Tim Carney in the Post: The Ideal Number of Kids is Four (at a minimum)

[Anonymous]

If you do it right, one is enough.

[Anonymous]

Oldest from a family of 5 who is now a one-and-done mom here. Both of my parents are oldests as well, and it was ingrained in me from early on that I had extra responsibilities in the family, including caring for my mentally ill sister. I think loving, healthy families come in manh different sizes but it has been so cathartic to read these comments from other oldests who were parentified like I was. It has really made me feel less alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the eldest girl in a big family (5 kids) and I think my parents tried hard not to force me to raise my younger siblings. I loved having a younger sister in particular and enjoyed taking care of her. What I did not enjoy was never ever getting any focused attention from my dad and very little from my mom. One sibling had significant issues and any bandwidth went to dealing with him (and it wasn’t enough). I wanted a different experience for my own kids, which is why I only have 2.

This was my experience in a big family. I was one of the kids kind of lost in the middle -- not the youngest or the oldest, a "good" kid who got good grades and didn't complain. I had several experiences early on where it was made clear to me that needing any extra attention -- to deal with recurrent nightmares, to help with social adjustment to school, etc. -- would be seen as an annoying distraction from all the other kids. So I learned to have no problems. Ever. In some ways this did make me resilient and independent, just like Carney suggest. It also means that as an adult, I am allergic to asking for help or even just telling someone when something is going on. I apologize for myself compulsively and have very low self esteem, something that has made both relationships and my career difficult. A few years ago I realized that I just carry around this longing to be seen and hear and understood, and I don't think anyone will ever be able to satisfy it because what I really want is to be a child and to be loved and seen in the way kids all want to be loved and seen. But I'm not a child and I'll never be one again so I just have to live with that feeling of absence.

I don't think all kids from big families feel that way, but I do. And I happen to know that another of my siblings feels the same. So I'm skeptical that large families can really meet the needs of every single kid. And it might seem like no big deal if 1 out of 6, or 2 out of 8, have this feeling of loss. But if you are the one experiencing it, it's deeply painful, a wound that will never heal.

so much of what you wrote resonated with me. it’s truly not something that ever gets discussed! I don’t think I’ve ever really met another one of us in person.

I think when people say broadly something like, "there will be less resources for each child" or "there's only so many hours in a day and only so much time you can give each one." they are including/referencing the very sad emotional neglect that pp's are describing. You lived it personally so obviously you feel the emotional cost in a profound way. I'm a parent of two teens. They need a lot, financially, emotionally, psychologically, medically, socially. A lot of guidance, a lot of patience, a lot of talking and checking in regularly and yes like many we also have two careers. It's only become more demanding (not less) as they have become teens. The era of large families was a different time. Some kids in large families got their needs met obviously. But some never did. We know more as a culture now about emotional intelligence. Thankfully.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But how does the 12 yr old feel about it?

great - she's happy as a clam and is often offering to help even when I don't need it.

You won't know she is happy as a clam until she grows up. She might be an extreme people pleaser.

Agree. That's how she gets your attention - by being the perfect little parent helper.

I’m the youngest of four. My oldest siblings didn’t have to “raise” me but my sister, who’s the oldest, was desperate for a baby sister and in so many pictures when I was a baby, she’s holding me with a huge grin. We’re still super close today and she has three kids of her own. She loved being a big sister - I think you’re projecting a lot of your own defensiveness onto larger families. The second born in my family is one of my brothers, and he’s an amazing father also to three kids. He’s actually a lot more involved than his wife and is always doing fun things with his kids. They both grew up to love kids. My other brother and I - numbers three and four - have less patience with kids because we didn’t really grow up with young kids around us.

Well I was an older sister and I never wanted to be the “little mother.” Not much fun. it’s great if the older girls enjoy it, not so great if they are forced to be free childcare.

My point is that they weren’t forced to be childcare. My sister and brothers are huge achievers and were in tons of activities and went to Ivy League schools. They are very successful and well adjusted adults. Our family was well off and had resources for whatever activities, tutoring or resources we needed. We went to private school and all skied, played tennis, were on debate teams, mock trial, and each did all of the “elite” extracurriculars. We were honors and AP students and national merit scholars. DCUM wants to keep pushing this narrative that large families are miserable and deadbeats… and that’s just an awful generalization. I can’t speak to “parentifiction” of kids, because my parents didn’t do that, but dcum acts like having a teenager babysit a younger kid is child abuse and anything short of raising 1-2 (max) entitled self centered brats is unacceptable. Many kids from families of 3+ are so happy to have more than one sibling, including myself. My siblings are my best friends as adults and we’re close with our parents.

