The socio-economic quandaries of rapid population growth and poverty have always gone hand in hand. It is evident that the poorest households are those who have a larger family size. Consequently, these households have to support more people with fewer resources. As such, one of the solutions to address the issue is the Reproductive Heath (RH) Bill, which is highly condemned by the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). For this reason, this study will explore other possibilities to limit family size by highlighting whether the availability of water, electricity, decent housing, sustainable income, employment, and other welfare enhancing programs limits family size. Showing whether the provisions of these basic sustenance affects family size, using the Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) procedure, it is then possible to propose an alternative solution instead of advocating the use of contraceptives. Likewise, the government can improve on its socio-economic policies so as to address the problem of a booming population. Results have shown that Pasay, Eastern Samar, and Agusan Del Sur responded differently to various stimuli such as educational attainment and government-funded programs, among others, insofar as population dynamics is concerned. This suggests a need to look into the distinction of each region’s socioeconomic context and underlying psyche. The milieu within which an individual resides may greatly influence his rational calculus and decision-making process. Also, beyond tailor-fitting population control programs, there is also a need to calibrate policies based on relevant socioeconomic, political, and cultural nuances each region may possess.