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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is an interesting point. My husband grew up one of four but they were very insulated and had no family around. He enjoyed his childhood but he’s the sort of guy not to complain about anything. They also had no major health issues / special needs.

On the flip side, I was one of two but we had tons of extended family. I grew up in a large immigrant community and we had so many people at our holiday events and it exposed me to all different types of people/ experiences.

I will say the biggest difference as I get older is that extended family doesn’t show up for you the same way sibling will (or feel the need too) but to counter that I feel like my husbands parents are tapped out trying to balance the needs of all their adult children (has this been discussed yet?). I know people talk about the teen years being hard but not there is also an expectation that you show up for your adult kids too. For example, my in laws will have to balance moving one of their kids out of their apartment, trying to launch their youngest and balancing multiple grandkids and helping out. It does create some bad blood if one kid gets more than the other. So something else to consider.

I think this is a fair point. I am one of the posters from a family with four children, and as adults, two are extremely demanding of my parents time and attention. It has always been the case that the “launched” adult children (my sibling and I) are sort of left alone because our other two siblings require a lot of attention. BUT I don’t see that is a lot different from families with two kids…if one is total chaos, the other will likely receive less attention and resources as a result.

There are lots of two kid families like this. My sibling was on her second marriage at 36 and has struggled to maintain relationships (friends and family as well as romantic) and steady employment, the latter despite graduating cum laude from a SLAC and receiving a desirable professional degree. My husband is one of four and his siblings all had struggles in their 20s despite being high achievers but more or less figured things out and are thriving more than my sister is in their 30s. This is probably due in part to the fact that my husband’s parents’ are very wealthy and have unlimited resources and my parents do not. But this is the problem with doing these types of comparisons. Family size is only one factor that might influence a child’s ability to achieve and life course.

The quality of parenting when children are young matters a great deal as does mental health and substance use when it comes to a positive life course. Neurotic and overbearing parents who emphasize achievement over a blend of self-acceptance/personal fulfillment and a good work ethic are going to be more damaging to most kids than someone who takes a more balanced approach to parenting.

I also am struggling to understand how asking an older to child to take some responsibility for a younger sibling, whether it to be driving a younger sibling to a practice or helping them with homework, is going to negatively influence their life course to the extent suggested in the comments I’ve read. My older sister went to boarding school and received her license late because of that. I would occasionally drive her places and pick things up for her when she was home from college and I was in high school and it didn’t scar me for life. I also babysat younger cousins (sometimes for free) and this allowed me to then get paying babysitting jobs outside my extended family. My husband also drove his siblings places (he had two younger siblings) and babysat one of them occasionally and he’s never said anything negative about it.

try being a 9 year old girl holding your screaming baby brother while you set the table. try having summer camp cancelled because you need to be available to babysit at 12.

I think it is healthy for kids to help their siblings and to have responsibility. Obviously what your parents did was cruel and goes far beyond that and my and my husband’s experiences helping our siblings. My point generally was that this can happen in families with 2+ children or in a single child family where the child is parented and takes care of their parents or other relatives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is an interesting point. My husband grew up one of four but they were very insulated and had no family around. He enjoyed his childhood but he’s the sort of guy not to complain about anything. They also had no major health issues / special needs.

On the flip side, I was one of two but we had tons of extended family. I grew up in a large immigrant community and we had so many people at our holiday events and it exposed me to all different types of people/ experiences.

I will say the biggest difference as I get older is that extended family doesn’t show up for you the same way sibling will (or feel the need too) but to counter that I feel like my husbands parents are tapped out trying to balance the needs of all their adult children (has this been discussed yet?). I know people talk about the teen years being hard but not there is also an expectation that you show up for your adult kids too. For example, my in laws will have to balance moving one of their kids out of their apartment, trying to launch their youngest and balancing multiple grandkids and helping out. It does create some bad blood if one kid gets more than the other. So something else to consider.

I think this is a fair point. I am one of the posters from a family with four children, and as adults, two are extremely demanding of my parents time and attention. It has always been the case that the “launched” adult children (my sibling and I) are sort of left alone because our other two siblings require a lot of attention. BUT I don’t see that is a lot different from families with two kids…if one is total chaos, the other will likely receive less attention and resources as a result.

