How many kids are 'too many'?

newmum1

belfastgirl23 wrote: »

It's the exchange of time for money that's at the root of this trouble. It's right to point out that 'goods' for children can cost as much as you want to spend, and conversely can cost fairly little if you shop around and happy to use 2nd hand etc. The biggest cost is in terms of one or both parents having to either give up on work or give up on advancement at work in order to have proper time with their children. Personally I can't see the point of having children to hand over to a childminder all the time - that's the worst of all worlds. Not criticising anyone who does, it just seems the same as having a home you can't life in

If we could all just get the work-life balance thing right it would help a lot!

I have a daughter who is 2 in june and yes shes at nursery full time but, in order for her to have the 'nice things' in life this is neccessary, what would you rather me stay at home live off benefits and not work?? The way I look at it is she is meeting all her educational targets and developing really well and most of all she enjoys it and is happy, if shes happy so am I.

newmum1

jo_b wrote: »

I'm surprised how the majority of the replies have focused on the financial aspects ie: you should only have as many children as you can afford to support financially without resorting to benefits.

I would have expected more posters to mention the issue about having the time, patience and emotional support to offer each child as an individual. I know this is a 'money saving' site but parenthood is about so much more than money.

I think that you should limit the number of children that you have not only to those that you can provide for materially but also emotionally. Watching the '10 Kids and Counting' programme last week, I did feel for some of the children as I really can't see that they can get the level of individual attention that a child really deserves to have from a parent.

Personally, I'm expecting my second baby this Summer. If we could afford to, then I might perhaps have considered a third child but think that I would struggle to give a child enough individual consideration and support if I had any more than that. I'm not saying that other parents can't do so - just that I would struggle past that point. Obviously, having bigger age gaps does help but I think parents need to consider the quality of a child's parenting and childhood just as much as the financial considerations. Unfortunately, some parents do neither.

I totally agree with you, my best friend, is 27 and has 5 children, they are 10,9,7,5 and 8 months, now she and her new husband they really do struggle, they had a mortgage but could not afford it and the house got reposed they now live in a council house 4 bedroom and she can only afford to work part time as it tops up her tax credits, but I do feel sorry for the kids cause she cant afford to do 'nice things' she wants to go for days out, holidays abroad but to do this costs money but on the other hand she couldnt ask for a nicer bunch. I personally could not do it but, I do admire her for being a good mum.

milkydrink

agentsquirrel wrote: »

i've got five, eldest is now 21 youngest is 9 and we have a four bed house, granted its a squeeze but i agree with the other post which said whats wrong with sharing a room, we all did it. i think to be honest kids are more expensive these days because parents seem to think they 'need' a £100 mobile phone and a ipod, fancy trainers, the latest video game system, truth is they dont, my two eldest girls wanted mp3 mobile phones, pay as you go on orange from woolworths £24.99 each, ok they're not fancy phones but they look ok and they work and the price is right for a kid who will be fed up next month with it. kids are only expensive if u think they need material things more than love, food, warmth. in these days of 'carbon footprint' this and that whats wrong with charity shop shopping, i do it, we've had some bargains for under a fiver. maybe its me and i'm old fashioned but i grew up in a two bed terrace without central heating, double glazing etc (oh i miss the coal fire,) and there where six of us. plus pets.

While I agree with all you have said, love is far more important than ANY material things.
Please do not sound so down on parents who take pleasure in indulging their children with material goods.
I haven't been lucky enough to have a large family & only have 1 daughter (19!!) & it is our great pleasure to "spoil" & indulge her.
Kim

ooobedoo

I think as long as you can remember all their names there you haven't got ot many.....

dlb

ooobedoo wrote: »

I think as long as you can remember all their names there you haven't got ot many.....

