Truthfully, can you both have careers and have 3+ kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No part of the lifestyle the posters on the past 3 pages are describing (3 kids 5 and under in 5 different activities per week and w/ a nanny and preschool) sounds fun at all to me.

I want to actually spend time w/ my kids. I want my kids to have time w/ me just focusing on them 1:1. I want to get to know my kids as people and not just shuttle them around to one activity after another (or have a nanny do it). I want to have a life where we (my spouse and kids and I) can relax and enjoy each other's company and not every waking minute is spent engaged in some "elite sport", working, or driving to/from work or elite sport. That does not sound enjoyable at all.

Think about what is best for your kids and you and your spouse, OP. Do you envision a lifestyle where everyone is always stressed, always going from one thing to the next? Or do you envision a lifestyle where you have a nice family dinner at home most nights and read your kids stories and put them to bed on time and talk about their day and sit on the couch cuddling with them? I think only you can decide what it is that works best for you and your family. Hopefully whatever you choose will also work for your kids as well.

If you have kids in travel sports you are probably not having dinner together every night - regardless of whether you have 2 or 3 children. If your spouse has a big job and gets home at 7 or 7:30 (as my husband does) you are not having family dinner together until your kids are in middle school. Another child does not make “getting to know” your children and family dinners impossible.

Your argument is dumb. Go away. You don’t belong in this forum anyway.

We have family dinner Friday-Sunday but my kids go to bed at 8 so it is not realistic.

I am so sick of reading this stupid stuff from people who pretended that when you have three kids you can’t know them.

I am PP writing from my lived experience as a kid who grew up one of 3 kids. My parents both worked demanding jobs. They are not emotionally close to me or my siblings as adults because they never did have enough time for us when we were kids. They didn't give us enough attention. We were always treated as a pack of kids, not as individuals. I'm not saying every family w/ 3 kids and 2 working parents is the same, of course. But it is just practically speaking a lot harder to spend time and give attention to your kids the more kids you have, especially when you and your spouse are also working a demanding job. It just is a practical matter. Time is finite. There is no practical way that a parent w/ 3 kids can give each kid as much attention as a parent w/ 2 or 1 kids can. So, I'm not saying you personally won't be able to "know your kids" just because you have 3. But it is a lot less likely that each kid will get the attention they need the more kids you have and that is nothing personal against you it's just a fact.

I wish my parents had scaled back their careers and had more time for me as a kid. I wish I had a close relationship w/ them. I wish I felt seen and heard and understood in my family growing up. But that was not their priority. Their priority was working first, family unit second, individual kids last/never.

Op here. This is very true. My husband is one of four and they were treated like a “pack”. I was one of two and I was really able to know my mom and had individual time. The thing that gives me pause is just how much support my husband gets from his siblings as an adult. The sibling relationship lasts longer than any other relationship. I struggle with wanting to give my kids a larger support network as adults vs providing individual parental attention.

I thought that studies show you have to have 4 for them to be a pack. In fact that's why parents of 3 are the most stressed - because it's not enough kids for a pack and you still try and do as much with each kid as if there were 2 or 1. When you have 4+ you get the pack effect and parents chill out and the stress level in the house goes down.

https://www.today.com/parents/mom-survey-says-three-most-stressful-number-kids-t127551

That true boo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No part of the lifestyle the posters on the past 3 pages are describing (3 kids 5 and under in 5 different activities per week and w/ a nanny and preschool) sounds fun at all to me.

I want to actually spend time w/ my kids. I want my kids to have time w/ me just focusing on them 1:1. I want to get to know my kids as people and not just shuttle them around to one activity after another (or have a nanny do it). I want to have a life where we (my spouse and kids and I) can relax and enjoy each other's company and not every waking minute is spent engaged in some "elite sport", working, or driving to/from work or elite sport. That does not sound enjoyable at all.

