Deseret News | Census survey shows Utahns marry younger, have more children

Reader comments
Census survey shows Utahns marry younger, have more children

115 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Stunning Data | 1:37 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

This can't be true. Are they sure their research is accurate?

If this IS true, this census survey is really on to something--this means more children are being born to Utahs, who marry younger. AND, if Utahns are marrying younger, it's likely they may have more children.

S-T-O-P T-H-E P-R-E-S-S!!

David O | 2:42 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I nominate this story for Most Obvious Observation Of The Year.

Rob | 5:50 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

We are very blessed to have seven children, each one of them a precious gift from the Lord. It's not always easy having a larger family, and even here in Utah we get frequent startled looks and comments when people realize the size of our family. However, any sacrifices we have made have been richly repaid to us over and over. We're very grateful for the Proclamation on the Family and the eternal truths that it teaches.

Comments continue below

Color me surprised! | 6:02 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

This seems so obvious that nayone over about 8 years old who lives in Utah could have written this.

Must be a slow news day, or is this only selective reporting that reflects media bias?

No need to report about Senators Dodd and Obama were recipients of tons of money from Fannie and Freddie and voted against reforming Fannie & Freddie's corrupt and inaccurate business practices when they were brought to Congress's atention 5 years ago. No need to report that the same guys who created the financial meltdown and refused to fix it before want to be in charge of spending billions more now.

No, we have room for a story that Utahns marry younger andhave more kids.

Tomorrow: Sky is blue! Winter coming and it will snow!

Fred Self | 6:20 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I'm not LDS and I dont live it UTAH, but I congratulate the Utan's for these great family statistics. Good work. You set a good example for the country and world.

Selfish | 7:04 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Why not have a bunch of kids if we the tax payers are footing most of the bill for the majority of these large families. From tax credits to education, it's all FREE, FREE, FREE. If you can't afford "everything" for your family without government help then you need to stop having children and stop being so selfish!

Grandma | 7:07 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

What is the purpose of this article? This isn't news to us.

elsie | 7:11 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Gee all the social scientists needed to do was take a trip to a grocery story and they'd have come to the same conclusion and saved a bundle of money.

Texan | 7:10 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

The survey results are nothing for the state of Utah to be proud of.

Freebies | 7:11 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

There's nothing like seeing a family at the grocery store with a pregnant mom and six kids using food stamps. I wouldn't be proud of a large family unless I could support the large family. Those of you using the government (us tax payers) should be ashamed, not proud.

EXTRA, EXTRA | 7:16 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Extra, extra read all about it, Utahns have large families! Talk about a shocker. I can't wait until a headline showing "Mormon's promote family values" or "Water proved to be wet." Talk about earth shattering developments in news reporting.

Ernest T. Bass | 7:21 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Wow. I would have never guessed, this is real news to me.

Danny C. | 7:23 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Re: Selfish

I agree with you in that families shouldn't wantonly have a ton of kids just because they think that's what the Lord calls for. They should be responsible for providing for additional mouths, drains on public services.

However, remember that more children = larger tax base in the not so distant future. Today's kids will be paying for your FREE, FREE, FREE benefits when you're old and start whining for them.

Danny C. | 7:23 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I apologize if this entry repeats, but my browser fritzed when I sent it. I'll just summarize this time.

Re: Selfish--

Keep in mind that more children = a larger tax base in the not so distant future, who will pay for your FREE, FREE, FREE benefits when you're old and start whining for them.

Quantity is not quality | 7:25 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I love children and am lucky to have two since I had numerous problems having them. I get tired of some saying that since they have large families they have been blessed by God. God doesn't pick and choose who is fertile and who is not. This is nature. People who have small families or who are unable to have children are just as loved by "God". If someone wants a large family and takes good care of their family more power to them! But there are also many examples of some that don't take care of children. And there are many who help take care of those children even though they are not their biological parents. These people are loved by "God" also. Some people need to stop thinking of children as commodities or possesions and start thinking of them as precious people that should only be brought into the world if they can be cared for and loved.

Tell Me | 7:27 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

What benefit does having a large family do for our society here in Utah? After 50 years here in Utah all I see is Utah #1 in bankruptcies and anti-depressants. The pollution in SLC ranks among the worst (too many cars), the suicide rate is ridiculous, the welfare system is over extended, jails can't fit anymore people, taxes are higher than ever, and like the hallways in schools the roadways are jam packed.

who paid for this? | 7:32 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Who flipped the bill to pay for this study? maybe they can pay me....I'll come up with some studies, like smoking can lead to cancer, sex can lead to pregnancy. sigh.