This made me smile, all my 3 boys look alike from the back and there isnt much difference in height, they are 9,10 +11 (dd is 4) the times i have called all 3 names out before i get the right one!!!
Its when i call my little girls by one of the boys name ill start to worry!!!:rolleyes:

emmaroids

newmum1 wrote: »

I have a daughter who is 2 in june and yes shes at nursery full time but, in order for her to have the 'nice things' in life this is neccessary, what would you rather me stay at home live off benefits and not work?? The way I look at it is she is meeting all her educational targets and developing really well and most of all she enjoys it and is happy, if shes happy so am I.

i dont agree with this, the best for a child is with a parent.

she may like the `nice` things you buy for her but i bet she would prefer her mum especially at that age.

dlb

I do think a happy parent makes for happy children, so if a parent wants to work and not stay at home as that make them happy, then thats great.
Just because a parent is a work all day doesnt mean they dont have quality time with their kids.
I am a stay at home mum, but do belive working mums are fantastic.
A few hours good quality time is better than day in day out with a unhappy parent.

Mum_of_many_4

I hate the way large families are always considered scroungers or that in some way the children are deprived because they dont have all the latest expensive gadgets :mad:
I am 26 and have been with Dh for 10 years we have 5 children aged 8,6,3,2 and 9 months with #6 due in july. We have a 4 bedroom detached house in a "nice" area, our kids go to the best school in the area- we have always paid for all their school trips etc they have never missed anything.We have an 8 seater car paid for outright, take a family holiday each year abroad, we have no debt apart from our mortgage and we even have savings :eek: I am a Sahm and my Dh works full time plus overtime, we have only ever claimed tax credits(no working families just basic tax credits ) and child benefit.Our kids do have "nice" things ie playstation each, nintendo Ds, lots of toys, well clothed(next etc) and days out. They have all had a birthday party from age 1, wherever and with however many friends they choose. Not boasting or trying to put anyone else down but just wanted to show it can be done, with a little hard work.

emmaroids

Mum_of_many wrote: »

I hate the way large families are always considered scroungers or that in some way the children are deprived because they dont have all the latest expensive gadgets :mad:
I am 26 and have been with Dh for 10 years we have 5 children aged 8,6,3,2 and 9 months with #6 due in july. We have a 4 bedroom detached house in a "nice" area, our kids go to the best school in the area- we have always paid for all their school trips etc they have never missed anything.We have an 8 seater car paid for outright, take a family holiday each year abroad, we have no debt apart from our mortgage and we even have savings :eek: I am a Sahm and my Dh works full time plus overtime, we have only ever claimed tax credits(no working families just basic tax credits ) and child benefit.Our kids do have "nice" things ie playstation each, nintendo Ds, lots of toys, well clothed(next etc) and days out. They have all had a birthday party from age 1, wherever and with however many friends they choose. Not boasting or trying to put anyone else down but just wanted to show it can be done, with a little hard work.

:T :T
thats how it should be if folks have a large familly.
unfortunately your a rare breed.

vippymini

Mum_of_many wrote: »

I hate the way large families are always considered scroungers or that in some way the children are deprived because they dont have all the latest expensive gadgets :mad:
I am 26 and have been with Dh for 10 years we have 5 children aged 8,6,3,2 and 9 months with #6 due in july. We have a 4 bedroom detached house in a "nice" area, our kids go to the best school in the area- we have always paid for all their school trips etc they have never missed anything.We have an 8 seater car paid for outright, take a family holiday each year abroad, we have no debt apart from our mortgage and we even have savings :eek: I am a Sahm and my Dh works full time plus overtime, we have only ever claimed tax credits(no working families just basic tax credits ) and child benefit.Our kids do have "nice" things ie playstation each, nintendo Ds, lots of toys, well clothed(next etc) and days out. They have all had a birthday party from age 1, wherever and with however many friends they choose. Not boasting or trying to put anyone else down but just wanted to show it can be done, with a little hard work.

Agree thats how it should be i have 5 wonderful children 9,6,4,2, 6mths and they are all happy and well socialized and i wouldnt change it for the world. we do have a tight budget but they dont go without.

It doent matter how much money you got having children is part of life and whatever the circumstances if you want children you will make it work . Children are only as expensive as you make them.

If everyone based having children on there income there would never be any children . Children come from much more than that....