Think about what is best for your kids and you and your spouse, OP. Do you envision a lifestyle where everyone is always stressed, always going from one thing to the next? Or do you envision a lifestyle where you have a nice family dinner at home most nights and read your kids stories and put them to bed on time and talk about their day and sit on the couch cuddling with them? I think only you can decide what it is that works best for you and your family. Hopefully whatever you choose will also work for your kids as well.

If you have kids in travel sports you are probably not having dinner together every night - regardless of whether you have 2 or 3 children. If your spouse has a big job and gets home at 7 or 7:30 (as my husband does) you are not having family dinner together until your kids are in middle school. Another child does not make “getting to know” your children and family dinners impossible.

Your argument is dumb. Go away. You don’t belong in this forum anyway.

The argument that someone wants to actually spend time with their kids versus spending all their time working and then rushing home from work to shuttle kids to activities is dumb?

DP and the argument is silly because it assumes you can't spend time with your kids if they do activities. Any parent of 3 with kids in activities knows that's just not true. Last night I had a quality 50 minutes with my youngest in the car chit-chatting about her day on her way to and from a game. When we got home I caught up with my oldest (whose old enough to stay by herself and was working on homework). Yes I had less time with my middle, but that evens out time earlier in the week when I was bringing her home from something and we were talking.

I wouldn't tell you to go away like PP did, but you're making an awful lot of incorrect assumptions about us 3 kid parents.

Again, they're not assumptions. They're anecdotes from my own lived experience as one of 3 kids. I didn't say it's impossible to spend quality time w/ each kid. I said it's a lot harder the more kids you have. Still you want to argue with that because you're very defensive and need to prove to yourself that you do indeed have enough time and give enough attention to each kid. That's fine and I'm sure you're doing your best. But it's still not, and can never be, as much time/attention you could have for each kid if you had 1-2 kids. It's just not.

I've only responded to you on this topic once, so you're conflating me with someone else. I actually am very comfortable with how well I know my kids, and I'm glad you feel the same about your relationship with your own kids.

You wanna fight?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No part of the lifestyle the posters on the past 3 pages are describing (3 kids 5 and under in 5 different activities per week and w/ a nanny and preschool) sounds fun at all to me.

I want to actually spend time w/ my kids. I want my kids to have time w/ me just focusing on them 1:1. I want to get to know my kids as people and not just shuttle them around to one activity after another (or have a nanny do it). I want to have a life where we (my spouse and kids and I) can relax and enjoy each other's company and not every waking minute is spent engaged in some "elite sport", working, or driving to/from work or elite sport. That does not sound enjoyable at all.

Think about what is best for your kids and you and your spouse, OP. Do you envision a lifestyle where everyone is always stressed, always going from one thing to the next? Or do you envision a lifestyle where you have a nice family dinner at home most nights and read your kids stories and put them to bed on time and talk about their day and sit on the couch cuddling with them? I think only you can decide what it is that works best for you and your family. Hopefully whatever you choose will also work for your kids as well.

If you have kids in travel sports you are probably not having dinner together every night - regardless of whether you have 2 or 3 children. If your spouse has a big job and gets home at 7 or 7:30 (as my husband does) you are not having family dinner together until your kids are in middle school. Another child does not make “getting to know” your children and family dinners impossible.

Your argument is dumb. Go away. You don’t belong in this forum anyway.

We have family dinner Friday-Sunday but my kids go to bed at 8 so it is not realistic.

I am so sick of reading this stupid stuff from people who pretended that when you have three kids you can’t know them.

I agree with this. 3 kid families are very normal in my UMC circle. 3-4 kid families were very typical in the UMC community I was raised in. Very tight knit families. I’m in a suburb of NYC - HCOL and academically competitive. I assure you the kids are well parented and most families have two working parents.

You have no way of knowing this unless you are actually IN their family and see it first hand. Why don't you just wait until the kids are grown and ask them how well they were parented. The kids' point of view on this is often much different than the parents' point of view.

