This message regarding the negative consequences for children of unchecked fertility still applies today. For example, the popular press carried a story (not satire) about an Albanian mother who'd given her 3 year-old to an older, childless Italian couple in exchange for a T.V. set and the promise of future payments. When these were not forthcoming, she complained to authorities. In spite of living in such severe poverty that she is forced to sell her children, the woman had recently given birth to her 8th child (3). While the Albanian "old woman in a shoe" may be unusual, anthropologists have described numerous societies where high fertility, regardless of the consequences, is positively sanctioned.

In a very famous study, Nancy Scheper-Hughes documented the phenomenon of infant neglect leading to death that was widely accepted as normal. The very poor women of Ladeiras, NE Brazil are "used up" (acabado) from too many previous pregnancies and transfer this weakness to the fetus who is then born frail and skinny, unfit for the luta (fight) ahead. A mother is, therefore, not held accountable for the infant's death. The cultural basis of reproduction in this community is completely Darwinian-of the many offspring, only the fittest will survive (4). Among the Papel in severely overpopulated Guinea-Bissau, Einarsdottir records:

"I experienced the hopelessness and desperation of the mothers. Despite heavy and incessant work they could hardly feed themselves and their children. [Nevertheless, when she asked mothers how many children they would prefer, many responded:] 'You never have too many children' (5)."

Similarly, a prolific Fulani (Burkina Faso) breeder is esteemed while her less prolific counterpart is scorned. "One man in his sixties, who had been through several wives, said, ‘you cannot love your wife if she gives you no children.'" In spite of the high rate of infant sickness, malnutrition and death...

There are no perceived disadvantages in having lots of children. Children are never seen as a drain on resources. The availability of food is believed to be purely a product of the God-given fortune of the child, and nothing to do with the level of resources available within the household or the number of mouths to feed: "BiDDo fuu rimdatakena e tindem-every child is born with its own luck" (6).

This cavalier attitude towards the child's well-being is by no means universal. Many, perhaps the majority, of the world's societies follow customs designed to improve the child's prospects. The practice of frequent, round-the-clock nursing releases prolactin that, in turn, reduces the likelihood of pregnancy (7). Prolonged (3 years+) nursing yields longer inter-birth-intervals as does the post-partum sex taboo. In Papua New Guinea, for example, the Enga see the man's semen as a component of his war magic. Was this potent substance to mix with breast milk the result for the infant could be fatal (8). These customary practices enhance both the mother's and infant's health. Among the Airo-Pai foragers of Amazonian Peru:

"Men and women have explicit ideas about family size and spacing. They say that the ideal number of children is three and that a woman should not become pregnant until her last child is capable of eating and moving around independently...Long birth spacings are necessary to provide an adequate upbringing for young children, who are bestowed with the undivided attention of their parents. Closely spaced children are said to suffer, cry and develop angry characters (9)."

Another widely employed practice is fosterage in which families with too many children transfer some to kin who have too few children (10).

Western Europe has had a dismal record on the subject of fertility and child welfare. Not only were there no effective contraceptives, any attempt to limit fertility was condemned as sinful. Infant and child mortality was so high in the middle ages that those who died were rarely given formal burials but were, rather, buried as waste. Analyzing these pathetic remains, "archeology corroborates the impression given by the texts. [Child] skeletons [exhibit] deep lesions, wounds, decalcification, bad teeth, in short, a state of relatively poor health." During this period, the sale of surplus children was widespread, e.g. "peasants of southern Italy got rid of their children at the marketplace during a large fair (11)."

The Christian church offered a mixed blessing. In simultaneously banning infanticide and contraception, it forced mothers to abandon their surplus children. The response to this very public display of sick or deceased children was to bundle them into foundling homes. Called brephotrophia, the earliest opened in Milan by the end of the 8th century CE (12). Supply could never keep up with demand. The Ospedale degli Innocenti in Florence (one of 16 brephotrophia in Tuscany alone) admitted 100 infants in its first year, admitting as many as 1000 babies/year in succeeding years, two-thirds of whom perished before their first birthday (13). It was widely acknowledged that "being sent to foundling homes presaged early death (14)." Children that survived infancy were treated little better than slaves and, in the early colonial era, 1000s were, involuntarily, shipped to the colonies as agricultural laborers (12). Meanwhile, the well-to-do also had reason to limit fertility but lacked a legal and socially acceptable means to do so. Hence, they winnowed their offspring via "maltreatment," as records showing higher infant and child mortality among the gentry than among peasants would suggest (15).

The industrial revolution had a major impact on child rearing cost/benefit calculations as factories offered parents the opportunity to earn wages through their children. While the size of one's landholding limited the scope for child employment, the industrial revolution encouraged a rise in fertility levels (12). By the 1720s, 4-year olds were employed in French textile mills, and 100 years later in Lancashire, one-quarter of all the 10-15 year old girls were making cotton (16). Restrictions were gradually imposed so that, by 1830, factory workers had to be at least 8 years old, yet a 14+ hour work day was the norm, and they could be beaten for tardiness (12). However, outside the rural farm and urban proletariat, high fertility gradually began to lose its cachet.

The Quakers, at the end of the 18th century, became the first polity to deliberately limit fertility-in sharp contrast to the Puritans 150 years earlier (17).

"Relying primarily upon abstinence, coitus interruptus, and the rhythm method, supplemented by abortion (usually chemically induced or a result of trauma to the uterus), parents dramatically reduced [fertility]...The drop in the birthrate also reflected new cultural ideals, including a rejection of the view that women were chattel who should devote their adult lives to an endless cycle of pregnancy and childbirth (18)."