RE: Danny C. | 7:33 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Wrong! I will not need today's kids to pay my benefits because I have manageable sized family and have financially planned for future retirement. My family is not a financial liability to the state of Utah, like most of these "called upon" oversized/subsidized families.

RE: Freebies | 7:36 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

From the article:

"The survey shows relatively few Utahns living in poverty or receiving public welfare. The state had the 43rd lowest rate of people living in poverty, 9.7 percent, and ranked No. 45 in the percent of households receiving cash public assistance, 1.3 percent."
Seems that those with large families are doing pretty well providing for them. Also, a growing population typically means a strong economy. That's why Utah's economy and housing market hasn't been hit as bad as the rest of the nation.

Nancy | 7:38 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

There is irresponcibility in over population. There are social and economic impacts that these families just do not get when continually popping out kids. My goodness it is just ignorance.

Self-Test | 7:41 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

If your kids eat cereal for more than one meal a day, two or more times a week. STOP having children.

To Selfish... | 7:40 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

You must not have a child in school, if you think it's FREE FREE FREE. After paying property taxes - that should cover a lot of these things, I still had to pay outrageous fees for Jr. High school, some for Kindergarten, fees for this and fees for that. Yea, I could have filed to not have to pay. But we would not have qualifed to get the freebies. Oh, and I also don't qualify for the freelunch program, even though we've 6 kids and a preschooler. So, every day, I pack a lunch for everyone. It's not free. And no, I'm not selfish.

k | 7:50 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Small families also qualify for food stamps. It's not necessarily a big family necessity. And all families whether directly or indirectly pay property taxes which support local schools. In fact, why are the homes so big, the bigger homes oay higher taxes. The families pay into the system and get services from the system and their kids will do the same. In Germany they are paying people to have more kids as their population is declining and there aren't enough people paying into the system even with immigration.

Jeff | 7:57 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Self-Test, most people have cereal for breakfast, in case you haven't noticed. Are you saying everyone should stop having children (good idea!)?

Tired | 7:59 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I don't understand how people can have so many kids. We had three and it just about killed me. I don't have the patience needed and to have more would have been totally irresponsible.

To those parents who are capable of dealing with so many kids, good for you, but I sure don't understand how you do it and would never want to be in your shoes.

@quantity 7:25.. | 8:02 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Blessed by God and LOVED by God are not always the same thing. God loves all his children, but what is a blessing to one may not be the same blessing to another. That one family feels blessed to have several children does not mean that God loves another family less because they have fewer children. I wish the ever present desire to take offense at anything and everything would cease, but I'm not holding my breath.

I knew it! | 8:11 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

When I saw this article I knew the "selfish" posters would be out. Please people, if you're worried about paying more taxes because of people having children, maybe you should realize that the BIG FAT bailout the government gave to the banks that ripped everyone off are coming out of YOUR WALLET.

Leave people alone, let them have as many children as they want, and keep your snoody opinions to yourself.

This article is a set-up for bashers.

DadOf7 | 8:11 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

What people do not realize is that you must have positive population growth to sustain a society. This will be the case until science comes up with a way to provide for all of the elderly people who need an actual person to provide health care, grow food, make cars, produce medical breakthroughs, run public utilities, and so forth. These things do not come about just because you might have money to pay for them. You can imagine that if you had all the money in the world but no one to produce a good or service, your money would perish with you.
It is debatable what the optimum growth rate may be, as technology has a tendency to drive down the number of people required to provide these necessary services. However, it is interesting to note that in some European countries where the birth rate is lower than the zero population growth rate, the governments have implemented or discussed programs to pay large amounts of money (yes govt. subsidies) for women to have children.
The value education provides society is another topic; suffice it to say few are silly enough to believe productive people are just hatched.

Wow | 8:27 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Really...I never would have guessed that. I'm glad they put time and effort into this. Its like the $200,000 study that was done to see if a broadway type theater would do well in Utah. The results of the study were that people may not go to see the borderline risque material and that Salt Lake may have a tough time attracting the big name shows/actors. Really??? You needed to spend $200K to tell you that?? I could have told you this for $50!!

This just in..... | 8:45 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Ice discovered in the arctic.

I can't believe what passes as news these days. Isn't there a war going on that needs to be reported?

