are 3+ kid families becoming more common?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

1 naturally conceived
1 IVF kid after 5 years of trying
1 oops

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

A thing that has happened to a number of women I know is that they get lax about birth control because they are older and think they can't get pregnant anymore. I think sometimes all the fear mongering about fertility wraps people's perspective and they assume that if they are over 35, the odds are too low. Especially if they had any trouble conceiving.

Several of the oops babies I know of have a big age gap with the next youngest child. The parents were probably initially on top of birth control, but may have assumed "eh, I'm over 40, what are the odds?" Without looking to see that actually the odds are much higher than zero, especially if you've successfully conceived before.

Yes this was us. I was 45 and laughed when my ob suggested birth control because we had done ivf in our thirties. We are thrilled with our surprise baby who miraculously has had no health issues so far and we had spent quite conservatively on our house so we feel fortunate but definitely stretched! Weirdly it’s made life easier because it takes lots of options off the table (travel sports, private school, etc)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

A thing that has happened to a number of women I know is that they get lax about birth control because they are older and think they can't get pregnant anymore. I think sometimes all the fear mongering about fertility wraps people's perspective and they assume that if they are over 35, the odds are too low. Especially if they had any trouble conceiving.

Several of the oops babies I know of have a big age gap with the next youngest child. The parents were probably initially on top of birth control, but may have assumed "eh, I'm over 40, what are the odds?" Without looking to see that actually the odds are much higher than zero, especially if you've successfully conceived before.

Yes this was us. I was 45 and laughed when my ob suggested birth control because we had done ivf in our thirties. We are thrilled with our surprise baby who miraculously has had no health issues so far and we had spent quite conservatively on our house so we feel fortunate but definitely stretched! Weirdly it’s made life easier because it takes lots of options off the table (travel sports, private school, etc)

It's a surprise, but not an oops. People who say "oops!" come across like they don't understand how babies are made.

[Anonymous]

Most of the people posting on here must be wealthy or religious because cdc birth data suggests this is not the case nationally

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only see Mormons with this many

I'm in my late 40's and grew up in an area with a lot of Mormons (I'm not Mormon.) Back then, every Mormon family I knew had at least 4 kids--a few were bigger like 8-10 kids--but four kids was by far the most common number.
Now, all those people that came from families with 4 kids? They have 5. Seriously every Mormon I know has 5 kids.
Five is the new four.

Utah tfr is sub 2

Mormon tfr is way lower than 5 and just at replacement

People in this thread have a really terrible grasp on data vs anecdotes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

A thing that has happened to a number of women I know is that they get lax about birth control because they are older and think they can't get pregnant anymore. I think sometimes all the fear mongering about fertility wraps people's perspective and they assume that if they are over 35, the odds are too low. Especially if they had any trouble conceiving.

Several of the oops babies I know of have a big age gap with the next youngest child. The parents were probably initially on top of birth control, but may have assumed "eh, I'm over 40, what are the odds?" Without looking to see that actually the odds are much higher than zero, especially if you've successfully conceived before.

Yes this was us. I was 45 and laughed when my ob suggested birth control because we had done ivf in our thirties. We are thrilled with our surprise baby who miraculously has had no health issues so far and we had spent quite conservatively on our house so we feel fortunate but definitely stretched! Weirdly it’s made life easier because it takes lots of options off the table (travel sports, private school, etc)

It's a surprise, but not an oops. People who say "oops!" come across like they don't understand how babies are made.

I try not to say oops because if a child hears that one day they might feel unwanted or unloved but come on I was 45! I actually thought I was in peri menopause at first. It was definitely a surprise. While in many ways I feel we are ‘wealthy’ we are dcum standard of middle class at ~250k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think 4 is now the desirable number for affluent families. More than that = religious family (in my experience). I have three for what it's worth (though both I and my husband come from families with three children, so seemed normal to us!)

Fewer people are having 4 kids than ever before if you check the data, I think. Just curious why you think this.

You are correct that fewer people are having 4+ kids. BUT among wealthy - it is on the uptick. It's also what people say when polled that they want. They just can't afford it, hence the trend only among wealthy. We run in highly educated, wealthy circle and it's very common.

You don’t run in shit

Goodness there’s some angry people on here today.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s more correlated to education than income. DH and I attended top undergrad and grad programs and almost none of those friends have more than 2 kids. Like maybe 2/20 couples off the top of my head have more than 2 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

I actually told a lot of people this when I was pregnant with #3. I didn’t want their judgement and jealousy.

This doesn't really make sense. I'd think people's reactions would be more harsh if you said #3 was an oopsie. I mean, look at how feisty the people on this board are being about it.

