in the room they share and reading to them each night. Looking in on them later all sleeping peacefully in the soft glow of the nightlight just fills me with so much happiness. It makes it a little hard to go home to our quiet 1 child family in the city. I find myself hoping I can pull off having at least 3 more.

If I could have a big family I would....but I do have to consider that the cost of housing in our area is high, and I can't move anywhere else because I have joint custody of my son. The school is great, for a city school, so I am not worried about that....and my son has so many toys and clothes that I know I could provide for more kids that way....they would just be sharing toys and not getting the big brand name clothes the way he has. I don't see anything wrong with that.

My biggest concern, besides housing is daycare....I have to work, my husband works seasonal jobs and try as we may, we haven't been able to get something better that has health insurance benefits for him, and that we can count on year round. My job pays more and has the benefits. Having my husband stay home with the kids isn't an option either because I can already tell the kids wouldn't be getting the enrichment they would get in a home daycare (the one I used with my son was wonderful) or if I was home. He would play with them, but he wouldn't take time to teach them things, or take them on educational outings, and they'd probably be watching way more TV than nessesary. I don't even know if he could handle 3 children at once 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, with no one else to help out. He was an only child and isn't used to the noise. My family lives 3 hours away, most of our friends work, and so does his family. I don't see any cheap daycare options, at least not ones where our kids would be getting the great care they deserve.

When it is time for us to start trying for more kids I am sure we will work it out as we go along, and who knows....maybe I will get my big family....if not I will be happy with as many miracles as I am given. I admire those of you with big families who make it work. Your kids are so lucky to have those experiences.

According to the Census in 2005, large families (meaning familes with 4 or more kids) only made up 5% of all families in the U.S. When the number of kids went to 5 or more, that number falls to 1.4% You must also keep in mind that the census counts all families with 4 or more, including blended families. So, the number of families with 4 or more biological children is significantly lower. I just find it frustrating that there is so much focus put on the large family and the accusation that we are the ones causing this planetary problem. There is a lot of evidence that shows that industry is truly the main culprit of the carbon problem.

150 years ago, the population wasn’t what it is today, and there is argument that our planet couldn’t have supported our current population then. The reason we have come so far is that advances in agriculture and other industries have allowed us new ways to house and feed the people on this planet. You just need to read some of the articles on the exciting things they are working on, clean fuels, ways to provide clean water to everyone, and advances on agriculture which will allows us to feed more people using less land. This knee-jerk reaction that if we just all stop having kids the problems will fix themselves is absurd. It will simply create another set of problems, and we will have less people in the world to come up with answers how to solve them.