But you are doing the same thing. Yes there are people on here who are against big families. But here you are describing people who prefer smaller families as raising "self entitled brats."

I’m not. I have two kids! Fully acknowledge the benefits of smaller and larger families. But people on dcum come out with pitchforks - that people with larger families can’t give the best of everything to four kids (which isn’t necessarily true, and can also be true with two kids- entirely dependent on income) and are therefore bad parents. I can’t stand that judgemental attitude. They are saying if a child has to (gasp) consider others in the household, they’re at a disadvantage. In my opinion that’s a reason NOT to only have two kids

“Self entitled brats”

[Anonymous]

News flash: There’s no such thing as an “ideal family size.”

I am the middle kid of 5 (though we were pretty spaced out), and I had a great childhood. Some of my siblings did have learning disabilities & things like that, but nothing too serious. We didn’t camp for vacations, but we mainly drove and stayed with relatives. We were able to do activities. I never felt ignored or unloved by my parents. We are all fairly close as adults.

I would have been happy to have 3-5 kids, but my spouse didn’t want that many, so we stopped at 2. So far, I think they are also having a good childhood, but I guess time will tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But how does the 12 yr old feel about it?

great - she's happy as a clam and is often offering to help even when I don't need it.

You won't know she is happy as a clam until she grows up. She might be an extreme people pleaser.

Agree. That's how she gets your attention - by being the perfect little parent helper.

I’m the youngest of four. My oldest siblings didn’t have to “raise” me but my sister, who’s the oldest, was desperate for a baby sister and in so many pictures when I was a baby, she’s holding me with a huge grin. We’re still super close today and she has three kids of her own. She loved being a big sister - I think you’re projecting a lot of your own defensiveness onto larger families. The second born in my family is one of my brothers, and he’s an amazing father also to three kids. He’s actually a lot more involved than his wife and is always doing fun things with his kids. They both grew up to love kids. My other brother and I - numbers three and four - have less patience with kids because we didn’t really grow up with young kids around us.

Well I was an older sister and I never wanted to be the “little mother.” Not much fun. it’s great if the older girls enjoy it, not so great if they are forced to be free childcare.

My point is that they weren’t forced to be childcare. My sister and brothers are huge achievers and were in tons of activities and went to Ivy League schools. They are very successful and well adjusted adults. Our family was well off and had resources for whatever activities, tutoring or resources we needed. We went to private school and all skied, played tennis, were on debate teams, mock trial, and each did all of the “elite” extracurriculars. We were honors and AP students and national merit scholars. DCUM wants to keep pushing this narrative that large families are miserable and deadbeats… and that’s just an awful generalization. I can’t speak to “parentifiction” of kids, because my parents didn’t do that, but dcum acts like having a teenager babysit a younger kid is child abuse and anything short of raising 1-2 (max) entitled self centered brats is unacceptable. Many kids from families of 3+ are so happy to have more than one sibling, including myself. My siblings are my best friends as adults and we’re close with our parents.

But you are doing the same thing. Yes there are people on here who are against big families. But here you are describing people who prefer smaller families as raising "self entitled brats."

I’m not. I have two kids! Fully acknowledge the benefits of smaller and larger families. But people on dcum come out with pitchforks - that people with larger families can’t give the best of everything to four kids (which isn’t necessarily true, and can also be true with two kids- entirely dependent on income) and are therefore bad parents. I can’t stand that judgemental attitude. They are saying if a child has to (gasp) consider others in the household, they’re at a disadvantage. In my opinion that’s a reason NOT to only have two kids

But your own experience was not really one of needing to consider the other kids or make trade offs in any sort of meaningful way if your family had resources for everyone to go to private school, play elite sports, get tutoring etc. I think if you are seriously wealthy and can outsource all the extra things most of us need to do like teach our kids things and do the cleaning and never worry about money etc you might have the bandwidth to parent 4 kids acceptably. However, that’s not the case for most large families. My dad had a good job and my mom worked part time and we would have been comfortable with a small family. As it was, each kid could only do one activity per year and if one kid had extra needs there was no additional help to deal with it. That attention just came at the expense of the other kids.

