There can be few choices in life more important than where to settle as a family, and the question of an urban or rural location is complex. There are strong arguments for and against living in the countryside, as we will discuss now.
On the one hand, it might be said that the countryside is rather a backwater, with fewer cultural amenities than a city in the form of museums, theatres, and even sporting events. This may mean that families become isolated, especially as rural depopulation leaves fewer country dwellers in the area, as we see, for example, in central France. Added to this is the scarcity of schools and colleges, meaning that children may need to travel long distances for their education. Finally, career options may be more limited in the countryside for both parents and children, resulting in rural unemployment and long-term rural poverty in the worst cases.
Conversely, life in the countryside has rewards which go beyond material considerations. For example, the abundance of natural resources such as land, wildlife forestry, and water bodies means that a comparatively simple life can be lived at a subsistence level. Many country residents are self-sufficient smallholders in this sense, safeguarding them from the changes in the wider economy which can afflict city dwellers. If the parents are farmers, children learn the importance of animal husbandry, methods of farming such as crop rotation and irrigation, and generally become more in tune with the natural world as a result. Finally, as technology enables children to undertake distance learning or remote viewing of cultural attractions such as museums, they should be less isolated from their cultural heritage.
Overall, it seems to me that quality of life in the countryside today is indeed quite high, with its advantages of resources, self-sufficiency, and environmental awareness, especially now that communications are reducing the risk of isolation in such far-flung communities.