Originally Posted by kathleen'smum
One might think it would be the smart people who realize that putting more time and resources into a smaller number of children would guarantee better reproductive 'success'.

That is what I wonder, as well. Most of the small-family parents that we know chose to do things that way because they calculated the costs of college, private school tuition, etc. etc. and found that it just didn't make sense to spread those resources more thinly among more siblings.

Of course, then there are those of us that consider ourselves fortunate to have had even the one child.

In general, I'm not sure that contributing to a rise in global population is necessarily a good thing no matter how intelligent those children might be. whistle Maybe that's just me.

Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.