DP. I’d bet it’s a pretty even split of people who would judge for an oopsie and people who judge for the choice to have 3+. Most people judge in comparison to their own choices (eg “I didn’t have an oopsie baby so you must be irresponsible” or “two kids is enough, why do more than replace yourself” etc). We are trying for a third and I already know who among my friends and family will judge the choice vs an oopsie. Doesn’t bother me.

Weird. I have 3 and I didn’t know that was something people were judgy about. I also don’t care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s more correlated to education than income. DH and I attended top undergrad and grad programs and almost none of those friends have more than 2 kids. Like maybe 2/20 couples off the top of my head have more than 2 kids.

Do you come from family wealth?

I think many of these people are saying that they are seeing 3+ in fams that earn a lot but also get grandparent help

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

A thing that has happened to a number of women I know is that they get lax about birth control because they are older and think they can't get pregnant anymore. I think sometimes all the fear mongering about fertility wraps people's perspective and they assume that if they are over 35, the odds are too low. Especially if they had any trouble conceiving.

Several of the oops babies I know of have a big age gap with the next youngest child. The parents were probably initially on top of birth control, but may have assumed "eh, I'm over 40, what are the odds?" Without looking to see that actually the odds are much higher than zero, especially if you've successfully conceived before.

Yes this was us. I was 45 and laughed when my ob suggested birth control because we had done ivf in our thirties. We are thrilled with our surprise baby who miraculously has had no health issues so far and we had spent quite conservatively on our house so we feel fortunate but definitely stretched! Weirdly it’s made life easier because it takes lots of options off the table (travel sports, private school, etc)

It's a surprise, but not an oops. People who say "oops!" come across like they don't understand how babies are made.

This seems weirdly pedantic. Given her age and reproductive history, PP had ample reason to consider herself infertile. Is it not an oops if a condom breaks? Or if a breastfeeding mom gets pregnant on the mini pill? Presumably people in these situations know how babies are made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

I actually told a lot of people this when I was pregnant with #3. I didn’t want their judgement and jealousy.

This doesn't really make sense. I'd think people's reactions would be more harsh if you said #3 was an oopsie. I mean, look at how feisty the people on this board are being about it.

To be honest you are not me so you really have no idea what my day-to-day lived experiences are. I’ve had people who I work with (all women) say nasty things, like having three is showing off and that having three is fine, but I shouldn’t have four. At work.

It’s jealousy and judgement and it’s reflected in the pew data where many people say larger families are what they desire but for whatever reasons they can’t or don’t actually have that. Don’t get me wrong, many people have one or two children or no children and are very happy with that (I am a mom of three but could probably be very content in all of those scenarios too) but for whatever reason a woman having more than two children makes a lot of people feel like they have license to say really vicious and mean spirited things both to your face and on anonymous message boards. And I find the people who feel the need to express their views and judgements the most on this topic are women. Like somehow my family planning decisions were made as an affront to them and they need to let me know that I’m wrong for having three kids because they will never get enough time or attention from me and my husband, we will never have enough money to provide all three of them with a “comfortable” existence, and the idea that another sibling could be a net positive for my children is absurd because somehow the dynamics will make it so everyone is miserable. And moms of three? They always looked stressed, they are overbreeders, they paradoxically can do nothing (no PTA or volunteering or date nights or book groups or vacations) but also have nannies and grandparents raise their children, their houses are a mess, they can’t have meaningful careers and if they do it’s because they had twins after having an older child (I can’t imagine the person who made that comment on DCUM was a mom of twins because it’s brutal), they mooch off of other moms for carpooling and playdates, and they are religious - usually Mormon or Catholic. It seems the only acceptable way for women to have more than two children is for it to be an oopsie baby - birth control didn’t work or twins.

If someone were to start a thread about how they love having an only child or how they love parenting two children there would probably be 100% affirming posts and if anyone said otherwise they would be called out as unhinged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people posting on here must be wealthy or religious because cdc birth data suggests this is not the case nationally

It's a bunch of people from similar (and maybe the same) communities looking around at each other and thinking they are "the norm" or that their choices are becoming "more common" because they don't know enough people outside their bubble. It's just myopia

3+ kids are not becoming more common. But if you have 3+ kids, the odds of meeting other people with 3+ kids probably go way up. Just like when you go from no kids to one kid, suddenly it seems like parents are everywhere and you meet them wherever you go. Because suddenly you are going places like "playgrounds" and "daycare" that a childless person wouldn't go.

