Why have 3+ kids if you can’t afford a babysitter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 19 and we don't use babysitters. The older kids take care of the younger ones.

Then you do use babysitting.

The important thing is that you havr never seem me with more than 5 kids at a time.

I'd be more impressed if you took care of all your kids instead of having your kids parent them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is American culture so anti-children? It is so bizarre to me that people have issues with children being a part of life.

.

I don’t think it’s American culture. It’s economics. Families don’t think about consequences of having so many kids.

They don’t think “Oh, I’ll never be alone with my husband again or any other adult, I’ll not be able to attend weddings, concerts and other events. I won’t afford college. I won’t be able to afford vacations that involve flying.”

A French woman would never think of herself as a package with all her kids. I can’t imagine who in Europe would. It’s a psychological problem if one doesn’t see the boundaries between persons.

Parents have their own lives and children have their own lives. Parents don’t have to sit through children parties and children don’t need to attend adult events. In America you just can’t afford it.

I think it is American culture (mostly Western and anti children). Why is a wedding an adult only event? Traditionally, in eastern cultures, it’s a family affair and children are welcome. Framing it as a psychological problem is BS. The people with the psych problems are the ones with the deep seated resentment of children. Maybe they had a bad childhood and their trauma lead to self hatred and projection by getting annoyed seeing children anywhere.

It’s not anti children to have a culture that offers both kid welcome and adult only weddings.

OP is complaining about kids at music lessons, sporting events and the grocery store.

And? I am responding to the person quoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Like who? Most people in DC, like us, have no family here. I would not trust a complete stranger to watch my kids for several days.

It’s called a nanny.

Do you just go everywhere together? Like a gypsy tribe?

What a circus.

They walk 5 abreast everywhere they go clogging aisles in grocery stores, Costco, sidewalks, etc. it would never occur to them to have one parent shop and the other stay home. It’s a big event.

You don't want them to bring the kids in public but you will also be the first to complain if they never learn how to behave in public.

Well you won’t teach them because you clog the aisles and are oblivious to everyone around you.

So do boomers. Maybe they should stay home with a babysitter too.

Reported for ageism. What if the poster had substituted the word blacks? An ism is an ism.

Great. Maybe you should report this whole thread for child-ism. It’s exactly the same thing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Like who? Most people in DC, like us, have no family here. I would not trust a complete stranger to watch my kids for several days.

It’s called a nanny.

Do you just go everywhere together? Like a gypsy tribe?

What a circus.

They walk 5 abreast everywhere they go clogging aisles in grocery stores, Costco, sidewalks, etc. it would never occur to them to have one parent shop and the other stay home. It’s a big event.

You don't want them to bring the kids in public but you will also be the first to complain if they never learn how to behave in public.

Well you won’t teach them because you clog the aisles and are oblivious to everyone around you.

So do boomers. Maybe they should stay home with a babysitter too.

Reported for ageism. What if the poster had substituted the word blacks? An ism is an ism.

Great. Maybe you should report this whole thread for child-ism. It’s exactly the same thing

+100. It is. Why is someone who doesn’t think it is appropriate for kids to be in grocery stores, sports practice, weddings, and music class posting this on a parenting forum? Children are not abhorrent. Your ideas about children are abhorrent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been invited to 2 child free weddings. Guess what? We're not going. I'm not flying my kids someone to sit in a hotel room with a babysitter.

I wish you could see how insane this is.

You either can’t afford a babysitter and so you are missing out on life events or you have a psychological problem and can’t separate yourself from your children.

Babysitters are a fortune. That money is better off in the college fund. Not missing out.

I’d rather have stuck to 2 rather than 3+ kids if it meant I couldn’t afford a babysitter to attend my friends’ and family weddings.

If your friend claimed she couldn’t come to your wedding because she couldn’t afford a babysitter, it’s probably because she would *actually* prefer to hang out with her kids and watch a movie or play a board game than go to your wedding. Sorry.

And this is why there are so many posts about having no friends. Do this too many times and people stop inviting you altogether. And then your kids leave you and you’re with your husband and nothing to talk about now that the kids are gone. The choices you make come back to you in time…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been invited to 2 child free weddings. Guess what? We're not going. I'm not flying my kids someone to sit in a hotel room with a babysitter.

I wish you could see how insane this is.

You either can’t afford a babysitter and so you are missing out on life events or you have a psychological problem and can’t separate yourself from your children.

Babysitters are a fortune. That money is better off in the college fund. Not missing out.

I’d rather have stuck to 2 rather than 3+ kids if it meant I couldn’t afford a babysitter to attend my friends’ and family weddings.

If your friend claimed she couldn’t come to your wedding because she couldn’t afford a babysitter, it’s probably because she would *actually* prefer to hang out with her kids and watch a movie or play a board game than go to your wedding. Sorry.

This is a different level of insane. It seems some people on this board don’t realize that they don’t have to do everything together with their kids 100% of the time. It’s a psychological issue if you can’t separate yourself from your children.

It’s also a cost issue. For a few hours it could be $100. That may be nothing to you but a lot to others.

Right, so you can barely afford your children. That’s what this post is all about. Thanks for illustrating it so succinctly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Like who? Most people in DC, like us, have no family here. I would not trust a complete stranger to watch my kids for several days.

It’s called a nanny.

Do you just go everywhere together? Like a gypsy tribe?

What a circus.

They walk 5 abreast everywhere they go clogging aisles in grocery stores, Costco, sidewalks, etc. it would never occur to them to have one parent shop and the other stay home. It’s a big event.

You don't want them to bring the kids in public but you will also be the first to complain if they never learn how to behave in public.

Well you won’t teach them because you clog the aisles and are oblivious to everyone around you.