Pp here. I grew up similarly. All of my close friends are from families with 3+ kids. All are close with their parents. Some are closer with some siblings than others. All of us went to top colleges and have careers and families now. Many are choosing to stick with two kids primarily because we started having kids later than our parents did, and because of our careers dont want to have three kids in five years. It really depends on your circle, but just because three kids would be too hard for you doesn’t mean it’s too hard for everyone.

OP would definitely need a nanny though - most working parents need childcare. No shame in that.

You sound like you’re from the NE. You grew up in a rat race and don’t know a better life. You grew up around long commutes, a nanny raising the kids, dual income, needing to send kids out of state for college because of a lack of in-stage options etc.

You’d be shocked what a world of difference it is growing up somewhere less chaotic with only two kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No part of the lifestyle the posters on the past 3 pages are describing (3 kids 5 and under in 5 different activities per week and w/ a nanny and preschool) sounds fun at all to me.

I want to actually spend time w/ my kids. I want my kids to have time w/ me just focusing on them 1:1. I want to get to know my kids as people and not just shuttle them around to one activity after another (or have a nanny do it). I want to have a life where we (my spouse and kids and I) can relax and enjoy each other's company and not every waking minute is spent engaged in some "elite sport", working, or driving to/from work or elite sport. That does not sound enjoyable at all.

Think about what is best for your kids and you and your spouse, OP. Do you envision a lifestyle where everyone is always stressed, always going from one thing to the next? Or do you envision a lifestyle where you have a nice family dinner at home most nights and read your kids stories and put them to bed on time and talk about their day and sit on the couch cuddling with them? I think only you can decide what it is that works best for you and your family. Hopefully whatever you choose will also work for your kids as well.

This post made me laugh. Oh to be a young parent and so naive. I'm guessing that your kids are toddlers, or you have a baby only. If you have 1-2 kids in any sports or activities, the nice family dinner thing goes out the window.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No part of the lifestyle the posters on the past 3 pages are describing (3 kids 5 and under in 5 different activities per week and w/ a nanny and preschool) sounds fun at all to me.

I want to actually spend time w/ my kids. I want my kids to have time w/ me just focusing on them 1:1. I want to get to know my kids as people and not just shuttle them around to one activity after another (or have a nanny do it). I want to have a life where we (my spouse and kids and I) can relax and enjoy each other's company and not every waking minute is spent engaged in some "elite sport", working, or driving to/from work or elite sport. That does not sound enjoyable at all.

Think about what is best for your kids and you and your spouse, OP. Do you envision a lifestyle where everyone is always stressed, always going from one thing to the next? Or do you envision a lifestyle where you have a nice family dinner at home most nights and read your kids stories and put them to bed on time and talk about their day and sit on the couch cuddling with them? I think only you can decide what it is that works best for you and your family. Hopefully whatever you choose will also work for your kids as well.

If you have kids in travel sports you are probably not having dinner together every night - regardless of whether you have 2 or 3 children. If your spouse has a big job and gets home at 7 or 7:30 (as my husband does) you are not having family dinner together until your kids are in middle school. Another child does not make “getting to know” your children and family dinners impossible.

Your argument is dumb. Go away. You don’t belong in this forum anyway.

We have family dinner Friday-Sunday but my kids go to bed at 8 so it is not realistic.

I am so sick of reading this stupid stuff from people who pretended that when you have three kids you can’t know them.

I agree with this. 3 kid families are very normal in my UMC circle. 3-4 kid families were very typical in the UMC community I was raised in. Very tight knit families. I’m in a suburb of NYC - HCOL and academically competitive. I assure you the kids are well parented and most families have two working parents.

You have no way of knowing this unless you are actually IN their family and see it first hand. Why don't you just wait until the kids are grown and ask them how well they were parented. The kids' point of view on this is often much different than the parents' point of view.

Pp here. I grew up similarly. All of my close friends are from families with 3+ kids. All are close with their parents. Some are closer with some siblings than others. All of us went to top colleges and have careers and families now. Many are choosing to stick with two kids primarily because we started having kids later than our parents did, and because of our careers dont want to have three kids in five years. It really depends on your circle, but just because three kids would be too hard for you doesn’t mean it’s too hard for everyone.