My oldest has mild SN (less than my sibling) and a big part of why we stopped at 2 was to be sure we’d have some bandwidth for the second one in addition to meeting our oldest’s needs. There’s plenty of compromising still, I promise you.

Let the pp share her experience without talking over him/her. There is no way to grow up with siblings and not have to consider their needs, whether the resources are there or not. Just stop!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But how does the 12 yr old feel about it?

great - she's happy as a clam and is often offering to help even when I don't need it.

You won't know she is happy as a clam until she grows up. She might be an extreme people pleaser.

Agree. That's how she gets your attention - by being the perfect little parent helper.

I’m the youngest of four. My oldest siblings didn’t have to “raise” me but my sister, who’s the oldest, was desperate for a baby sister and in so many pictures when I was a baby, she’s holding me with a huge grin. We’re still super close today and she has three kids of her own. She loved being a big sister - I think you’re projecting a lot of your own defensiveness onto larger families. The second born in my family is one of my brothers, and he’s an amazing father also to three kids. He’s actually a lot more involved than his wife and is always doing fun things with his kids. They both grew up to love kids. My other brother and I - numbers three and four - have less patience with kids because we didn’t really grow up with young kids around us.

Well I was an older sister and I never wanted to be the “little mother.” Not much fun. it’s great if the older girls enjoy it, not so great if they are forced to be free childcare.

My point is that they weren’t forced to be childcare. My sister and brothers are huge achievers and were in tons of activities and went to Ivy League schools. They are very successful and well adjusted adults. Our family was well off and had resources for whatever activities, tutoring or resources we needed. We went to private school and all skied, played tennis, were on debate teams, mock trial, and each did all of the “elite” extracurriculars. We were honors and AP students and national merit scholars. DCUM wants to keep pushing this narrative that large families are miserable and deadbeats… and that’s just an awful generalization. I can’t speak to “parentifiction” of kids, because my parents didn’t do that, but dcum acts like having a teenager babysit a younger kid is child abuse and anything short of raising 1-2 (max) entitled self centered brats is unacceptable. Many kids from families of 3+ are so happy to have more than one sibling, including myself. My siblings are my best friends as adults and we’re close with our parents.

But you are doing the same thing. Yes there are people on here who are against big families. But here you are describing people who prefer smaller families as raising "self entitled brats."

I’m not. I have two kids! Fully acknowledge the benefits of smaller and larger families. But people on dcum come out with pitchforks - that people with larger families can’t give the best of everything to four kids (which isn’t necessarily true, and can also be true with two kids- entirely dependent on income) and are therefore bad parents. I can’t stand that judgemental attitude. They are saying if a child has to (gasp) consider others in the household, they’re at a disadvantage. In my opinion that’s a reason NOT to only have two kids

Regardless of family size, every family member should consider the others. That is very different from what happens in many large families, particularly where the oldest is a girl. In many cases, the oldest girl gets treated more similar to a parent than a sibling to the younger ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But how does the 12 yr old feel about it?

great - she's happy as a clam and is often offering to help even when I don't need it.

You won't know she is happy as a clam until she grows up. She might be an extreme people pleaser.

Agree. That's how she gets your attention - by being the perfect little parent helper.

I’m the youngest of four. My oldest siblings didn’t have to “raise” me but my sister, who’s the oldest, was desperate for a baby sister and in so many pictures when I was a baby, she’s holding me with a huge grin. We’re still super close today and she has three kids of her own. She loved being a big sister - I think you’re projecting a lot of your own defensiveness onto larger families. The second born in my family is one of my brothers, and he’s an amazing father also to three kids. He’s actually a lot more involved than his wife and is always doing fun things with his kids. They both grew up to love kids. My other brother and I - numbers three and four - have less patience with kids because we didn’t really grow up with young kids around us.

Well I was an older sister and I never wanted to be the “little mother.” Not much fun. it’s great if the older girls enjoy it, not so great if they are forced to be free childcare.