So do boomers. Maybe they should stay home with a babysitter too.

Reported for ageism. What if the poster had substituted the word blacks? An ism is an ism.

Great. Maybe you should report this whole thread for child-ism. It’s exactly the same thing

Not really. Kids grow out of being kids. The elderly don’t grow out of being elderly—they just become more and more elderly. Until they die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been invited to 2 child free weddings. Guess what? We're not going. I'm not flying my kids someone to sit in a hotel room with a babysitter.

I wish you could see how insane this is.

You either can’t afford a babysitter and so you are missing out on life events or you have a psychological problem and can’t separate yourself from your children.

Babysitters are a fortune. That money is better off in the college fund. Not missing out.

I’d rather have stuck to 2 rather than 3+ kids if it meant I couldn’t afford a babysitter to attend my friends’ and family weddings.

If your friend claimed she couldn’t come to your wedding because she couldn’t afford a babysitter, it’s probably because she would *actually* prefer to hang out with her kids and watch a movie or play a board game than go to your wedding. Sorry.

This is a different level of insane. It seems some people on this board don’t realize that they don’t have to do everything together with their kids 100% of the time. It’s a psychological issue if you can’t separate yourself from your children.

It’s also a cost issue. For a few hours it could be $100. That may be nothing to you but a lot to others.

Right, so you can barely afford your children. That’s what this post is all about. Thanks for illustrating it so succinctly.

No one gets a babysitter to go to Costco. You are delusional. Your views are also delusional.

[Anonymous]

Op sounds like someone that wanted 3 kids but couldn’t have them. No one is bother by big families like Op is.

- mom of one (by choice)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been invited to 2 child free weddings. Guess what? We're not going. I'm not flying my kids someone to sit in a hotel room with a babysitter.

I wish you could see how insane this is.

You either can’t afford a babysitter and so you are missing out on life events or you have a psychological problem and can’t separate yourself from your children.

Babysitters are a fortune. That money is better off in the college fund. Not missing out.

I’d rather have stuck to 2 rather than 3+ kids if it meant I couldn’t afford a babysitter to attend my friends’ and family weddings.

If your friend claimed she couldn’t come to your wedding because she couldn’t afford a babysitter, it’s probably because she would *actually* prefer to hang out with her kids and watch a movie or play a board game than go to your wedding. Sorry.

This is a different level of insane. It seems some people on this board don’t realize that they don’t have to do everything together with their kids 100% of the time. It’s a psychological issue if you can’t separate yourself from your children.

It’s also a cost issue. For a few hours it could be $100. That may be nothing to you but a lot to others.

Right, so you can barely afford your children. That’s what this post is all about. Thanks for illustrating it so succinctly.

Or just have different priorities…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op sounds like someone that wanted 3 kids but couldn’t have them. No one is bother by big families like Op is.

- mom of one (by choice)

I agree with this. I have two kids and OP sounds very triggered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s baffling to me why people choose to have three or more kids while they don’t have childcare options and can’t afford a babysitter in regular basis.

They end up tagging those 3-4 kids everywhere they go.

One kid has a music instrument class? All five of them go and then wait for that one.

Adult gathering for like a poker night or a sports event? Bring along the kids as inconvenient for everyone involved as it may be.

Wedding? RSVP for six of us. We can’t leave kids home alone.

It’s a hug inconvenience it just for them, but for others, as well.

What did you think it was going to be like?

3 kid parent here who can afford babysitting, has family locally, and now has one kid old enough to watch her siblings on occasion for short periods. Why in the world would it be a problem if I bring my kids to music class and have them play quietly in the waiting area? Same with sports and other classes. If one of my kids is doing a kid thing, the other kids are probably going to be along. They play together or I entertain them or they read. So?

Adult gatherings and weddings I get the issue, but some the things you are expecting people not to bring their kids along for are insane.

[Anonymous]

OP, if you don't want kids at your event, then don't invite them, problem solved. For other spaces, mind your own business and stop being such a misanthrope. Kids probably don't like you there either, given how much you seem to dislike them. The problem is completely symmetrical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've been invited to 2 child free weddings. Guess what? We're not going. I'm not flying my kids someone to sit in a hotel room with a babysitter.

I wish you could see how insane this is.

You either can’t afford a babysitter and so you are missing out on life events or you have a psychological problem and can’t separate yourself from your children.

Babysitters are a fortune. That money is better off in the college fund. Not missing out.

I’d rather have stuck to 2 rather than 3+ kids if it meant I couldn’t afford a babysitter to attend my friends’ and family weddings.

If your friend claimed she couldn’t come to your wedding because she couldn’t afford a babysitter, it’s probably because she would *actually* prefer to hang out with her kids and watch a movie or play a board game than go to your wedding. Sorry.

This is a different level of insane. It seems some people on this board don’t realize that they don’t have to do everything together with their kids 100% of the time. It’s a psychological issue if you can’t separate yourself from your children.

It’s also a cost issue. For a few hours it could be $100. That may be nothing to you but a lot to others.

Right, so you can barely afford your children. That’s what this post is all about. Thanks for illustrating it so succinctly.

No, we all have priorities. So while you demand aid for college all that money we saved will go to college. I don’t need someone to care for mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+100. It is. Why is someone who doesn’t think it is appropriate for kids to be in grocery stores, sports practice, weddings, and music class posting this on a parenting forum? Children are not abhorrent. Your ideas about children are abhorrent.

If you go around with a gypsy tribe that’s loud, obnoxious and takes up most of the space it’s not appropriate to create a nuisance in public.

It’s always the case that the parents of big families completely check out. They don’t have energy to get their kids to behave and adopt “kids will be kids” attitude when creating a nuisance for everyone else.