There are lots of two kid families like this. My sibling was on her second marriage at 36 and has struggled to maintain relationships (friends and family as well as romantic) and steady employment, the latter despite graduating cum laude from a SLAC and receiving a desirable professional degree. My husband is one of four and his siblings all had struggles in their 20s despite being high achievers but more or less figured things out and are thriving more than my sister is in their 30s. This is probably due in part to the fact that my husband’s parents’ are very wealthy and have unlimited resources and my parents do not. But this is the problem with doing these types of comparisons. Family size is only one factor that might influence a child’s ability to achieve and life course.

The quality of parenting when children are young matters a great deal as does mental health and substance use when it comes to a positive life course. Neurotic and overbearing parents who emphasize achievement over a blend of self-acceptance/personal fulfillment and a good work ethic are going to be more damaging to most kids than someone who takes a more balanced approach to parenting.

I also am struggling to understand how asking an older to child to take some responsibility for a younger sibling, whether it to be driving a younger sibling to a practice or helping them with homework, is going to negatively influence their life course to the extent suggested in the comments I’ve read. My older sister went to boarding school and received her license late because of that. I would occasionally drive her places and pick things up for her when she was home from college and I was in high school and it didn’t scar me for life. I also babysat younger cousins (sometimes for free) and this allowed me to then get paying babysitting jobs outside my extended family. My husband also drove his siblings places (he had two younger siblings) and babysat one of them occasionally and he’s never said anything negative about it.

try being a 9 year old girl holding your screaming baby brother while you set the table. try having summer camp cancelled because you need to be available to babysit at 12.

I think it is healthy for kids to help their siblings and to have responsibility. Obviously what your parents did was cruel and goes far beyond that and my and my husband’s experiences helping our siblings. My point generally was that this can happen in families with 2+ children or in a single child family where the child is parented and takes care of their parents or other relatives.

Parentified*
Parentifing a child is more about a parents mental health and resources than it is about the number of children in a home.

[Anonymous]

One question is whether it's better to have not lived at all or lived the semi neglected life of a 5th or 6th child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is an interesting point. My husband grew up one of four but they were very insulated and had no family around. He enjoyed his childhood but he’s the sort of guy not to complain about anything. They also had no major health issues / special needs.

On the flip side, I was one of two but we had tons of extended family. I grew up in a large immigrant community and we had so many people at our holiday events and it exposed me to all different types of people/ experiences.

I will say the biggest difference as I get older is that extended family doesn’t show up for you the same way sibling will (or feel the need too) but to counter that I feel like my husbands parents are tapped out trying to balance the needs of all their adult children (has this been discussed yet?). I know people talk about the teen years being hard but not there is also an expectation that you show up for your adult kids too. For example, my in laws will have to balance moving one of their kids out of their apartment, trying to launch their youngest and balancing multiple grandkids and helping out. It does create some bad blood if one kid gets more than the other. So something else to consider.

I think this is a fair point. I am one of the posters from a family with four children, and as adults, two are extremely demanding of my parents time and attention. It has always been the case that the “launched” adult children (my sibling and I) are sort of left alone because our other two siblings require a lot of attention. BUT I don’t see that is a lot different from families with two kids…if one is total chaos, the other will likely receive less attention and resources as a result.

There are lots of two kid families like this. My sibling was on her second marriage at 36 and has struggled to maintain relationships (friends and family as well as romantic) and steady employment, the latter despite graduating cum laude from a SLAC and receiving a desirable professional degree. My husband is one of four and his siblings all had struggles in their 20s despite being high achievers but more or less figured things out and are thriving more than my sister is in their 30s. This is probably due in part to the fact that my husband’s parents’ are very wealthy and have unlimited resources and my parents do not. But this is the problem with doing these types of comparisons. Family size is only one factor that might influence a child’s ability to achieve and life course.