My point is that they weren’t forced to be childcare. My sister and brothers are huge achievers and were in tons of activities and went to Ivy League schools. They are very successful and well adjusted adults. Our family was well off and had resources for whatever activities, tutoring or resources we needed. We went to private school and all skied, played tennis, were on debate teams, mock trial, and each did all of the “elite” extracurriculars. We were honors and AP students and national merit scholars. DCUM wants to keep pushing this narrative that large families are miserable and deadbeats… and that’s just an awful generalization. I can’t speak to “parentifiction” of kids, because my parents didn’t do that, but dcum acts like having a teenager babysit a younger kid is child abuse and anything short of raising 1-2 (max) entitled self centered brats is unacceptable. Many kids from families of 3+ are so happy to have more than one sibling, including myself. My siblings are my best friends as adults and we’re close with our parents.

But you are doing the same thing. Yes there are people on here who are against big families. But here you are describing people who prefer smaller families as raising "self entitled brats."

I’m not. I have two kids! Fully acknowledge the benefits of smaller and larger families. But people on dcum come out with pitchforks - that people with larger families can’t give the best of everything to four kids (which isn’t necessarily true, and can also be true with two kids- entirely dependent on income) and are therefore bad parents. I can’t stand that judgemental attitude. They are saying if a child has to (gasp) consider others in the household, they’re at a disadvantage. In my opinion that’s a reason NOT to only have two kids

Regardless of family size, every family member should consider the others. That is very different from what happens in many large families, particularly where the oldest is a girl. In many cases, the oldest girl gets treated more similar to a parent than a sibling to the younger ones.

By way of example:

Having to get up on Sat am to change your sibling’s diaper, get him breakfast, and settle him down for a cartoon - parentification and bad

Taking turns choosing what show to watch - good

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you do it right, one is enough.

I'm not against big families but I do think it's easier to mitigate the negative aspects of having 1 or 2 than to mitigate the negative things about having 4 or more. Like a family with an only child can do things to address stuff like entitlement or loneliness.

I think having a very large family is a bit like roulette. If it hits and everything works out, the bounty is plentiful. But a lot can go wrong. I grew up in a big family where a lot went wrong. I chose to have a small family and am thoughtful about things that might be harder with fewer kids.

Also, all of these arguments assume that a family is an island unto itself. That's not true. How do you compare an only child who lives 20 minutes away from a gaggle of cousins they see all the time, with a child who has 4 siblings but no extended family to speak of or whose extended family are all very far away? Or kids in a family where the parents are social and get together with friends and neighbors (and their kids) frequently versus a family that is insular and rarely spends time with other families? A lot of the arguments about large or small families hinge on this idea that kids are spending all their time with just their immediate family. That's actually not how a lot of families operate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Backward reasoning.

1. The reason mothers of 4 are generally happier than mother of 3, is that they wanted a large family all along, and got it. Not that they ended up with a large family by accident, and then found out that it was "easier".

2. I know lots of people who had to parent their little siblings. Most of them don't have kids of their own, because of the psychological toll it took on their childhoods.

3. While I would have loved a large family, my oldest was born with special needs. Parenting him was a full time job, and I missed my fertile window to expand beyond 2. But I certainly wouldn't have forced my oldest kids to parent the younger kids!

4. This man is a moron.

#2 is definitely interesting. My dad is smack on the middle of 9 siblings, and his four older siblings are either childless or had 1 kid. He and my mom had 3. His four younger siblings all have kids (2 of them had 4 kids each). I think where you are in the birth order in large families does influence your perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But how does the 12 yr old feel about it?

great - she's happy as a clam and is often offering to help even when I don't need it.

You won't know she is happy as a clam until she grows up. She might be an extreme people pleaser.

Agree. That's how she gets your attention - by being the perfect little parent helper.

I’m the youngest of four. My oldest siblings didn’t have to “raise” me but my sister, who’s the oldest, was desperate for a baby sister and in so many pictures when I was a baby, she’s holding me with a huge grin. We’re still super close today and she has three kids of her own. She loved being a big sister - I think you’re projecting a lot of your own defensiveness onto larger families. The second born in my family is one of my brothers, and he’s an amazing father also to three kids. He’s actually a lot more involved than his wife and is always doing fun things with his kids. They both grew up to love kids. My other brother and I - numbers three and four - have less patience with kids because we didn’t really grow up with young kids around us.

Well I was an older sister and I never wanted to be the “little mother.” Not much fun. it’s great if the older girls enjoy it, not so great if they are forced to be free childcare.

