Size doesn't matter

The New York Times > Opinion > A Family Portrait, in Red and Blue (5 Letters):

To the Editor:
David Brooks applauds parents 'who have enough kids for a basketball team,' a sentiment that takes my breath away. Does having many children signal a greater devotion to parenting? I think not.

My husband and I have one child, and our 'personal identity is defined by parenthood.' Our child's physical, emotional and spiritual well-being is our primary and deeply satisfying concern.

But I also know that we are part of a bigger family. And this is what Mr. Brooks overlooks.

Large American families consume resources and produce waste in glaring disproportion to most other families of the world.

These natalists value their own immediate nuclear families to the detriment of our human family.

Erin Anthony

Carbondale, Ill., Dec. 7, 2004

Here is an excerpt from the original Op-Ed which Erin responded to:

Very often they have sacrificed pleasures like sophisticated movies, restaurant dining and foreign travel, let alone competitive careers and disposable income, for the sake of their parental calling.

As a parent of three, living in a small (just over 10,000 people) town in Wisconsin (a blue state mind you), I can attest to some of the statements made by David Brooks in his Op-Ed piece. My wife and I have made other choices than some. In fact, most of the families in this small town have made the same choices. To call the things Mr. Brooks lists as 'sacrifices', misses the point.

As for Erin from Carbondale, she completely misses the point of having a family. She uses her letter to condescend and admonish those of us who have the audacity to produce more than one offspring. For her, it isn't the number of children as much as it is her attitude. Each of our three children is unique, with their own personality. Without families like those of us in 'wasteful' Port Washington, her precious progeny would grow up in world without much diversity.

In addition, there is a dynamic between siblings that can't be replaced. Brothers and sisters have to learn to get along with each other. They can't 'go home' and be alone. They share bedrooms, bathrooms, dinner tables, toys, and parents every day. Just like they'll share workspaces, transportation, resources and bosses in the future.

We didn't make our decision to have children on political grounds. We didn't intellectually calculate the impact that each of our kids would have on the environment to determine to proper number to produce nor did we calculate the 'life-time' cost of raising kids and the impact that would have on our portfolio.

We had children as an expression of the love that we have for each other based on the traditions of our own families and the faith we have in the future of mankind. As I think about our community and the families that make up this community, I believe that most feel pretty much the same way. We tend to be generally optimistic and conservative - even those who vote blue.