The quality of parenting when children are young matters a great deal as does mental health and substance use when it comes to a positive life course. Neurotic and overbearing parents who emphasize achievement over a blend of self-acceptance/personal fulfillment and a good work ethic are going to be more damaging to most kids than someone who takes a more balanced approach to parenting.

I also am struggling to understand how asking an older to child to take some responsibility for a younger sibling, whether it to be driving a younger sibling to a practice or helping them with homework, is going to negatively influence their life course to the extent suggested in the comments I’ve read. My older sister went to boarding school and received her license late because of that. I would occasionally drive her places and pick things up for her when she was home from college and I was in high school and it didn’t scar me for life. I also babysat younger cousins (sometimes for free) and this allowed me to then get paying babysitting jobs outside my extended family. My husband also drove his siblings places (he had two younger siblings) and babysat one of them occasionally and he’s never said anything negative about it.

try being a 9 year old girl holding your screaming baby brother while you set the table. try having summer camp cancelled because you need to be available to babysit at 12.

I think it is healthy for kids to help their siblings and to have responsibility. Obviously what your parents did was cruel and goes far beyond that and my and my husband’s experiences helping our siblings. My point generally was that this can happen in families with 2+ children or in a single child family where the child is parented and takes care of their parents or other relatives.

Parentified*
Parentifing a child is more about a parents mental health and resources than it is about the number of children in a home.

I agree, but the number of children directly affects resources available. And resources available directly affect a parent’s mental health. So as long as you have the time, energy, and finances (aka the necessary resources) and good mental health to parent x number of kids without parentification, then you’re good. But if you don’t have the resources and good mental health to parent x number of kids, it can do pretty deep damage to your children that lasts for a long time.

It seems like maybe there is a general agreement that there’s no perfect number of kids, it’s more about what the parents can handle? With the acknowledgment that a lot of parents aren’t able to appropriately handle the specific number of children that they end up having for various reasons, whether that’s 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5+.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One question is whether it's better to have not lived at all or lived the semi neglected life of a 5th or 6th child?

The “babies”? Ha!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One question is whether it's better to have not lived at all or lived the semi neglected life of a 5th or 6th child?

The “babies”? Ha!

Yeah...for large families the "babies" are probably the best off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One question is whether it's better to have not lived at all or lived the semi neglected life of a 5th or 6th child?

As a neglected middle child, I am sorry to inform you that one of the side effects of having crushingly low self esteem due to childhood neglect is that you often wonder if you would have been better off never having been born. So now you know.

[Anonymous]

Hey, just FYI to all those oldest children who were parentified in big families:

I agree that sucked for you but imagine being a younger child who is raised by an older sibling who has ZERO qualifications to parent you. Like imagine getting to college and still having a limited understanding of basic hygiene or manners. Having a [resentful, angry to be doing it] 14 yr old explain what to do when your period comes by throwing some pads at you and telling you to "figure it out."

Also, when older siblings are made into parent figures for younger siblings, it also gives them a form of power over younger siblings they aren't really qualified to have. So sometimes younger siblings are abused and harassed by older siblings who feel entitled to do so because "they are in charge." Like the time my older brother soaked my toddler brother's hands in turpentine to try and get him to stop sucking his thumb, or the time our oldest brother and sister forced the rest of us to clean up vomit and other bodily fluids from a party they'd thrown while our parents were out of town.

Children should NOT be parenting children. Leaving your kids to parent each other is bad for ALL of them. That's what actual, adult parents are supposed to be for. If you don't want to actually raise all your kids, Do Not Have Them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have four close in age. The oldest was 5 when the youngest was born. None of them changed their sibling’s diapers, but I would definitely say that they help with parenting in that they monitor each other’s behavior and speak up if someone says something rude or uncaring. It’s one thing to have your mom tell you that girls won’t like it if you don’t brush your teeth before school. It’s another thing to have your sister say it. They also help each other with homework and with generally keeping the routine of the household.
We do have one with ASD, and I probably would do more for him if he was my only child. But I also think he would have no real friends and no teenage chats into the night if it weren’t for his brothers and sister. I also don’t think anyone would call him out for being a jerk. Because sometimes he is.
I don’t know. I like having 4, and I think it’s easier in some ways. It is definitely more cooking and laundry though. There are no two ways around that.

