In many parts of the world, families were larger in the past because people had more children. Do you think there were more advantages or disadvantages to being part of a large family in the past?
Over the past century, household size in various places around the world has declined considerably as a result of the social and historical changes. While I recognize some possible benefits of living in a big family, I consider it to be a serious drawback to children’s all-round development. Perhaps living with numerous siblings could benefit a child in many ways such as high levels of brother-and-sister support and understanding among members of the family. Every kid had his or her own stories and at the end of the day, they could sit back, chat with each other, share their experiences or difficulties as well as find out appropriate solutions for their issues. Furthermore, spending time playing with other children in the family could greatly build up a strong spiritual bond among everyone. If such kids had any problems in life, they would always find a place to turn to, in this circumstance their ‘home’. Despite some potential benefits of big-sized families, I believe such households did more harm than good to the growth of a young. Firstly, parents could not give sufficient care to all of their kids, especially at a time of economic crisis. This could lead to severe situations like hunger, conflicts or even wellbeing decline. For example, my dad was the oldest child of a large family and he had to work from a very young age to help to raise his bros and sis. Secondly, the interruption of education was also a grave concern for parents of huge households. Many school-age children got dropped out of school because of the lack of fund for paying fees and other costs. This appeared to hinder these children’s career prospect in the long term. In summary, the positives of being a part of a large family by no mean outweigh its negatives as we consider factors of living expenses or education.