The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-04-14

Another doctor with experience among the very poor said: My patients are largely foreign born and are dis tressingly prolific. Still those who be- gin to learn selfrespect to restrict their families. Those who produce incessant-
 ly and without attempt to check are al-
 ways class that we would better have
 excluded from the country. They are
 the poorest possible material for mak- ing Amerieans.'
 Mrs. Commander continues: "So far
 have spoken exclusively of women in relation to the checking of population,
 as they are the ones most intimately and immediately concerned. But it does not appear that American men are more desirous than women of large families or to any considerable extent oppose the present tendency Fewer men than women seem to be satisfied with no children, but few, if any have any desire for a large family. .'The opposition to large families is not only individual but social Not on- ly do people object to large families for | themselves; they do not want others to have them. Americans disapprove of | the large family as social institution. They dislike to see it and condemn it's
 existence. The producers of large lam 1 lilies are considered rather in the light
 of social enemies than social benefac- tors.
 "A physician who has practised in
 New York for over 20 years among well-off Americans( as well as having
 done great deal of clinic work, said: 'The large family Is never anything
 but an unintentional misfortune at the present. Nowadays the mother of a
 large family feels humiliated. She is really an object or ridicule People ' laugh at her at best, and blame her if
 she Is poor. Society does not approve of many children Unless people have plenty of money we do net excuse them for having large family. Another doctor, who has practiced for six years among different classes of people, saii: I often have women say, Doctor, I family I'm ashamed. | don't like to be laughed att
 "1n woman's club.o in New York
 President Roosevelts opinion on race suicide were discussed and his atti-
 tude generally condemned. Of S4 pres ent only two agreed with MT. Roose- welt. The remaining 32i indorsed the
 statement of one of the members. There are thousands born that have no busi-
 ness to be born M 9 1 "A review of the evidence gathered points to these conclusions: | T That the size of the American fam lily has diminished
 l p That the decline is greater among
 the rich and educated. but also exists to marked extent, among the middle
 class and the intelligent poor B That only the most ignorant and
 Irresponsible make no effort to limit
 the number of their children. A That not only has the large fam l fly disappeared, but it is no longer de- sired.
 | "5 That the prevailing American ideal, among rich and poor, educated
 and uneducated, women and men, is two children.
 | '6 That childlessness is no longer con.
 sidered q disgrace or even a misfortune,
 but is frequently desired and voluntar- | fly sought.
 v That opposition to large families
 is so strong an American tendency
 that our immigrants are speedily in-
 fluenced by it; even Jews, famous for
 ages for their love of family, exhibiting
 its effects.
 1 'S That the large family 1t not only Individually, but socially, disapproved, ! the parents of numerous children meet li~g public censure.