Kids really don't have the appropriate judgement or perspective to do this appropriately. I grew up in a family with 4 kids and my parents left us to self police and work out conflicts. It resulted in a very Lord of the Flies childhood with rampant sibling bullying and abuse. We don't speak as adults because of the deep and permanent wounds that resulted from intense sibling rivalry.

It’s really not a Lord of the Flies situation. I mean, much less than the playground anyway.
What I mean is that my 14 year old with ASD comes down to dinner and pitches a fit that the chairs are too close together or whatever, and his 15 year old brother will say, “Stop being a jerk. You’re ruining dinner.”
I don’t think DS has a lot of people in his life who will share their perspective on his behavior with him. Siblings are good for that.

[Anonymous]

I was the second oldest of 5. My older sibling has 3 kids, I have 4, the third sibling has 4 and the two youngest aren’t married yet. Seems like the people who are thinking large families are bad had bad parents, which can occur in any size family. Was I responsible for helping watch my siblings? Sure. Was it overwhelming? No. It was expected that we helped out in our family. I will say, when my parents wanted to do fun things they would pay us for babysitting (think- if my mom needed to take a younger sibling to the doctors office, I was expected to babysit other kids. If my parents were doing date night I would get paid to babysit)

My folks weren’t rich either. My mom stayed home and my dad was in education. We didn’t take lavish vacations. We were able to do all the basic activities though (sports, music) though I guess not insane levels of travel sports. It never occurred to me to think me being able to play more travel sports and maybe getting to go to a third tier university to play sports should have been prioritized over my siblings existence.

My own (4) kids are 6 to newborn and while we do have financial resources we obviously will need to ration time. That means our kids will not be able to do all sorts of activities. If they show talent or inclination in a specific area we will obviously try to develop that but within reason. My kids are highly unlikely to be professional athletes based on the genetics they received so it’s weird to prioritize the insanely intense parenting culture in the DC to them having siblings.

Will they be required to help out around the house? Of course. Will they have responsibilities to each other? Again, of course. I enjoyed and was proud growing up with a family identity that we were the “X’s” and this is how we did things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is an interesting point. My husband grew up one of four but they were very insulated and had no family around. He enjoyed his childhood but he’s the sort of guy not to complain about anything. They also had no major health issues / special needs.

On the flip side, I was one of two but we had tons of extended family. I grew up in a large immigrant community and we had so many people at our holiday events and it exposed me to all different types of people/ experiences.

I will say the biggest difference as I get older is that extended family doesn’t show up for you the same way sibling will (or feel the need too) but to counter that I feel like my husbands parents are tapped out trying to balance the needs of all their adult children (has this been discussed yet?). I know people talk about the teen years being hard but not there is also an expectation that you show up for your adult kids too. For example, my in laws will have to balance moving one of their kids out of their apartment, trying to launch their youngest and balancing multiple grandkids and helping out. It does create some bad blood if one kid gets more than the other. So something else to consider.

I think this is a fair point. I am one of the posters from a family with four children, and as adults, two are extremely demanding of my parents time and attention. It has always been the case that the “launched” adult children (my sibling and I) are sort of left alone because our other two siblings require a lot of attention. BUT I don’t see that is a lot different from families with two kids…if one is total chaos, the other will likely receive less attention and resources as a result.

2 adult kids vs 4-5 adult kids needs are very different. Most people can handle two adult kid needs even if one has alot of needs.

+1

My DH is one of two with a sibling who is "failure to launch" (still lives when the parents in 40s) and has a lot of mental health problems. My DH sometimes does feel resentful of this dying, but his parents are still in our lives, remember our kids' birthdays, call regularly, and seem to care about our lives, even though much of there energy (and money) goes to my BIL.

I am one of four with no failure to launch siblings, but two siblings with some major issues (one divorced, the other has mental health/substance abuse issues) and a third sibling who has a good life but has very high expectations from our parents in terms of attention (and financial support) and a ton of resentment towards the two wayward siblings for not being able to get it together.

