\n<\/p>\n
This article is part of\u00a0Upstream,<\/a>\u00a0The Daily Wire\u2019s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories \u2014 from our featured writers to you.<\/em><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Conservatives have a lot of opinions on how many children a woman should have. But, if they really cared about increasing the birth rate, perhaps they wouldn\u2019t.<\/span><\/p>\n This week, Hannah Neeleman caused a stir after announcing she was having her ninth child. Dubbed \u201cqueen of the \u2018trad wives,<\/a>\u201d <\/span>Neeleman creates content of her family\u2019s life running a beautiful farm for her more than 10 million Instagram followers. <\/span>A viral tweet<\/a> responding to Neeleman\u2019s announcement of her ninth baby questioned if two parents could give nine children the love and connection they need.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Conservatives rightly rushed to her defense \u2014 after all, in an age where children are no longer valued, this gorgeous former ballerina is spending her millions raising a big family, and that\u2019s something to celebrate.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat the heck do you know about having 9 kids?\u201d American Principles Project President Terry Schilling<\/a> asked<\/a>. \u201cYou should talk to a big family or a kid from a big family about their experience. You really get a lot more attention in a big family than a small one. And kids from big families are way more stable and less anxious than kids who need everything to be perfect for them.\u201d<\/p>\n But just because the Neeleman family has the desire and resources requisite for nine kids, that <\/span>doesn\u2019t mean everyone needs to have enough children to fill a baseball field.<\/p>\n Simple math provides the basis of the viral question: The more children two parents have to care for, the less time they have to spend individually with each child. <\/span>Sociologists call this <\/span>resource dilution, <\/span>which <\/span>one study<\/span><\/a> described as an acknowledgement that \u201c<\/span>parental resources are finite and that as the number of children in the family increases, the resources accrued by any one child necessarily decline.\u201d <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n I\u2019m not suggesting <\/span>there are only negatives to having a big family; the internet is filled with testimonies of their joys. But, like most things in life, having a big family brings pros and cons. This used to be something conservatives were allowed to <\/span>talk about<\/span><\/a>. <\/span>The suggestion that big families might have <\/span>any<\/span><\/i> downsides drew the sharp ire of <\/span>conservatives and pro-birth pronatalists alike, who wholeheartedly defended big families, with some seemingly expressing contempt for smaller ones. <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cIf you had a large family like mine, you would know that plenty of time without the searching eyes and drilling attention of the mother of two is one of the best thing you can give your children,\u201d doctor and writer Grazie Pozo Christie said<\/a>. \u201cOh and siblings! Don\u2019t forget about the incalculable blessing of siblings.\u201d<\/p>\n An account called Meta Trav was more direct in its criticism of small families, tweeting<\/a>, \u201cThe modern obsession with \u2018adequate time and attention\u2019 per child is a broken framework. Two parents hovering over one or two kids produces anxious, poorly socialized children who never had to negotiate with a real peer group.\u201d<\/p>\n This response makes sense when you understand that a certain branch of the pronatalist movement views having many children not only as an example of peak womanhood but also as an example of good morality. <\/span>Many parts of the conservative movement have adopted this messaging. <\/span>Y<\/span>ou\u2019ve probably heard someone telling young people to get married and have more kids than they can afford, while saying next to nothing about the stress and finances <\/span>needed to raise a large family.<\/span><\/p>\n Big families are a luxury good, particularly if you can afford a large family on one income.\u00a0<\/span>The average yearly cost to raise a child in America <\/span>grew<\/span><\/a> to $<\/span>27,743 in 2025. That\u2019s $83,229 a year to support three kids or $249,687 to support nine children.\u00a0<\/span>Estimates show the <\/span>median<\/span><\/a> American household income is around $84,000.\u00a0<\/span>While I\u2019ve seen conservatives brush off the financial concerns that affect family formation, the real-world consequences of <\/span>financial stress<\/span><\/a>, such as marital instability and health deterioration, can be devastating.<\/span><\/p>\n