Though it’s too early to produce long-term research, anecdotal evidence is linking the struggling economy with more abortions and vasectomies. Why? People simply can’t afford more kids right now.

Former president of the American Urological Association and practicing urologist Lawrence Ross said the number of men seeking vasectomies had remained consistent over the years–about 500,000 a year. But in the last six months or so, he has seen a 50% increase. His patients’ reasons make sense. If you’ve been thinking about it, and now you are worried about losing your job and insurance benefits–get it done while you still can.

Ross also says men who weren’t previously thinking of vasectomies have new motivation. “A lot of them are saying that we’ve decided to limit our family, the costs of education and raising kids is so high.”

Vasectomies may have remained at constant levels. But abortion rates definitely fluctuate. (The numbers of tubal ligations or other female sterilization procedures may be a better comparison. But such data was not compared.) In 2005, when the economy was great, abortion rates were down to their lowest numbers since it was legalized. Now, they are up again. One woman interviewed for the initial report said, “I felt I had to go through with the procedure because I cannot afford another child.” The 32-year old woman is a registered nurse, but she is single and feels her job is not secure.

The president of an abortion hotline says their phone has been “ringing off the hook.” She says some of the issues that low-income women have always cited as reasons for abortion–their husbands or boyfriends are unemployed, uninsured, or are afraid of losing their home–are now affecting middle-class women.

I do not personally support abortion. But I can absolutely see why some people would choose to limit their family size right now. I know that economics was part of the decision when my husband and I started talking about having another baby. This was a few years ago. And at the time, the nation’s economy was doing great. But my personal economy was more the issue. How would we make it financially if I took a year off? Of course, my husband said if you wait until you can afford kids, you’ll never have them. He’s right, of course. But I was still nervous. I’m glad we expanded our family when we did. I’m not sure I would have wanted to make that decision today.

What about you? Is an uncertain economy a factor in expanding (or limiting) your family size?

Everyone knows what the policy is in China when it comes to having children. It’s tough to judge them too harshly I guess, as they have to find some means of controlling their population. I sometimes wonder though just how far the Chinese government is willing to take it. With the world population continuing to grow, many people speculate that we are on our way to not being able to sustain it. I’m not too big on Doomsday theories myself, but is it possible that other nations may soon impose stricter laws restricting people’s reproductive rights?

Take for example, Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar who already have 17 children, with another baby due in January of 2009. With Michelle just 42, there is the real possibility that the Duggars are not done having babies quite yet.

Recently a few celebrities weighed in on the discussion of family size. See who shares your opinion on whether or not a family can be too big.

The View co-host, Whoopi Goldberg feels that nobody has the right to judge. She says, ‘I think it’s to each their own and none of our business. If people want to have 30 kids and can afford it, it’s none of our business. Some people are very wealthy, only have one child and that’s too much for them. Some people have 18 children and they have it together?’

According to The Grand Dame of Dish, Liz Smith, ‘Doesn’t the number of children a family chooses to have fall under the “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” clause? Isn’t it a private matter, so long as a family can cope, care for and control in a healthy manner?’

Actress Lily Tomlin put it this way, ‘I’ve seen it written in information about overpopulation that “People are a good thing. Overpopulation isn’t.’

While it is in fact a private issue, maybe it’s not such a bad idea to view it in the context of the health care system, and programs like welfare. If a family is really able to care for a large number of children that is one thing, but those that aren’t would be forced to rely on others to meet the children’s needs.

What’s your view on this issue? Should any family be criticized for its size?