Regret number of kids?

melbury

Spirit wrote: »

I would have liked to have had more than one child. It is something OH and I both would have wanted.

Our resources would have stretched. Some material things would have been less, some personal experiences more.

Our love for our daughter is unlimted, there is room for others. She is not a squidgy little one, but a woman of 25. We love her and enjoy her company, she enhances our lives including the ups and downs.

I would have liked DD to have siblings, especially as an adult have more people around the table for family meals, and family special occassions, or even visting although as she is till living at home she is here too much at the moment. We have friends who we include in our family but there is a difference in how we feel and treat our DD and share experiences.

DD could be over focused on in terms of expectations and our interference as she is an only and we have taken a view that we must not do this: All our eggs in one basket in terms of prospects of grandchildren, future generation things, hopes dreams aspirations.

I also wish that she was not in sole charge of us if ever lose our minds, and had others to share decisions with.

Totally agree with everything you say, extremely well put.:T

It is only since my DS has grown up that I have regretted just having the one child. When he was little it never really bothered me at all.

I did used to think that he missed out on having siblings, but then again my OH is the eldest of three and he has never been at all close to his siblings, even when they were children.

John_Pierpoint

As a nation all of us plus the two parents invest a sum well into six figures into each child; the largest burden normally falls on the mother, as it requires two incomes to maintain the standard of living most of us enjoy.
Has anyone else noticed that children are being spaced 4 - 5 years apart, to avoid two lots of child care costs?
So producing multiple children us not a lifestyle choice, if someone else is paying these costs..

I suppose we should be thankful that we don't live in India, where the statistics demonstrate that girls are being aborted nor in China where the increase in multiple births demonstrates that some mothers are popping fertility pills, to avoid the tax on a second child, that does not apply to twins.

zygurat789

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

As a nation all of us plus the two parents invest a sum well into six figures into each child; the largest burden normally falls on the mother, as it requires two incomes to maintain the standard of living most of us enjoy.
Has anyone else noticed that children are being spaced 4 - 5 years apart, to avoid two lots of child care costs?
So producing multiple children us not a lifestyle choice, if someone else is paying these costs..

I suppose we should be thankful that we don't live in India, where the statistics demonstrate that girls are being aborted nor in China where the increase in multiple births demonstrates that some mothers are popping fertility pills, to avoid the tax on a second child, that does not apply to twins.

But perhaps we should be grateful to the Indians because this will, inevitably, lead to a reduction in that country's birth rate. At least it will, hopefully, cancel out the increase in China where they have had a similar situation for years.

John_Pierpoint

I think the number of children per woman is much more significant than the number of men per women.

India has not managed to skew the number of women per man to 25/75 and the situation is changing since the passing of a law to clamp down on the abortion of female foetus..




http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4708432.stm

zygurat789

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

I think the number of children per woman is much more significant than the number of men per women.

Trust me John a man can father more children in a given time than a woman can give birth to.

John_Pierpoint

I think that is the point we are both making - dairy farmers maximise the number of female births, but that is because the man with the straws makes sure that every female get pregnant every year, and those who don't get culled.
http://familycow.proboards.com/thread/39322
Since we started ploughing with shire horses, the male of the species became increasingly redundant - dog food from birth - seeing as most of us don't eat veal.

So there we have it family size is largely a matter of female "choice" in "modern" societies; however the care and upbringing has increasingly been socialised.

[As the old saying goes: If men and women could take took it in turns to have babies, there would be some 3 child families but not many 4 ]

Modern urban developments, provided the social structure does not collapse, no longer biologically function as population limiting structures, as they did in historical times.

[Though they probably do in economic terms]

Bricken

I am one of 8 i survived my childhood when we all get together we avoid talking of the past it too painful there were kids from larger families we grew up with who's experience is similar Abuse through ignorance.
It is not the size of a familly that matters its how they are reared and their genetics combined there is an aundance of information on how to raise a child.
I am father to 3 and have 3 step children. One from each family keeps regular contact two treat me as if i were a casual aquaintence and two are who knows where. Money was never the issue its all personalities likes and dislikes i made huge mistakes some hold it against me some dont. I love them all but not equally. Dont have expectations have kids feed them cloth them and love them and you will get what you get. adult people with all their complexities.

grai

what's DD stand for? why can't people just type the word?

Savvy_Sue

Dear Daughter.

mumps

I have 4, 21 years between eldest and youngest. I normally see at least one of them every day and am enjoying my first three grandchildren and expect I will have more in the future.