I am tired of people making fun of the parents of only children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely think there are personality traits that tend to develop along sibling order (or only child) lines.

The adult only children I know are not necessarily selfish, but they are much more needy and need feedback more - on social media, in person, they harbor extra sensitivity against being excluded. They like to talk about themselves a lot more. Growing up in a medium-large family, you learn to need less feedback from others, you are pretty ok with spending time alone, and exclusion happens - just because your siblings are invited places and get to do things, doesn't mean you can too. Tough cookies. That's life.

It's not always this way, but it does seem to be the case with my adult friends and acquaintances who are only kids. It does make it harder for me to relate to them.

+1 to this. There is a good reason for the stereotypes - in the vast majority of cases, they're true. I can think of one only child I know who is socially well-adjusted and normal...she takes it as a compliment when people are surprised she's an only child, because she gets it

Maybe you attract needy people?

You must be a really cool person to issue a blanket insult to a certain category of children based on the decisions or circumstances concerned with their parents. Jeez.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everybody judges to some degree and if you're at all social and paying attention everyone will feel judged once in a while.

Parents of unless are judged as being lazy, selfish, cold, hovering.

Parents of many are judged as being greedy, addicted to babies, dumb, careless, also helicoptery.

Non-parents are judged as being sad or mean or selfish or are pitied or abnormal.

I'm sure some of these people are some of these things, but all in all we do what we can with what we have, and it doesn't matter. Having little kids means existing in a really myopic universe, and growing out of that helps alleviate all the judgement and perceived judgement by others.

I have found that as my child gets older (9 now) my perception of being judge has stopped and instead of judging others I feel ore empathy (or maybe relief, or occasional envy). Having a healthy normal life means you have stuff to do: that can happen with 1 or 2 or 4 or no kids - everyone keeps moving on to the next thing, it's just a different thing for each of us.

One thing I disagree with: the people who are seen as helicopters are the parents of obliged, not of multiple.

I tend to largely agree with you otherwise

Yeah I don't think these are firm categories - everyone has different stereotypes and perceptions. Birth order and family size isn't really a concrete science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the parent of an only child. That was not our plan; we wanted two kids. But my DW had two miscarriages after DD was born. We tried to adopt after the second, but a few months into the process I was diagnosed with metastatic cancer. The social worker we were working with said that it would be disqualifying.

DD is now a HS student. Socially, there are huge disadvantage to being an only child: many of the conflict resolution skills she would have developed with a sibling are undeveloped.

OP here.

I'm sorry for your losses.

We have a large family. It's right for us. That said, there are also disadvantages of being one of several children and the stereotypes, negative and positive, that exist regarding children in large families probably exist for a reason.

I'm guessing your kid probably benefited in many ways from being an only child...

PP here. There are several ways she has and will benefit....first, we have more resources. If she needs something, there is no competition. Second, she gets more attention. As in, any event will have a parent present. Usually 2. (I do not understand how parents with 4 kids manage soccer Saturdays...). Third, (maybe an extension of 1st), more financial options for college: we can pay for 1 kid to go anywhere. Two would be a problem. And finally, she will inherit more money.

So, money, money, money?

You are correct that your one child will likely have more financial resources than some. But is that necessarily a good thing?

I'm one of four. My parents attended our school and sporting events for the most part. Mom was a sahm and had leadership positions at our private school. Dad coached a number of teams. Sometimes we carpooled to games with our friends. (Note to pp: *That's* how families handle busy Saturdays with conflicting events...carpool...google it.)

My parents invested in private school K-12 for the four of us, and they made it clear that they could cover in-state tuition.

I babysat starting as a young teen, had summer jobs, and worked PT during college and FT over summer. I learned how to budget and invest better than my more privileged counterparts who were handed things on a silver platter. Many of my friends from law school are still in debt. I am not. Many of my friends who were singletons or only have 1 sibling were essentially spoiled and are unequipped to cowboy up and be self-sufficient.

I have four kids. They are loved. They have everything they need. They have passports and have traveled extensively. They are not spoiled. They realize they are part of a family unit of 6, and that sometimes they need to wait. They seem to be more independent and self-sufficient than some of their counterparts. They seem to have better self-control and more empathy. They know how to pitch in and help (even without being asked). We can cover in-state tuition, and we will counsel them against student loans and debt.

