Advantages of Having An Only

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome thread! I love having one for all the reasons already stated.

And aside from all the selfish reasons, I also think I'm doing something positive for the planet.

Well, maybe. But what the planet really needs are more people that the moms on this board would create: relatively affluent, intelligent, educated and curious. The kinds of people who will be able to think up solutions to an overpopulated planet. We need to reduce the population, but would make most sense by reducing population in impoverished, uneducated, overpopulated areas. Actually, the educated elite should be having MORE children.

Wow, just wow. Elite bitch you are. Why don't you adopt one or two of these impoverished, uneducated orphans from one of these overpopulated areas. Who says one needs to be a parent by creating a mini-me.

[Anonymous]

If my only was like my DD or my middle DS, that would be great. Life rarely works out like that, though and my luck would be that my only would have turned out like my most difficult child. (whom I love, of course, but woah, he is really difficult.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I also worry about what would happen to my parents if something happened to me.

My husband is the middle child of three. With help from his mother, he handled all his father's arrangements when he died unexpectedly, heart attack. When his mother was diagnosed with a debilitating and terminal illness, it was my big strapping husband who nursed her. He took her to all her doctor's appointments, fed and bathed her. His trifling brother showed up at the funeral. And his selfish spoiled sister would fly in When she thought dear mom was at death door. It did not stop either one of them for taking their inheritance share. But they were no help. P,ease don't assume that siblings will be there for each other or you the parents. Life does not give us guarantees.

Well, not having siblings certainly does guarantee that you won't have siblings that COULD be friends and COULD help out.

Oops, what I afield to mention is that DH had loving friends who was there for him during this time. You can't pick your siblings, but you can pick your friends. That is a guarantee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have 3 and love them all to death. But I lament that I spend more time doing things FOR my children than WITH my children. My first was an only for 5 years and I know the difference. I don't really spend much time doing things with my children anymore, but spend TONS of time cooking, cleaning up, driving, watching plays, watching sports, watching recitals, going to dr, dentist appts, buying, washing, sorting and purging outgrown clothes, managing toys, planning and executing birthday parties, hosting play dates, volunteering for school/activity events, etc. This is what fills my time. The amount of time spent curled up on the sofa watching a movie or reading a book or playing a game or making a craft? Very, very minimal compared to the time spent doing the other stuff. And even when I manage to start to do somthing like this, it is too often interrupted by needing to go/do something FOR another child or they start arguing or whatever... I do feel that having one allows you to really enjoy being WITH your child, which is really why all of us became parents, right?

YES! Thank you for being able to say it better than I could (as the parent of one)!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you fucking kidding me?

I have no idea who these only freaks are, but I can tell you that as an only, I had plenty of friends to keep me busy. And some of them - gasp!!!! - were only children!

Anonymous wrote:i come from a family of 4 so i have no idea how it would feel for an only. yes, they actually said that. you know what was the worst for them? when they're in college and come back home during the xmas holidays on their break with no siblings to hang out with at home, sure the parents are there but it's not really the same. I knew several onlys who had the same sentiments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:right, there are no guarantees siblings will get along. But i'm not here to argue, and there's no right or wrong answer. And there are valid reasons to having an only and I'm not disputing them, i'm just thinking in the best interest of the child and what makes them ultimately happy, not the parents per se. Sure, if having one will make the parents less crazy, happier family all around. Really? Lot of only childs i know grew up lonely especially around the holidays (Thanks, Xmas) with no silblings around or in other words, would've prefered to have a sibling growing up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:when the only at some point will ask the parents why they didn't have another child and to wish for a brother or sister. How would that make the parent REALLY feel "because only one was in the cards for us due to stress and hardship or other reasons cited here?" I'm sorry but if you are physically and financially able to have another i think you owe it to them to have another. The reality is they need a sibling in this world. Someone to lean on when they become adults, attend their respective weddings, take care of the parents when they get old, on their deathbeds TOGETHER.

I'm just not sold on an only.

My DH is one of four. Every one of them moved far away from their parents and from one another, as soon as they became adults, to every corner of the US.
They hardly ever see one another and rarely talk to each other. They are friendly, but not friends. There was and is no drama/trauma. An average family.

There are no guarantees for anything! You do not have to give your child a sibling. And you certainly should not do it for the often cited reasons of 'giving them a friend' or 'sharing the burden to take care of their aging parents together' . These things have a knack for not panning out.

Are you sure they actually said that, or that you perceived it? I mean, I certainly was "bored" sometimes, but no more than a child with siblings was being picked on or neglected.

Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:During this heat wave I am so glad I don't have an only.

My 4.5 and 7 year old boys have been playing fantastically with no fights. They get long great. Older one said last night--I am soooo glad I have a brother.

We just returned from two vacations where they had each other to chase around the beach, etc.

Less work for mom and dad and they are never bored.