My point is that they weren’t forced to be childcare. My sister and brothers are huge achievers and were in tons of activities and went to Ivy League schools. They are very successful and well adjusted adults. Our family was well off and had resources for whatever activities, tutoring or resources we needed. We went to private school and all skied, played tennis, were on debate teams, mock trial, and each did all of the “elite” extracurriculars. We were honors and AP students and national merit scholars. DCUM wants to keep pushing this narrative that large families are miserable and deadbeats… and that’s just an awful generalization. I can’t speak to “parentifiction” of kids, because my parents didn’t do that, but dcum acts like having a teenager babysit a younger kid is child abuse and anything short of raising 1-2 (max) entitled self centered brats is unacceptable. Many kids from families of 3+ are so happy to have more than one sibling, including myself. My siblings are my best friends as adults and we’re close with our parents.

But you are doing the same thing. Yes there are people on here who are against big families. But here you are describing people who prefer smaller families as raising "self entitled brats."

I’m not. I have two kids! Fully acknowledge the benefits of smaller and larger families. But people on dcum come out with pitchforks - that people with larger families can’t give the best of everything to four kids (which isn’t necessarily true, and can also be true with two kids- entirely dependent on income) and are therefore bad parents. I can’t stand that judgemental attitude. They are saying if a child has to (gasp) consider others in the household, they’re at a disadvantage. In my opinion that’s a reason NOT to only have two kids

Regardless of family size, every family member should consider the others. That is very different from what happens in many large families, particularly where the oldest is a girl. In many cases, the oldest girl gets treated more similar to a parent than a sibling to the younger ones.

I'm not sure the point of your response, other than to demonstrate the judgmental attitude pp was talking about!

[Anonymous]

I grew up as the middle child of three and I have four kids. I think that Carney's article provides a nice counterpoint to the dominant narrative right now, especially in a place like DCUM, that parenthood is a miserable slog. Considering that the U.S. birthrate is really low right now, positive representations of parenthood and large families seem like a good thing. The opposite view espoused by many on this thread just seems so sad and nihilist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up as the middle child of three and I have four kids. I think that Carney's article provides a nice counterpoint to the dominant narrative right now, especially in a place like DCUM, that parenthood is a miserable slog. Considering that the U.S. birthrate is really low right now, positive representations of parenthood and large families seem like a good thing. The opposite view espoused by many on this thread just seems so sad and nihilist.

Hmm, different take. I love parenting and don't find it a slog at all... but I only have one kid. A lot of the posts on DCUM about how hard parenting is and how they can't make their home life or marriage or career work while also parenting are from people with 3 or more kids. It often seems like what is happening is that some families are having one more kid than they can feasibly manage, whether that's the 3rd or 4th or 5th (or in some cases, 2nd) kid is kind of irrelevant. Families do get overwhelmed when they have more kids than makes sense for their resources, marriage, personalities, etc.

So I would argue that people who normalize smaller families and having only as many kids as make sense *for you* are the counterbalance to the "parenting sucks" crowd. People like Carney who ridicule smaller families or make it sound like everyone with one or two kids is an anxiety-ridden helicopter parent with entitled kids with no resilience contribute to this pressure people often have to have "just one more." Well if I've learned anything from my own childhood, the experiences of people close to me, and yes, from reading DCUM, it's that sometimes you need to draw a hard line and say "no more" for the sake of your sanity, your marriage, and your existing kids. I think that's a pro-family stance, actually.

[Anonymous]

The number of children doesn’t correlate with happiness.

I’ve see n families with different compositions and there is not a pattern in their happiness or unhappiness. Some big families miserable and some small ones happy and vice versa.

Children will not make you happy, you have to work on it yourself.

Stop trying to fill a hole in your soul with children.

[Anonymous]

All I know is that I have friends and family members who seemed to be doing okay and then they had "one more" and everyone seemed much less happy after that.

The problem is that the procreative urge doesn't really care if you are happy or not, if your marriage is good, if college is affordable, if your house is big enough. You have to be able to make family planning choices separate from that feeling of "oh wouldn't it be so nice to have another little baby in the house?" Eventually the baby will be a 10 year old who needs braces and is struggling at math. Make family planning choices based on the 10 year old, not the baby.