Why do poor people have so many children?

Why do poor people have children they can't afford? It's a reasonable question. One has to ask the question: which came first, the poverty or the children?

According to BLS data from 2011, families receiving some form of federal assistance have an average size of 3.7 people (including the parents). The nationwide average family size is 3.14 people (including parents). The same data shows that nearly half of families receiving assistance are single-parent households. Let that sink in. The number of families receiving assistance, according to the data, is 6.6 million. Of those, 3.2 million are single-parent households, and 3.4 million are two-parent households.

The average size of two-parent families receiving assistance is 4.4 people. That means, they have 2.4 children, on average. The average size of single-parent families receiving assistance is 3.7 people. That means single-parents on assistance have, on average, 2.7 children.

Let's take that and run the numbers based on the number of assistance-receiving households.

• Single-Parent households receiving assistance is 3.2 million
• Average number of children per single-parent household is 2.7
• Two-Parent households receiving assistance is 3.4 million
• Average number of children per two-parent household is 2.4

The number of children in 2011 who's parent(s) received assistance is:

Single-Parent Families: 3,200,000 x 2.7 = 8,640,000

Two-Parent Families: 3,400,000 x 2.4 = 8,160,000

Total: 16,800,000 children

To put that in context, the average family-size is 3.14 people. Let's take the numbers above, and lower the number of children in each household to bring it in line with the average family.

Single-Parent Families: 3,200,000 x 2.14 = 6,848,000

Two-Parent Families: 3,400,000 x 1.14 = 3,876,000

Total: 10,724,000 children

As you can see, the difference is 6,076,000. That's the number of "extra" children in households that receive assistance. That's a lot of mouths to feed.

Now let's talk about the political problem. One party talks about "abstinence only", rails against birth control and abortion, and generally couldn't care less about the kids once they are born. The other party supports contraception and abortion rights, and cares about the kids to the point of encouraging more of them to be born on the public dole.

I'm not sure what is the right solution. I really don't want to interfere with the reproduction choices of other people. On the other hand, I really don't like to encourage the production of more children who will have a hard time escaping the poverty trap they were born into.

Since our broken political system can't seem to come up with useful solutions, perhaps the non-profit sector should fill in the gaps.

References:
Spending patterns of families receiving means-tested government assistance
The Majority of Children Live With Two Parents, Census Bureau Reports