OP would definitely need a nanny though - most working parents need childcare. No shame in that.

You sound like you’re from the NE. You grew up in a rat race and don’t know a better life. You grew up around long commutes, a nanny raising the kids, dual income, needing to send kids out of state for college because of a lack of in-stage options etc.

You’d be shocked what a world of difference it is growing up somewhere less chaotic with only two kids.

All of this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No part of the lifestyle the posters on the past 3 pages are describing (3 kids 5 and under in 5 different activities per week and w/ a nanny and preschool) sounds fun at all to me.

I want to actually spend time w/ my kids. I want my kids to have time w/ me just focusing on them 1:1. I want to get to know my kids as people and not just shuttle them around to one activity after another (or have a nanny do it). I want to have a life where we (my spouse and kids and I) can relax and enjoy each other's company and not every waking minute is spent engaged in some "elite sport", working, or driving to/from work or elite sport. That does not sound enjoyable at all.

Think about what is best for your kids and you and your spouse, OP. Do you envision a lifestyle where everyone is always stressed, always going from one thing to the next? Or do you envision a lifestyle where you have a nice family dinner at home most nights and read your kids stories and put them to bed on time and talk about their day and sit on the couch cuddling with them? I think only you can decide what it is that works best for you and your family. Hopefully whatever you choose will also work for your kids as well.

If you have kids in travel sports you are probably not having dinner together every night - regardless of whether you have 2 or 3 children. If your spouse has a big job and gets home at 7 or 7:30 (as my husband does) you are not having family dinner together until your kids are in middle school. Another child does not make “getting to know” your children and family dinners impossible.

Your argument is dumb. Go away. You don’t belong in this forum anyway.

We have family dinner Friday-Sunday but my kids go to bed at 8 so it is not realistic.

I am so sick of reading this stupid stuff from people who pretended that when you have three kids you can’t know them.

I agree with this. 3 kid families are very normal in my UMC circle. 3-4 kid families were very typical in the UMC community I was raised in. Very tight knit families. I’m in a suburb of NYC - HCOL and academically competitive. I assure you the kids are well parented and most families have two working parents.

You have no way of knowing this unless you are actually IN their family and see it first hand. Why don't you just wait until the kids are grown and ask them how well they were parented. The kids' point of view on this is often much different than the parents' point of view.

Pp here. I grew up similarly. All of my close friends are from families with 3+ kids. All are close with their parents. Some are closer with some siblings than others. All of us went to top colleges and have careers and families now. Many are choosing to stick with two kids primarily because we started having kids later than our parents did, and because of our careers dont want to have three kids in five years. It really depends on your circle, but just because three kids would be too hard for you doesn’t mean it’s too hard for everyone.

OP would definitely need a nanny though - most working parents need childcare. No shame in that.

You sound like you’re from the NE. You grew up in a rat race and don’t know a better life. You grew up around long commutes, a nanny raising the kids, dual income, needing to send kids out of state for college because of a lack of in-stage options etc.

You’d be shocked what a world of difference it is growing up somewhere less chaotic with only two kids.

I am from the northeast. My mom worked locally and had a flexible schedule, we did not have a nanny, my dad did have a long commute to Manhattan. We went to private school and all of us went to college in Manhattan - two of us to Columbia and two to NYU.

As an adult, my husband and I work from home. We have a nanny for childcare but we are also around. Yes, living is expensive and we need two incomes. We try very hard to be present for our kids. I understand that two kids is less chaotic because I have two kids. But I also love having more than one sibling. I’m simply acknowledging that there is more than one successful way to raise a family - that includes size, location, working parents vs stay at home parents, etc. besides, dc doesn’t sound all that different from the northeast. In fact, it sounds like the parents are so intense that they can only imagine hyper-parenting two kids.