Why do you parents of 2+ feel compelled to read threads about the advantages of only children, only to preach about the wonders of more than one???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is so hard for some of you to understand? Some of us simply do not want multiple children. It's no slant against your family, it's nothing personal. We just personally do not want 2-3 kids. You don't have to come here and convince us how great it is. For you, it probably is. For people who don't want it, it never will sound or seem wonderful, and we're simply not interested!

And others here are unable to have more and want to keep a positive outlook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awesome thread! I love having one for all the reasons already stated.

And aside from all the selfish reasons, I also think I'm doing something positive for the planet.

Well, maybe. But what the planet really needs are more people that the moms on this board would create: relatively affluent, intelligent, educated and curious. The kinds of people who will be able to think up solutions to an overpopulated planet. We need to reduce the population, but would make most sense by reducing population in impoverished, uneducated, overpopulated areas. Actually, the educated elite should be having MORE children.

What a completely ridiculous statement. All of your "affluent, intelligent, educated, elite" children are using 6 times the planet's resources than those "impoverished, uneducated" children. But, keep telling yourself you're doing something great for humanity by having a giant brood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:During this heat wave I am so glad I don't have an only.

My 4.5 and 7 year old boys have been playing fantastically with no fights. They get long great. Older one said last night--I am soooo glad I have a brother.

We just returned from two vacations where they had each other to chase around the beach, etc.

Less work for mom and dad and they are never bored.

Why do you parents of 2+ feel compelled to read threads about the advantages of only children, only to preach about the wonders of more than one???

Being the parent of an only is not "easier." I've found many parents of multiples, especially those close in age, say how much "easier" it is with multiples because they entertain each other, rather than having the parents engage with their children. When parents do engage in their children's play, it is often to break up fights, rather than to play with their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:During this heat wave I am so glad I don't have an only.

My 4.5 and 7 year old boys have been playing fantastically with no fights. They get long great. Older one said last night--I am soooo glad I have a brother.

We just returned from two vacations where they had each other to chase around the beach, etc.

Less work for mom and dad and they are never bored.

Yes. Your kids play together while an only child goes to Europe. I see it now! I'm going to get started on my second right away!

Ummm----my kids go to Europe. They both had passports within a month of their births. It is a wild assumption to assume anyone with more than one kid cant' afford trips to Europe.

(Hush---they also have their college almost paid off and the youngest hasn't even started kindergarten.)

You know what else? If I ask them where they want to go on vacation---it isn't Europe---they'll take Legoland in the US anyday. Thankfully-- we have enough resources to do 'our trip' and 'their trip' each year.


ITs great to have a sibling at those 'boring' adult sight seeing trips in Europe.

Honey, we get it. You love having multiple children AND you're wealthy. Good for you! But not relevant to the thread.

She's trying hard to convince herself of something. But we can all see throgh her.

[Anonymous]

I'm an only and the mother of an only. He was conceived through IVF, and I really don't want to go through it again. Having grown up as an only myself, our family of three seems "normal" to me. I can't imagine having multiple children. We have the time and resources we need to give our son the life we want for him. (or at least the foundation for that life) We also continue to have time for ourselves and more energy to put into our marriage. Honestly, I don't know that our marriage would survive another child, as the first few years of my son's life were very trying for us. I feel blessed to have my only and try not to spend my time wondering "what if?" about having more children. An only isn't right for everyone, but it's definitely the right decision for our family.

[Anonymous]

We have a 4 year old and we are very thankful. She's awesome, independent, compassionate and so darn loving. (God bless her) I had a miscarriage and we are still kinds hoping for a second.

If it doesn't happen, I'm okay with that too. My daughter has 9 first cousins and we see them every week..she has the perfect balance.

[Anonymous]

For me, the advantage to only having one child is that I can be the best parent I'm capable of being, to one child. If I had a second, the quality of my parenting would drop dramatically. Which means the relationship I have with the current only child would deteriorate.

I grew up as an only, and DH grew up with a sister.

[Anonymous]

I only wanted one child and that decision works for me. There are pros and cons to one or more, but it is really a personal choice. The pros for me are that I can give all my love and attention to one child--I work full time so I already feel like I don't spend enough time with my child. Two would be hard for me--I'd always feel like one child isn't getting what they need. I can also afford one child--two would result in many hard choices financially.

[Anonymous]

I'm not a people person, don't really like kids, so my one is just what I can handle. I know how to interact with my kid, we understand each other, I like him & his personality. I do believe that parents can not like their kids (love them yes, but not really like them as people) and would worry that could happen with another child. The only times I think about wanting a second is if I worry he will be lonely or god-forbid something were to happen to him.

We spend a lot of time together going places & doing things so it is great to only have to balance our two wants. When my husband tags along it seems like so much more trouble to have to take a third person into account I can't imagine if that third person was a child.

I think a happy mom is the best way to a happy child. I see moms with one child are so caught up in just that child & their reason for being that they would probably be better to have another to help balance them out. I see mothers with 3 kids that are always stressed and feel like their kids are a "job" and not a family. So, keep mom happy and everyone will be happy