Ghost | 9:10 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

In the neighborhood I live in, there are many families with 6 or more kids. The kids are clean, well mannered, fed properly and are in no way a drain on society. They pay their fair share of taxes. To say that all big families are on welfare just isnï¿½t true and you need to check your facts. The article says as much if you care to read it and not just read the headline. The LDS Church teaches that you should have as many children as you can physically, emotionally, and FINANCIALLY handle. That is different for each family.

to Tired: | 9:08 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Not everyone has the stress and tiredness level as others. Some people are highly motivated and have excess energy and can handle more children. Others have the great gift of patience, it just depends on the person.

The Deuce | 9:15 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

The conclusions reached by many of the readers does not seem to be supported by the data of the research reported here. For Selfish/Freebies, the data seems to contradict your conclusion as Utah ranks 43rd in the lowest rate of people living in poverty and 45th in percent of households receiving cash assistance. Seems to me these households do quite well compared to other parts of this nation. While those of you who live in Utah are not suprised by this information, many of us who live outside of Utah view these statistics as quite remarkable given the state of this union. Whether you have 1 or 11 children depends on you and your situation and what you are able to manage. It is amazing that there is such a bias in people that come from Utah against anything the LDS faith promotes or stands for. While not a member of this church, I have traveled enough in the world to know that this is one of the most unusual circumstances I have ever come across. I would like to know the reason why a person would live in Utah when they appear to have such a hangup.

I'm just here on business | 9:15 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

and this is news to me. I thought it was a pretty interesting story about the state. This type of story is excactly the thing a local newspaper is for. If I want to find out about the financial bail out, I can tune into one the other millions of media outlets covering it. It's not like I'm going to go uninformed if this local paper doesn't cover the financial markets.

To Texas:

I'm from Texas, and I don't understand why these statistics are nothing for Utah to be proud of. How can you not be proud of having the highest % of children in families with a married couple, or the highest % of children with a stay at home mother? How is that not a good thing? There is no way you are from the great state of Texas, because no good southern born person would think those things are nothing to be proud of.

Kit | 9:37 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

HOw many people actually read the article. This is fantastic new Utah. Way to be self reliant and put family first. And I'm not only talking about the ones with many children. I'm talking about the highest percentage of stay at home moms. You sacrfice alot to be with your children and you should be commended for it.

Random | 9:42 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

We have six children, are not on food stamps, do not use public assistance, and are doing just fine. My wife stays home and homeschools the kids (you get the benefit of our property taxes without having our offspring taking up space at your facility); her choice, which I was initially against as I, like most, bought into the myth that two incomes are necessary to raise a family. It's not; you adjust. Priorities change.

We feel blessed to have our six. We don't think that makes us "better" or "more loved" by God than anyone else; we are just happy to have the ones we have. We would feel just as blessed if we had only two, or if we had ten. Those of you who want less or could not imagine having that many - fine! No one is telling you to have more.

We have had relatives tell us that we should have not had so many. I always ask them which ones they think we should have aborted?

They are good, hard working, productive members of society. What more can a parent (or fellow citizen) ask?

Rebecca | 9:45 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I'm 16 and the oldest of eight children (nine in January!!) and I think that large families are absolutely wonderful. You can't condemn one if you haven't been in one.

wambajester | 9:48 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Is it just me or does this paragraph sound like some dishonest spinning of the facts?

"The survey shows relatively few Utahns living in poverty or receiving public welfare. The state had the 43rd lowest rate of people living in poverty, 9.7 percent."

If the "1st lowest" rate of people living in poverty is the richest state, and we have the 43rd lowest rate of people in poverty out of 50 states, doesn't that mean we have the 8th highest rate of people in poverty?

Or is this just poorly written?

Why such anger? | 9:56 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I fully agree with the comments of "Ghost", "The Deuce" and "I'm just here on business". I suppose most people who have responded negatively here have pre-existing perceptions and stereotypes that they are trying to fit others into.

I am the oldest of seven children and my parents taught each of us the importance of hard work, education and thrift; they continue to do it even though we're all grown and most have families of our own - one still at the university, paying for his own education. I have 3 children of my own and I'll admit it requires constant effort to manage a budget with one income but it can be done and we are proof that families can live without debt and provide all the necessities (I didn't say "wants") for their families.

I challenge others to open their minds and try to break down your stereotypes through true education, not rumor and misconceived perceptions.

