The Best Sized Family
ALL INFORMATION SUPPLIED ON THIS PAGE AND SITE ARE SUPPLIED ON A NON-ADVISORY CAPACITY ONLY AND WE ARE THEREFORE NOT ACCOUNTABLE FOR ANY OUTCOMES HAD THROUGH USE OF ANY INFORMATION SUPPLIED ON THIS SITE. SEE DISCLAIMER
The Best sized family is something that is often debated- some beleive that to protect the world from over population couples should NOT have children, some people beleive in only 1 or 2 children
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/overpopulation-environment-threat/story-e6frg8y6-1111119059859
http://www.carbontax.net.au/category/climate-change/
some people like myself beleive in 4 or more children - that if they are raised the right way to respect themselves, others and the environment it would not hurt the world in fact might help the world to have a few more hands and people that are DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR THE WORLD AND SOCIETY.
The idea that having more children will destroy the world with over population comes from the knowledge of more and more of the worlds resourses are being used up- the question I have with this idea is that as knowledge of depleting resources is the BIGGEST reason behind the protecting the world by not having children or having limited children why have we not looked at all of the MANY of the worlds resources being used up for trivial materialistic items being sold today? How much of the worlds resources would be saved by cutting down the amount of WANTS that are available these days such as TVs, DVDs, Game Machines, Fashion Items, Junkfood chains (so MANY of these things are made and so many dont get sold - often in the case of food they automatically get thrown out after a certain time frame according to policies when out of the shop they would still be perfectly good, or have some problem and are just wasted a lot of this due to the materialistic veiws of people these days) Many of these items use many of the worlds resources often more than children do- yet so many people fail to see this unnesessary wastage of resources on a day to day basis and still point the finger at over population and children - that its the children and over population that are using up the worlds resources but is it really?
Environmental aspects With high lead content in CRTs, and the rapid diffusion of new, flat-panel display technologies, some of which (LCDs) use lamps which contain mercury, there is growing concern about electronic waste from discarded televisions. Related occupational health concerns exist, as well, for disassemblers removing copper wiring and other materials from CRTs. Further environmental concerns related to television design and use relate to the devices' increasing electrical energy requirements - (THIS EXTRACT WAS TAKEN FROM WIKEPEDIA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television#Environmental_aspects )
http://www.environment.ucla.edu/reportcard/article.asp?parentid=1361 - a study done on the effect of TV NOT children
http://www.greenchoices.org/green-living/clothes/environmental-impacts - enviromental impacts of clothing
http://www.sustainabilitystore.com/index_clothing___accessories.html - people improving the world a taking LESS of its rescources is possible.
http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.115-a449 - an American Government site on the impact of clothing fashion stores leaving LARGE footprints in the world resources
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/0/3B0DD93AB123A68BCA257234007B6A2F?OpenDocument - Australian Government Bureau of Statistics on Rubbish, Waste and Enviromental Issues.
http://www.hawkesbury.nsw.gov.au/environment/waste-and-recycling/recycling-in-the-hawkesbury2/?a=35685&result_35685_result_page=T - Hawkesbery NSW Government Australia Waste and Enviromental issues.
PDF Document on Waste percentages and types throughout Australia
http://www.ewaste.com.au/ewaste-articles/electronic-waste-australia-vs-the-world/ - Waste in Australia vs waste in other parts of the world
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/warr/ewaste.htm - Australian NSW Government on Electronic Waste
http://businessrecycling.com.au/documents/doc-516-nrw08-business-report.pdf - Recycling in Australia
http://www.ewaste.com.au/ewaste-articles/world-environment-day-2011-a-time-to-think-about-recycling-your-ewaste/ - Electronic Waste The BIGGEST waste issue in Australia at the moment- leaving the BIGGEST footprint- not over population
It begs the question is the REAL issue at hand over population or is it one of the expectations, wants and carelessnesss of people these days- with so many options available to us that people did not have 10 years, 20 years, 30 years even 50 plus years ago why would a good portion of the population CARE about the planet or even think about the footprints we are leaving.