When we're old and sick, they'll have their siblings and won't shoulder any burdens alone. They're being raised with the mantra: one team, one fight. And while they are being taught the value of a dollar, how to save, etc., they are also being taught that money isn't everything. They realize they are blessed and privileged despite going to public school, wearing their siblings' hand me downs, and not being shipped off to sailing camp. They aren't snobs. They are cool little people.

As 1 of 4 myself, major +1 to this. I'd take the unshakeable deep bonds and lifelong friendship (...that's not a strong enough word) I have with my siblings over a larger inheritance ANY day

Two quick points here:

1. I don't think PP was saying money is the chief reason to have an only. She was stating that it is a clear advantage to being an only. And it is. Assuming there is money to be had.

2. I don't think you and the other PP's status as 1 of 4 is an automatic ticket to lifetime friendship and feel-good bonding. But if you get that, then yes, it's a clear advantage.

Every situation will have advantages, disadvantages, guarantees, and risks. Your situation is no better than the only PP's. Her stating that her child will inherit more is not an implication that your family is worse and hers is better - she's just answering a question. You don't need to defend your position or make her feel less than with a defensive response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the past week I think I've been a part of at least three conversations in which parents of only children are judged. I just don't understand how it's considered okay to do this.

It is not ok. I am 1 of 4, DH was 1 of 5. We decided to have only 1. Because we had very ineffective parents who allowed bullying among siblings, chose "favorite child" , among may other issues, which we do not go around explaining every time we hear bs.
We were married 10 years before having dd. Many friends/family/other mothers made a lot of very obnoxious comments about us only having one.
like, You are not a REAL parent, you NEED to have my kid over for a playdate to your house because your kid is lonely on the school holiday (oh & i have to go to work, so could you pick up/drop off Jr), well you don't understand, you don't have to worry about college expenses, you brought dd that- you are making the rest of us look bad, and many, many more.

My dd is now grown. Great social skills, no student loans, great childhood....my only regret is that I didn't have more children because I thought favoritism and sibling rivalry was inevitable (which I now realize is not true) and I hated the idea that dd does not have siblings to help her deal when both of us die (although when my parents & in-laws died-there was no true support or love among siblings.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the parent of an only child. That was not our plan; we wanted two kids. But my DW had two miscarriages after DD was born. We tried to adopt after the second, but a few months into the process I was diagnosed with metastatic cancer. The social worker we were working with said that it would be disqualifying.

DD is now a HS student. Socially, there are huge disadvantage to being an only child: many of the conflict resolution skills she would have developed with a sibling are undeveloped.

OP here.

I'm sorry for your losses.

We have a large family. It's right for us. That said, there are also disadvantages of being one of several children and the stereotypes, negative and positive, that exist regarding children in large families probably exist for a reason.

I'm guessing your kid probably benefited in many ways from being an only child...

PP here. There are several ways she has and will benefit....first, we have more resources. If she needs something, there is no competition. Second, she gets more attention. As in, any event will have a parent present. Usually 2. (I do not understand how parents with 4 kids manage soccer Saturdays...). Third, (maybe an extension of 1st), more financial options for college: we can pay for 1 kid to go anywhere. Two would be a problem. And finally, she will inherit more money.

So, money, money, money?

You are correct that your one child will likely have more financial resources than some. But is that necessarily a good thing?

I'm one of four. My parents attended our school and sporting events for the most part. Mom was a sahm and had leadership positions at our private school. Dad coached a number of teams. Sometimes we carpooled to games with our friends. (Note to pp: *That's* how families handle busy Saturdays with conflicting events...carpool...google it.)

My parents invested in private school K-12 for the four of us, and they made it clear that they could cover in-state tuition.

I babysat starting as a young teen, had summer jobs, and worked PT during college and FT over summer. I learned how to budget and invest better than my more privileged counterparts who were handed things on a silver platter. Many of my friends from law school are still in debt. I am not. Many of my friends who were singletons or only have 1 sibling were essentially spoiled and are unequipped to cowboy up and be self-sufficient.