[Anonymous]

Having 3+ kids and having fully booked kids are two separate issues, not really helpful to conflate them in this discussion. We have three young kids and all they do is piano once a week, that works fine for us for now. Our neighbors have three kids and they have multiple travel sports and dance competitions, they are happy. Realistically their extra curricular options will be limited by schedules and money constraints. I personally have found that the limitations and sacrifices that come from family needs are really healthy for the kids and that in fact they understand and appreciate things better.
Here is how we make it work:
1. We live in a slightly more affordable exurb with good public schools (Anne arundel county)
2. I work from home and work part time at a good paying technical job where I had accumulated 10 years of seniority which allows me the flexibility. Dh is a fed who goes in once a week. He takes over from 6pm on.
3. We have a modest house and outsource a lot of cleaning.
4. We are saving for college but will only be able to find state schools absent merit aid.

This is the logistics of how we make it work. As you can see we have made some sacrifices but it has been the absolute best thing for our family to add a third.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having 3+ kids and having fully booked kids are two separate issues, not really helpful to conflate them in this discussion. We have three young kids and all they do is piano once a week, that works fine for us for now. Our neighbors have three kids and they have multiple travel sports and dance competitions, they are happy. Realistically their extra curricular options will be limited by schedules and money constraints. I personally have found that the limitations and sacrifices that come from family needs are really healthy for the kids and that in fact they understand and appreciate things better.
Here is how we make it work:
1. We live in a slightly more affordable exurb with good public schools (Anne arundel county)
2. I work from home and work part time at a good paying technical job where I had accumulated 10 years of seniority which allows me the flexibility. Dh is a fed who goes in once a week. He takes over from 6pm on.
3. We have a modest house and outsource a lot of cleaning.
4. We are saving for college but will only be able to find state schools absent merit aid.

This is the logistics of how we make it work. As you can see we have made some sacrifices but it has been the absolute best thing for our family to add a third.

You’re missing the point. Even a third child having one activity is one more activity to juggle. Two is manageable and the third is where it starts to become unmanageable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having 3+ kids and having fully booked kids are two separate issues, not really helpful to conflate them in this discussion. We have three young kids and all they do is piano once a week, that works fine for us for now. Our neighbors have three kids and they have multiple travel sports and dance competitions, they are happy. Realistically their extra curricular options will be limited by schedules and money constraints. I personally have found that the limitations and sacrifices that come from family needs are really healthy for the kids and that in fact they understand and appreciate things better.
Here is how we make it work:
1. We live in a slightly more affordable exurb with good public schools (Anne arundel county)
2. I work from home and work part time at a good paying technical job where I had accumulated 10 years of seniority which allows me the flexibility. Dh is a fed who goes in once a week. He takes over from 6pm on.
3. We have a modest house and outsource a lot of cleaning.
4. We are saving for college but will only be able to find state schools absent merit aid.

This is the logistics of how we make it work. As you can see we have made some sacrifices but it has been the absolute best thing for our family to add a third.

You’re missing the point. Even a third child having one activity is one more activity to juggle. Two is manageable and the third is where it starts to become unmanageable.

For YOU. There is no universal cut off. Some people feel that one is their threshold. Some feel it’s two. And believe it or not, some people have the capacity to raise more than two kids. How come you aren’t here lamenting that your second kid takes away so much attention from your first?

Also, there are benefits to having more than two kids. There are benefits to learning to cooperate in a group and understanding to have to factor in other people’s needs. My sister in law - one of two - is one of the most self absorbed people I know because she and my husband never needed to learn this critical skill growing up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having 3+ kids and having fully booked kids are two separate issues, not really helpful to conflate them in this discussion. We have three young kids and all they do is piano once a week, that works fine for us for now. Our neighbors have three kids and they have multiple travel sports and dance competitions, they are happy. Realistically their extra curricular options will be limited by schedules and money constraints. I personally have found that the limitations and sacrifices that come from family needs are really healthy for the kids and that in fact they understand and appreciate things better.
Here is how we make it work:
1. We live in a slightly more affordable exurb with good public schools (Anne arundel county)
2. I work from home and work part time at a good paying technical job where I had accumulated 10 years of seniority which allows me the flexibility. Dh is a fed who goes in once a week. He takes over from 6pm on.
3. We have a modest house and outsource a lot of cleaning.
4. We are saving for college but will only be able to find state schools absent merit aid.