The results of our generations carelessness and constant need for unnecessary material possetions is clear and it is NOT good, the more we buy the more businesses who make thing and sell things without care for the drastic imprint its making on the world THRIVE and continue to make, sell and destroy the environment.
It is clear based on the findings that is is NOT an issue of over populations rather than an issue of advertising, sales and profit industries- if children are taught and shown the impacts of everything on the enviromentt they can grow to protect and care for the enviroment and if REAL measures for example limiting families to 1-2 TVs, 1 game machine, 1 computer or laptop (electronics) per household within a 5010 year period- Electronic Manufactorers should be limited to producing a certain amount of electronics and only aloud to put them out in shops once every 10 years (not in mass amounts but ONLY equal to 1 electronic item (for example a TV) per house hold with an additional thousand being made for each state ONLY - customers should be MADE by LAW to trade in their old system if at any stage they want a new or different electronic (so if you want a new TV you trade in your old and pay for your new same goes with computers and laptops etc) encouraging a trade in and resell system for clothes (for every clothes store, also making it not voluntary but necessary to trade back the same number of clothes that you want to buy) within a 5-10 year period over the entire period every 5019 years licences, receipts, checks etc put into play the number of TV's and electronics purchased or ideas similar would significantly decrease a number of the worlds resources being used and there fore decrease the carbon foot print.
If a 1 per house hold rule applied for electronics and clothing (fashion)
along with a TRADE IN and Buy more system was introduced it would not only decrease carbon footprints but also ensure the business were STILL making money through re-selling of the compulsary items traded back in before purchase of something else becomes possible.
If we start beleiving that over population is the reason of the eviromental demise we cease to veiw or acknowledge evidence true, statistical and factual evidence from reliable sources- we cease to properly veiw the REAL issues at hand which are CLEAR and in not seeing and acknowledging we are essentially refusing to do our best to help the enviroment to better maintain our lives and the lives of future generations. If we cease to acknowledge statistical genuine evidence we and force our veiws of 0-2 children beleifs and policies on other people we cease to develop adequatly - just as China is finally starting to relise to issues of their limited child policies with males out numbering females - leading into issues with the population in the country being UNABLE to grow and also impacting on the running of the country as a whole- the limited child policy per family has done more than ensure that their country doesnt suffer from over population it has created an inability for the country to grow- a problem that their government is NOW trying to solve.
The realistic factor is if we limit our growth we inevitably die out just as any animal breed would.
http://simplicitycollective.com/the-scapegoat-of-overpopulation
http://laowaiblog.com/population-in-trouble/
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMhpr051833
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/One-child-policy-threatening-China%E2%80%99s-growth-10971.html
http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=128&catid=4&subcatid=15
http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=128&catid=4&subcatid=15#03 - Details of Chinas one child policy.
Another Huge factor in how many children families should have is health- so below are links which are related to pregnacy, children and the womans health
http://www.ninemonths.com.au/multiple-pregnancy-from-assisted-reproduction-too-high-a-price/
http://www.healthinsite.gov.au/topics/Systematic_Reviews_on_Multiple_Births
http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/factssheets/fs2010conf/fs2010conf.html
http://www.aifs.gov.au/afrc/pubs/issues/issues4/issues4.pdf
http://www.livestrong.com/article/204007-benefits-of-growing-up-in-a-large-family/
http://www.hqlo.com/content/5/1/61
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2080707/ - Government Study proves improved health and decreased risk of asthma, allergies, exmas, heart problems and cancer in children with multiple siblings (HEALTH BENIFITS FOR CHILDREN)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15188979 - study done on behavioural and emotional issue in different family sizes from 1 child - several children.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3356892/The-bigger-the-family-the-better-says-Cassandra-Jardine.html
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/library/downloads/child-cancer-6-other-2011-11.pdf - Cancer Research and study proved that children with 5 or more siblings DECREASED the risk of cancer
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2072035/Unwanted-pregnancy-doubles-womens-risk-mental-health-problems-abortion-impact.html - Studies show that with an unwanted pregnancy abortion will NOT help mental health- however the woman will remain struggling whether she elects to keep the baby or abort it.