It is almost like I don't have a family. My parents don't visit, don't call. Nor do my siblings. When we visit them, they simply complain to us about one another or try to get us to pay for things. My kids barely know them, have almost no relationship with their cousins on my side. My parents mostly use me as moral support for dealing with my siblings (something I've started backing away from, thanks to therapy).

Two kids with one troubled kid can be hard, but is manageable. 4+ with multiple high needs kids? If you aren't one of the high needs kids, good luck. You're on your own.

PP- I think that because of how expensive and hard it is to launch into adulthood, parents are being asked to continue parenting and supporting their kids into adulthood. That expectation was likely not there before but with the way things are now, I feel bad for parents of 4 or more adult kids who are trying to navigate these expectations. It’s hard to juggle the needs of adult kids without resentment. My in laws try their best but there is always an unevenness. For example, they watched my nephew when he was born for a year but then quickly realized they would have to offer the same to the rest of their likely *many* future grandkid and stopped. But that meant we never had that benefit and kinda resent that one sibling had free child care while we had to pay out of our nose for daycare.

This is true of life. I always remember that it is a "nice to have" family help but, never should be expected. Everyone has struggles and we chose to have our kids so it doesn't do you any good to resent the care that your nephew got verus what you got.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was the second oldest of 5. My older sibling has 3 kids, I have 4, the third sibling has 4 and the two youngest aren’t married yet. Seems like the people who are thinking large families are bad had bad parents, which can occur in any size family. Was I responsible for helping watch my siblings? Sure. Was it overwhelming? No. It was expected that we helped out in our family. I will say, when my parents wanted to do fun things they would pay us for babysitting (think- if my mom needed to take a younger sibling to the doctors office, I was expected to babysit other kids. If my parents were doing date night I would get paid to babysit)

My folks weren’t rich either. My mom stayed home and my dad was in education. We didn’t take lavish vacations. We were able to do all the basic activities though (sports, music) though I guess not insane levels of travel sports. It never occurred to me to think me being able to play more travel sports and maybe getting to go to a third tier university to play sports should have been prioritized over my siblings existence.

My own (4) kids are 6 to newborn and while we do have financial resources we obviously will need to ration time. That means our kids will not be able to do all sorts of activities. If they show talent or inclination in a specific area we will obviously try to develop that but within reason. My kids are highly unlikely to be professional athletes based on the genetics they received so it’s weird to prioritize the insanely intense parenting culture in the DC to them having siblings.

Will they be required to help out around the house? Of course. Will they have responsibilities to each other? Again, of course. I enjoyed and was proud growing up with a family identity that we were the “X’s” and this is how we did things.

I don’t think the fact that you all have lots of kids proves that you had a happy childhood. How religious are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is an interesting point. My husband grew up one of four but they were very insulated and had no family around. He enjoyed his childhood but he’s the sort of guy not to complain about anything. They also had no major health issues / special needs.

On the flip side, I was one of two but we had tons of extended family. I grew up in a large immigrant community and we had so many people at our holiday events and it exposed me to all different types of people/ experiences.

I will say the biggest difference as I get older is that extended family doesn’t show up for you the same way sibling will (or feel the need too) but to counter that I feel like my husbands parents are tapped out trying to balance the needs of all their adult children (has this been discussed yet?). I know people talk about the teen years being hard but not there is also an expectation that you show up for your adult kids too. For example, my in laws will have to balance moving one of their kids out of their apartment, trying to launch their youngest and balancing multiple grandkids and helping out. It does create some bad blood if one kid gets more than the other. So something else to consider.

I think this is a fair point. I am one of the posters from a family with four children, and as adults, two are extremely demanding of my parents time and attention. It has always been the case that the “launched” adult children (my sibling and I) are sort of left alone because our other two siblings require a lot of attention. BUT I don’t see that is a lot different from families with two kids…if one is total chaos, the other will likely receive less attention and resources as a result.

2 adult kids vs 4-5 adult kids needs are very different. Most people can handle two adult kid needs even if one has alot of needs.