This is the logistics of how we make it work. As you can see we have made some sacrifices but it has been the absolute best thing for our family to add a third.

You’re missing the point. Even a third child having one activity is one more activity to juggle. Two is manageable and the third is where it starts to become unmanageable.

To say that a third is unmanageable is to ignore all the people on this thread saying they manage 3 and explaining. PP you quoted manages it by limiting the kids to (for now) one activity. And they like teaching their kids that limits on activities are good. Other people in this thread (and PP's neighbor) do more and manage it various ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having 3+ kids and having fully booked kids are two separate issues, not really helpful to conflate them in this discussion. We have three young kids and all they do is piano once a week, that works fine for us for now. Our neighbors have three kids and they have multiple travel sports and dance competitions, they are happy. Realistically their extra curricular options will be limited by schedules and money constraints. I personally have found that the limitations and sacrifices that come from family needs are really healthy for the kids and that in fact they understand and appreciate things better.
Here is how we make it work:
1. We live in a slightly more affordable exurb with good public schools (Anne arundel county)
2. I work from home and work part time at a good paying technical job where I had accumulated 10 years of seniority which allows me the flexibility. Dh is a fed who goes in once a week. He takes over from 6pm on.
3. We have a modest house and outsource a lot of cleaning.
4. We are saving for college but will only be able to find state schools absent merit aid.

This is the logistics of how we make it work. As you can see we have made some sacrifices but it has been the absolute best thing for our family to add a third.

You’re missing the point. Even a third child having one activity is one more activity to juggle. Two is manageable and the third is where it starts to become unmanageable.

For YOU. There is no universal cut off. Some people feel that one is their threshold. Some feel it’s two. And believe it or not, some people have the capacity to raise more than two kids. How come you aren’t here lamenting that your second kid takes away so much attention from your first?

Also, there are benefits to having more than two kids. There are benefits to learning to cooperate in a group and understanding to have to factor in other people’s needs. My sister in law - one of two - is one of the most self absorbed people I know because she and my husband never needed to learn this critical skill growing up.

This has way more to do with parenting and personality as opposed to number of children. Also, a lot of these things you speak of can be learned in school…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having 3+ kids and having fully booked kids are two separate issues, not really helpful to conflate them in this discussion. We have three young kids and all they do is piano once a week, that works fine for us for now. Our neighbors have three kids and they have multiple travel sports and dance competitions, they are happy. Realistically their extra curricular options will be limited by schedules and money constraints. I personally have found that the limitations and sacrifices that come from family needs are really healthy for the kids and that in fact they understand and appreciate things better.
Here is how we make it work:
1. We live in a slightly more affordable exurb with good public schools (Anne arundel county)
2. I work from home and work part time at a good paying technical job where I had accumulated 10 years of seniority which allows me the flexibility. Dh is a fed who goes in once a week. He takes over from 6pm on.
3. We have a modest house and outsource a lot of cleaning.
4. We are saving for college but will only be able to find state schools absent merit aid.

This is the logistics of how we make it work. As you can see we have made some sacrifices but it has been the absolute best thing for our family to add a third.

You’re missing the point. Even a third child having one activity is one more activity to juggle. Two is manageable and the third is where it starts to become unmanageable.

For YOU. There is no universal cut off. Some people feel that one is their threshold. Some feel it’s two. And believe it or not, some people have the capacity to raise more than two kids. How come you aren’t here lamenting that your second kid takes away so much attention from your first?