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=5195551 - babies cells linger in woman and give added protection for up to 50 years after birth, misscarriage or abortion of the fetus
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2067069/Large-family-protects-mothers-health-Four-babies-cuts-risk-heart-disease.html
- a mums cardiovascular health protected by having four or more children
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8915576/Large-families-protect-mothers-health.html - Study Proves Having more than 4 children protects health of mums
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/overpopulation-environment-threat/story-e6frg8y6-1111119059859
http://www.carbontax.net.au/category/climate-change/
some people like myself beleive in 4 or more children - that if they are raised the right way to respect themselves, others and the environment it would not hurt the world in fact might help the world to have a few more hands and people that are DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR THE WORLD AND SOCIETY.
The idea that having more children will destroy the world with over population comes from the knowledge of more and more of the worlds resourses are being used up- the question I have with this idea is that as knowledge of depleting resources is the BIGGEST reason behind the protecting the world by not having children or having limited children why have we not looked at all of the MANY of the worlds resources being used up for trivial materialistic items being sold today? How much of the worlds resources would be saved by cutting down the amount of WANTS that are available these days such as TVs, DVDs, Game Machines, Fashion Items, Junkfood chains (so MANY of these things are made and so many dont get sold - often in the case of food they automatically get thrown out after a certain time frame according to policies when out of the shop they would still be perfectly good, or have some problem and are just wasted a lot of this due to the materialistic veiws of people these days) Many of these items use many of the worlds resources often more than children do- yet so many people fail to see this unnesessary wastage of resources on a day to day basis and still point the finger at over population and children - that its the children and over population that are using up the worlds resources but is it really?
Environmental aspects With high lead content in CRTs, and the rapid diffusion of new, flat-panel display technologies, some of which (LCDs) use lamps which contain mercury, there is growing concern about electronic waste from discarded televisions. Related occupational health concerns exist, as well, for disassemblers removing copper wiring and other materials from CRTs. Further environmental concerns related to television design and use relate to the devices' increasing electrical energy requirements - (THIS EXTRACT WAS TAKEN FROM WIKEPEDIA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television#Environmental_aspects )
http://www.environment.ucla.edu/reportcard/article.asp?parentid=1361 - a study done on the effect of TV NOT children
http://www.greenchoices.org/green-living/clothes/environmental-impacts - enviromental impacts of clothing
http://www.sustainabilitystore.com/index_clothing___accessories.html - people improving the world a taking LESS of its rescources is possible.
http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.115-a449 - an American Government site on the impact of clothing fashion stores leaving LARGE footprints in the world resources
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/0/3B0DD93AB123A68BCA257234007B6A2F?OpenDocument - Australian Government Bureau of Statistics on Rubbish, Waste and Enviromental Issues.
http://www.hawkesbury.nsw.gov.au/environment/waste-and-recycling/recycling-in-the-hawkesbury2/?a=35685&result_35685_result_page=T - Hawkesbery NSW Government Australia Waste and Enviromental issues.
PDF Document on Waste percentages and types throughout Australia
http://www.ewaste.com.au/ewaste-articles/electronic-waste-australia-vs-the-world/ - Waste in Australia vs waste in other parts of the world
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/warr/ewaste.htm - Australian NSW Government on Electronic Waste
http://businessrecycling.com.au/documents/doc-516-nrw08-business-report.pdf - Recycling in Australia
http://www.ewaste.com.au/ewaste-articles/world-environment-day-2011-a-time-to-think-about-recycling-your-ewaste/ - Electronic Waste The BIGGEST waste issue in Australia at the moment- leaving the BIGGEST footprint- not over population
It begs the question is the REAL issue at hand over population or is it one of the expectations, wants and carelessnesss of people these days- with so many options available to us that people did not have 10 years, 20 years, 30 years even 50 plus years ago why would a good portion of the population CARE about the planet or even think about the footprints we are leaving.
The results of our generations carelessness and constant need for unnecessary material possetions is clear and it is NOT good, the more we buy the more businesses who make thing and sell things without care for the drastic imprint its making on the world THRIVE and continue to make, sell and destroy the environment.