But okay, it "feels" like 3+ kids are becoming more common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of accidental 3 kid families lately, one older kid followed by twins. When I was growing up, I didn't know a lot of families with more than two. In fact, a lot of my friends were only children.

How do you know the twins were an accident? And lots of twin accidents? You just live in a neighborhood where everyone is accidentally having twins after an older child. Mmmhmmm

Uh, you can't just....have twins on purpose. You understand that right? Twins are spontaneous. Maybe some of these families would have gone for a third regardless, but they didn't plan their twins...

They are much more common with fertility treatments. That’s what PP is talking about.

As someone whose kids were conceived via fertility treatment, accepting the higher risk of multiples does not mean that you intend to have multiples. They’re still very much a surprise.

If you don’t want a surprise of two only implant one embryo. How can you read the fine print, make a decision where having twins is a distinct possibility, and then be surprised?

They can split. I have a friend who implanted two and got three.

+1. Identical twins are always a surprise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at everyone I know, I’d guess it is like this:

50% 2 DC
25% 3 DC
20% 1 DC
5% 4+ DC

I also know an absolute ton of couples that are childless by choice, or single people who never married or want to marry.

Most of the families I know with one DC didn’t plan on just one (for those who have said)…more commonly fertility issues or divorce/single parent.

A lot of the families with 3+ are due to an “oops”. I had a friend who had an oops #3 that turned into 3 & 4! twins. LOL.

I’d still say 2 seems to be the default.

Agree that a LOT Of the 3+ kid families are oops babies, or include multiples. I know two families that had oops triplets.

How on earth would you not have figured out how fertility and birth control work after having two kids? I suspect many of the people claiming #3 was an oopsie intended to have 3 all along and just need a way to justify it.

I actually told a lot of people this when I was pregnant with #3. I didn’t want their judgement and jealousy.

This doesn't really make sense. I'd think people's reactions would be more harsh if you said #3 was an oopsie. I mean, look at how feisty the people on this board are being about it.

To be honest you are not me so you really have no idea what my day-to-day lived experiences are. I’ve had people who I work with (all women) say nasty things, like having three is showing off and that having three is fine, but I shouldn’t have four. At work.

It’s jealousy and judgement and it’s reflected in the pew data where many people say larger families are what they desire but for whatever reasons they can’t or don’t actually have that. Don’t get me wrong, many people have one or two children or no children and are very happy with that (I am a mom of three but could probably be very content in all of those scenarios too) but for whatever reason a woman having more than two children makes a lot of people feel like they have license to say really vicious and mean spirited things both to your face and on anonymous message boards. And I find the people who feel the need to express their views and judgements the most on this topic are women. Like somehow my family planning decisions were made as an affront to them and they need to let me know that I’m wrong for having three kids because they will never get enough time or attention from me and my husband, we will never have enough money to provide all three of them with a “comfortable” existence, and the idea that another sibling could be a net positive for my children is absurd because somehow the dynamics will make it so everyone is miserable. And moms of three? They always looked stressed, they are overbreeders, they paradoxically can do nothing (no PTA or volunteering or date nights or book groups or vacations) but also have nannies and grandparents raise their children, their houses are a mess, they can’t have meaningful careers and if they do it’s because they had twins after having an older child (I can’t imagine the person who made that comment on DCUM was a mom of twins because it’s brutal), they mooch off of other moms for carpooling and playdates, and they are religious - usually Mormon or Catholic. It seems the only acceptable way for women to have more than two children is for it to be an oopsie baby - birth control didn’t work or twins.

If someone were to start a thread about how they love having an only child or how they love parenting two children there would probably be 100% affirming posts and if anyone said otherwise they would be called out as unhinged.

A few reasons people might judge or be unhappy about people having 3+ kids that aren't about jealousy:

1) They are from a family of 3+ kids themselves, and think it's bad for kids or families generally.

2) They are in competition with the larger family for resources. I have seen this with siblings where one sibling has 3+ kids and the other sibling has one or two -- there can be resentment about money/inheritance/help that goes to the larger family from grandparents because it feels unfair to the family with fewer kids.

3) They fear that if their friend has 3+ kids, they will no longer have time or want to spend time with their friends with smaller families. This is grounded in truth, because larger families can be much harder to host or get together with, not only due to the number of people but also due to kids' ages (introducing a baby to a dynamic that had previously been older kids means some activities will be harder or impossible).

It's complicated. I would never tell someone with 3+ kids that there is anything wrong with it, but I definitely sometimes have private, negative opinions of the choice. And I'm sure sometimes people suspect I have those opinions. Oh well. I am a mom of an only child and I know lots of people judge me for that (and plenty will tell me their judgment out loud). That's life.