Seen both sides | 10:06 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I am the oldest of 8 and the father of two, one of whom is deceased. I loved being in a large family, but our oldest was severely handicapped and just consumed so much time and energy and resources that having a large family was not an option. Having said that, now that he has passed away, my wife and I have both said to each other that in retrospect, it would have been great to have had another couple of children. Life does not come with a rewind button, however.

Large Families | 10:16 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I would like to thank those who do have large families. I think you do a great service to society. I am LDS and my wife has had fertility problems, thus we only have two children. We were even lucky to have those two. My wife is 40 years old, and we hope to get lucky again and have another child soon, but that might not happen. We'll see. If you have many children, thank God everyday, since fertility problems are very common today, and you are blessed to not have that problem. Sometimes I feel a little "cheated" in not having a large family, but at the same time I accept the situation as it is.

Re: Random | 10:39 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

You'd think we were the same person. I have 6 children as well with number 7 coming in March. Technically those of us who homeschool are paying taxes for your children's education. My family is very supportive if we are ever in need (which we haven't been in many, many years) and therefore my wife and I have never pulled food stamps or cash for the government. I feel blessed to have so many children, though I don't look down on those who have few. They may simply have another calling in life. My wife and I both want more. We may never have the beautiful boat out on the lake or the extremely nice vehicles and houses. I've just traded those things for something more valuable to me. I grew up with 6 in my family as well. My two brothers were always my best friends to the point that I work for my younger brother now and am proud of what he has accomplished. I wouldn't trade my brothers for those material things and want my children to have the same type of best friends.

re: selfish | 10:58 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

You must not have read the article too closely - seems like Utah also leads in the number of stay at home moms and with higher household incomes. What does that mean. It means larger familieis are generally being seff-sufficient and not receiving handouts. Instead they form the backbone which also supplies the handouts to those that need help.

re:quantity vs. quality | 11:02 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Amen. You said it just right!

Z | 11:03 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

After reading this article, ponder on the fact that the United States is unique among developed nations in having a positive birth rate, but only barely at 2.3 births per childbearing female. Other countries have fallen below the replacement rate. The population decline has gotten so bad in France that the national government has started offering "Baby Bounties" to couples who have three or more children.

So look at it this way. Utah's large families are just balancing out the one or none pattern that is becoming the norm elsewhere. Don't start shrieking about a non-existent overpopulation problem. The numbers tell a different story.

john przyk* | 11:04 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

Forget about the state, what about me ? I have 8 children and they have all attended private elementary, secondary, and high schools and private universities in and out of the state. So why am I stuck paying taxes for other's kids to "drag me down" with their additional schooling costs when my family has never utilized these services ? How is that fair ?

I too | 11:27 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I too have seen both sides of a large family. I grew up in a large family and watched my dad work hard to provide for us so that my mother would not have to work and we would not have to rely on others. We were happy and very close. When parents can do this it is a wonderful thing!
After getting married and buying a home we lived next to a large family (9 children and one on the way)I got tired of hearing the mother brag about all of the free services they got because they had so many children (fee waivers,free lunch and breakfast not to mention many others she would tell me about). It can make you angry when you hear these things when you know that your own parents worked hard to take care of the family they raised. So lets not blame big families let's blame the free loaders and those that give handouts rather than trying to teach these parents how to become self sufficient, I agree you should not have more than you can care for with out handouts.

Scruffy | 11:35 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I thought newspapers were supposed to provide "news". This is news?

Sasha Pachev | 11:39 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

We have 5 children, expecting 6th in a month. We home school. We do not use any of the welfare services and never have. I am self-employed and we buy our own insurance. My wife stays home with the kids. We still pay quite a bit in taxes . I do not mind picking up the burden for another family where the dad is not as fortunate in his job due to no fault of his own, but I do mind picking up the tab for a guy that frequents liquor stores and cannot keep a job or others of that kind that are just wasting their lives a way with no commitment or efforts on their end to make a change.

Re: The Duece | 11:44 a.m. Sept. 23, 2008

I think it's great that Utah ranks very low in receiving cash payments from the government, but I wonder how much, if any, of that is offset by support from the LDS Church welfare system? LDS will often go to the church before using government handouts. Just a thought.

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.

Michael Brandy, Deseret News

Kay Lotulelei reads with her daughters Caroline, Meleanna and Levila at their home in Midvale. The Lotuleleis' nine children help keep Utah No. 1 for family size.