It is clear based on the findings that is is NOT an issue of over populations rather than an issue of advertising, sales and profit industries- if children are taught and shown the impacts of everything on the enviromentt they can grow to protect and care for the enviroment and if REAL measures for example limiting families to 1-2 TVs, 1 game machine, 1 computer or laptop (electronics) per household within a 5010 year period- Electronic Manufactorers should be limited to producing a certain amount of electronics and only aloud to put them out in shops once every 10 years (not in mass amounts but ONLY equal to 1 electronic item (for example a TV) per house hold with an additional thousand being made for each state ONLY - customers should be MADE by LAW to trade in their old system if at any stage they want a new or different electronic (so if you want a new TV you trade in your old and pay for your new same goes with computers and laptops etc) encouraging a trade in and resell system for clothes (for every clothes store, also making it not voluntary but necessary to trade back the same number of clothes that you want to buy) within a 5-10 year period over the entire period every 5019 years licences, receipts, checks etc put into play the number of TV's and electronics purchased or ideas similar would significantly decrease a number of the worlds resources being used and there fore decrease the carbon foot print.
If a 1 per house hold rule applied for electronics and clothing (fashion)
along with a TRADE IN and Buy more system was introduced it would not only decrease carbon footprints but also ensure the business were STILL making money through re-selling of the compulsary items traded back in before purchase of something else becomes possible.
If we start beleiving that over population is the reason of the eviromental demise we cease to veiw or acknowledge evidence true, statistical and factual evidence from reliable sources- we cease to properly veiw the REAL issues at hand which are CLEAR and in not seeing and acknowledging we are essentially refusing to do our best to help the enviroment to better maintain our lives and the lives of future generations. If we cease to acknowledge statistical genuine evidence we and force our veiws of 0-2 children beleifs and policies on other people we cease to develop adequatly - just as China is finally starting to relise to issues of their limited child policies with males out numbering females - leading into issues with the population in the country being UNABLE to grow and also impacting on the running of the country as a whole- the limited child policy per family has done more than ensure that their country doesnt suffer from over population it has created an inability for the country to grow- a problem that their government is NOW trying to solve.
The realistic factor is if we limit our growth we inevitably die out just as any animal breed would.
http://simplicitycollective.com/the-scapegoat-of-overpopulation
http://laowaiblog.com/population-in-trouble/
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMhpr051833
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/One-child-policy-threatening-China%E2%80%99s-growth-10971.html
http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=128&catid=4&subcatid=15
http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=128&catid=4&subcatid=15#03 - Details of Chinas one child policy.
Another Huge factor in how many children families should have is health- so below are links which are related to pregnacy, children and the womans health
http://www.ninemonths.com.au/multiple-pregnancy-from-assisted-reproduction-too-high-a-price/
http://www.healthinsite.gov.au/topics/Systematic_Reviews_on_Multiple_Births
http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/factssheets/fs2010conf/fs2010conf.html
http://www.aifs.gov.au/afrc/pubs/issues/issues4/issues4.pdf
http://www.livestrong.com/article/204007-benefits-of-growing-up-in-a-large-family/
http://www.hqlo.com/content/5/1/61
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2080707/ - Government Study proves improved health and decreased risk of asthma, allergies, exmas, heart problems and cancer in children with multiple siblings (HEALTH BENIFITS FOR CHILDREN)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15188979 - study done on behavioural and emotional issue in different family sizes from 1 child - several children.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3356892/The-bigger-the-family-the-better-says-Cassandra-Jardine.html
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/library/downloads/child-cancer-6-other-2011-11.pdf - Cancer Research and study proved that children with 5 or more siblings DECREASED the risk of cancer
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2072035/Unwanted-pregnancy-doubles-womens-risk-mental-health-problems-abortion-impact.html - Studies show that with an unwanted pregnancy abortion will NOT help mental health- however the woman will remain struggling whether she elects to keep the baby or abort it.
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=5195551 - babies cells linger in woman and give added protection for up to 50 years after birth, misscarriage or abortion of the fetus
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2067069/Large-family-protects-mothers-health-Four-babies-cuts-risk-heart-disease.html
- a mums cardiovascular health protected by having four or more children
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8915576/Large-families-protect-mothers-health.html - Study Proves Having more than 4 children protects health of mums