+1

My DH is one of two with a sibling who is "failure to launch" (still lives when the parents in 40s) and has a lot of mental health problems. My DH sometimes does feel resentful of this dying, but his parents are still in our lives, remember our kids' birthdays, call regularly, and seem to care about our lives, even though much of there energy (and money) goes to my BIL.

I am one of four with no failure to launch siblings, but two siblings with some major issues (one divorced, the other has mental health/substance abuse issues) and a third sibling who has a good life but has very high expectations from our parents in terms of attention (and financial support) and a ton of resentment towards the two wayward siblings for not being able to get it together.

It is almost like I don't have a family. My parents don't visit, don't call. Nor do my siblings. When we visit them, they simply complain to us about one another or try to get us to pay for things. My kids barely know them, have almost no relationship with their cousins on my side. My parents mostly use me as moral support for dealing with my siblings (something I've started backing away from, thanks to therapy).

Two kids with one troubled kid can be hard, but is manageable. 4+ with multiple high needs kids? If you aren't one of the high needs kids, good luck. You're on your own.

PP- I think that because of how expensive and hard it is to launch into adulthood, parents are being asked to continue parenting and supporting their kids into adulthood. That expectation was likely not there before but with the way things are now, I feel bad for parents of 4 or more adult kids who are trying to navigate these expectations. It’s hard to juggle the needs of adult kids without resentment. My in laws try their best but there is always an unevenness. For example, they watched my nephew when he was born for a year but then quickly realized they would have to offer the same to the rest of their likely *many* future grandkid and stopped. But that meant we never had that benefit and kinda resent that one sibling had free child care while we had to pay out of our nose for daycare.

This is true of life. I always remember that it is a "nice to have" family help but, never should be expected. Everyone has struggles and we chose to have our kids so it doesn't do you any good to resent the care that your nephew got verus what you got.

Nothing is expected but know that unevenness between kids will breed resent whether it’s wrong or right. So when you have four kids you have to be aware of these dynamics when they get older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was the second oldest of 5. My older sibling has 3 kids, I have 4, the third sibling has 4 and the two youngest aren’t married yet. Seems like the people who are thinking large families are bad had bad parents, which can occur in any size family. Was I responsible for helping watch my siblings? Sure. Was it overwhelming? No. It was expected that we helped out in our family. I will say, when my parents wanted to do fun things they would pay us for babysitting (think- if my mom needed to take a younger sibling to the doctors office, I was expected to babysit other kids. If my parents were doing date night I would get paid to babysit)

My folks weren’t rich either. My mom stayed home and my dad was in education. We didn’t take lavish vacations. We were able to do all the basic activities though (sports, music) though I guess not insane levels of travel sports. It never occurred to me to think me being able to play more travel sports and maybe getting to go to a third tier university to play sports should have been prioritized over my siblings existence.

My own (4) kids are 6 to newborn and while we do have financial resources we obviously will need to ration time. That means our kids will not be able to do all sorts of activities. If they show talent or inclination in a specific area we will obviously try to develop that but within reason. My kids are highly unlikely to be professional athletes based on the genetics they received so it’s weird to prioritize the insanely intense parenting culture in the DC to them having siblings.

Will they be required to help out around the house? Of course. Will they have responsibilities to each other? Again, of course. I enjoyed and was proud growing up with a family identity that we were the “X’s” and this is how we did things.

I don’t think the fact that you all have lots of kids proves that you had a happy childhood. How religious are you?

Well, there’s a constant refrain that older kids don’t have lots of kids cause being an older child in a big family is miserable. At least in my family the older children have had decent sized families.

But can I ‘prove’ my other siblings had happy childhoods? No. I know I did. I’ve never heard much grumbling from my siblings so I assume they did as well, or at least non-miserable childhoods.

Again, I think this is much more about the parents rather than the number of kids. I get that there are parents of two who don’t have the capability to have more than two. I don’t know why they project that on others. And I’m sure some who have more than 2 share that incompetence and their children are miserable. It’s just not my experience having grown up in a big family.

[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.

Absolutely this. Go ahead and have 5 kids if you're going to have real adults taking care of them 90% of the time.