Also, there are benefits to having more than two kids. There are benefits to learning to cooperate in a group and understanding to have to factor in other people’s needs. My sister in law - one of two - is one of the most self absorbed people I know because she and my husband never needed to learn this critical skill growing up.

This has way more to do with parenting and personality as opposed to number of children. Also, a lot of these things you speak of can be learned in school…

People come on DCUM all the time to lament that there aren't packs of kids running the neighborhood so kids can learn those group cooperation and coordination skills. Then when someone asks about having a third a (hopefully different set of people) lament goes up that there won't be time for all 3 kids to both go to Juliard AND be D1 athletic commits at a T10 university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having 3+ kids and having fully booked kids are two separate issues, not really helpful to conflate them in this discussion. We have three young kids and all they do is piano once a week, that works fine for us for now. Our neighbors have three kids and they have multiple travel sports and dance competitions, they are happy. Realistically their extra curricular options will be limited by schedules and money constraints. I personally have found that the limitations and sacrifices that come from family needs are really healthy for the kids and that in fact they understand and appreciate things better.
Here is how we make it work:
1. We live in a slightly more affordable exurb with good public schools (Anne arundel county)
2. I work from home and work part time at a good paying technical job where I had accumulated 10 years of seniority which allows me the flexibility. Dh is a fed who goes in once a week. He takes over from 6pm on.
3. We have a modest house and outsource a lot of cleaning.
4. We are saving for college but will only be able to find state schools absent merit aid.

This is the logistics of how we make it work. As you can see we have made some sacrifices but it has been the absolute best thing for our family to add a third.

You’re missing the point. Even a third child having one activity is one more activity to juggle. Two is manageable and the third is where it starts to become unmanageable.

For YOU. There is no universal cut off. Some people feel that one is their threshold. Some feel it’s two. And believe it or not, some people have the capacity to raise more than two kids. How come you aren’t here lamenting that your second kid takes away so much attention from your first?

Also, there are benefits to having more than two kids. There are benefits to learning to cooperate in a group and understanding to have to factor in other people’s needs. My sister in law - one of two - is one of the most self absorbed people I know because she and my husband never needed to learn this critical skill growing up.

This has way more to do with parenting and personality as opposed to number of children. Also, a lot of these things you speak of can be learned in school…

Yes- everything has to do with parenting and personality vs number of kids. It’s not like 2 is 0 and 3 is 10. It’s a difference of one child. It also depends on financial resources and spacing of the children. There are a lot of factors and it’s just silly to be so certain that 3 leads to some kind of quality control issue. It’s based on many factors which will vary by family. My sister runs a venture capitalist firm and her husband is an oncologist. They have three amazing, bright teenagers who are well adjusted, do well at school, and are close to each other. The kids love being from a family of 3 kids and both my sister and her and kids encouraged me to have more than 2. It’s a personal decision and equation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No part of the lifestyle the posters on the past 3 pages are describing (3 kids 5 and under in 5 different activities per week and w/ a nanny and preschool) sounds fun at all to me.

I want to actually spend time w/ my kids. I want my kids to have time w/ me just focusing on them 1:1. I want to get to know my kids as people and not just shuttle them around to one activity after another (or have a nanny do it). I want to have a life where we (my spouse and kids and I) can relax and enjoy each other's company and not every waking minute is spent engaged in some "elite sport", working, or driving to/from work or elite sport. That does not sound enjoyable at all.

Think about what is best for your kids and you and your spouse, OP. Do you envision a lifestyle where everyone is always stressed, always going from one thing to the next? Or do you envision a lifestyle where you have a nice family dinner at home most nights and read your kids stories and put them to bed on time and talk about their day and sit on the couch cuddling with them? I think only you can decide what it is that works best for you and your family. Hopefully whatever you choose will also work for your kids as well.

If you have kids in travel sports you are probably not having dinner together every night - regardless of whether you have 2 or 3 children. If your spouse has a big job and gets home at 7 or 7:30 (as my husband does) you are not having family dinner together until your kids are in middle school. Another child does not make “getting to know” your children and family dinners impossible.

Your argument is dumb. Go away. You don’t belong in this forum anyway.

My "argument" is not an argument. It's an explanation of what kind of lifestyle I want. I do not want the always stressed out running around from one thing to the next lifestyle. I have 2 kids in upper elementary. They do not play travel sports (that would change everything and I'm glad that they do not want to do that. If they wanted to play at that level, we would allow it but it would be a major change.) I didn't say dinner together every night...I think of it more like is family dinner a goal for you? If it is, maybe don't have 3 kids because it'll be harder to achieve that goal the more kids you have as they get older.

And why are you telling me to go away and that I "don't belong in this forum?" Only people w/ 3 kids belong in this forum? Only people who want the hectic lifestyle belong? I suspect you react so strongly to my post because you see in it that not everyone is "super busy and stressed" just because they have kids and careers. That it is in fact possible to have a more relaxed, enjoyable lifestyle where you actually have conversations w/ each other and are not always rushing from one thing to the next. I suspect you seem so hostile toward me because there is some part of you that is unfulfilled w/ your go-go-go always busy life.

I’m reacting to your post because you are speaking about something that you have not experienced in a one-sided, condescending, and arrogant way.

My point is that your family dinner example does not take into account lifestyle choices that structurally would impede family dinner. Having another kid does not impede family dinner if no one does travel sports and both parents can get home from work at a reasonable hour. No one sticks with two kids because they wouldn’t be able to have family dinners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious how many of these responders have three kids. Everyone I know with three+ kids wouldn’t change it. It’s human nature to adapt. If you have a strong marriage, similar desire for more kids, and means - go for it.

I'm a previous responder, and I have three kids, and my husband and I both work. It's really hard, and I am at a breaking point at least 1-2 times a week, because I feel like I haven't had sufficient 1-1 interaction with my kids (much less my husband). We are generally just cars passing each other in the driveway as we drive the kids to all of their things (our kids are 14, 11, and 8).

Of course I wouldn't change my family - I can't imagine life without my kids! I love watching them grow and I love watching each and every sporting event (maybe not winter swim meets, but oh well!) But I also agree with a previous poster that you need to also think about your own happiness and mental health. There are days when I have basically no time for myself, and despite my husband (who works remotely full-time) pulling a ton of weight, if you're a mom, the likelihood is that you're still going to carry much more of the domestic and emotional load (even, if as in my case, you are the priority breadwinner.)

Again! Wouldn't change my 3 kids. But I worry about my stress and emotional health, and probably as a result of those two things, am prone to yelling when frustrated.

How old are your kids? Do you work from home? I usually can spend at least 30 minutes to multiple hours 1:1 with each kid each day and my kids are 5 and under. Also, my husband and I have a lot of intimacy, talk multiple times a day, and hang out at night. We’re very connected.

DP, but that's because you have very young children still that are napping, going to bed early, and not in extracurriculars. PP said she has 8, 11, and 14 year olds, which is fundamentally different parenting than babies and preschoolers. Try not to sound so smug when you just don't know yet.

None of my children nap and my youngest wakes up multiple times a night.

I think it comes down to what you prioritize.

Oh and my oldest does field hockey on the weekends and during the week gymnastics, swimming, water polo, and tennis. My child is swimming and gymnastics.

Not trying to sound smug but as your children get older it should be easier to spend 1:1 time with them and talking to your spouse during the day is about picking up the phone occasionally and chatting…and chatting before bed. If you are chaperoning your kids to activities can’t you talk to them? Isn’t it easier to spend time with your spouse when your kids don’t need constant supervision…and if they are going to be late why can’t you spend any of that time with them?

As someone who played water polo in college, I'm dying laughing imagining PP's four-year old taking water polo lessons. Lady, you're nuts.

I did too. Where did you play? You didn’t. If you did you would know club activities start at 4/5. You’re a troll and the only point you’ve made is that you’re a troll.