I have four kids. They are loved. They have everything they need. They have passports and have traveled extensively. They are not spoiled. They realize they are part of a family unit of 6, and that sometimes they need to wait. They seem to be more independent and self-sufficient than some of their counterparts. They seem to have better self-control and more empathy. They know how to pitch in and help (even without being asked). We can cover in-state tuition, and we will counsel them against student loans and debt.

When we're old and sick, they'll have their siblings and won't shoulder any burdens alone. They're being raised with the mantra: one team, one fight. And while they are being taught the value of a dollar, how to save, etc., they are also being taught that money isn't everything. They realize they are blessed and privileged despite going to public school, wearing their siblings' hand me downs, and not being shipped off to sailing camp. They aren't snobs. They are cool little people.

As 1 of 4 myself, major +1 to this. I'd take the unshakeable deep bonds and lifelong friendship (...that's not a strong enough word) I have with my siblings over a larger inheritance ANY day

Two quick points here:

1. I don't think PP was saying money is the chief reason to have an only. She was stating that it is a clear advantage to being an only. And it is. Assuming there is money to be had.

2. I don't think you and the other PP's status as 1 of 4 is an automatic ticket to lifetime friendship and feel-good bonding. But if you get that, then yes, it's a clear advantage.

Every situation will have advantages, disadvantages, guarantees, and risks. Your situation is no better than the only PP's. Her stating that her child will inherit more is not an implication that your family is worse and hers is better - she's just answering a question. You don't need to defend your position or make her feel less than with a defensive response.

I am the PP. We would much rather of had two kids (or three). But it was not in the card. OP pointed out there must be advantages. I listed them, and yes, there are financial advantages. However, those are secondary to the social disadvantages of being an only child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the parent of an only child. That was not our plan; we wanted two kids. But my DW had two miscarriages after DD was born. We tried to adopt after the second, but a few months into the process I was diagnosed with metastatic cancer. The social worker we were working with said that it would be disqualifying.

DD is now a HS student. Socially, there are huge disadvantage to being an only child: many of the conflict resolution skills she would have developed with a sibling are undeveloped.

OP here.

I'm sorry for your losses.

We have a large family. It's right for us. That said, there are also disadvantages of being one of several children and the stereotypes, negative and positive, that exist regarding children in large families probably exist for a reason.

I'm guessing your kid probably benefited in many ways from being an only child...

PP here. There are several ways she has and will benefit....first, we have more resources. If she needs something, there is no competition. Second, she gets more attention. As in, any event will have a parent present. Usually 2. (I do not understand how parents with 4 kids manage soccer Saturdays...). Third, (maybe an extension of 1st), more financial options for college: we can pay for 1 kid to go anywhere. Two would be a problem. And finally, she will inherit more money.

So, money, money, money?

You are correct that your one child will likely have more financial resources than some. But is that necessarily a good thing?

I'm one of four. My parents attended our school and sporting events for the most part. Mom was a sahm and had leadership positions at our private school. Dad coached a number of teams. Sometimes we carpooled to games with our friends. (Note to pp: *That's* how families handle busy Saturdays with conflicting events...carpool...google it.)

My parents invested in private school K-12 for the four of us, and they made it clear that they could cover in-state tuition.

I babysat starting as a young teen, had summer jobs, and worked PT during college and FT over summer. I learned how to budget and invest better than my more privileged counterparts who were handed things on a silver platter. Many of my friends from law school are still in debt. I am not. Many of my friends who were singletons or only have 1 sibling were essentially spoiled and are unequipped to cowboy up and be self-sufficient.

I have four kids. They are loved. They have everything they need. They have passports and have traveled extensively. They are not spoiled. They realize they are part of a family unit of 6, and that sometimes they need to wait. They seem to be more independent and self-sufficient than some of their counterparts. They seem to have better self-control and more empathy. They know how to pitch in and help (even without being asked). We can cover in-state tuition, and we will counsel them against student loans and debt.

When we're old and sick, they'll have their siblings and won't shoulder any burdens alone. They're being raised with the mantra: one team, one fight. And while they are being taught the value of a dollar, how to save, etc., they are also being taught that money isn't everything. They realize they are blessed and privileged despite going to public school, wearing their siblings' hand me downs, and not being shipped off to sailing camp. They aren't snobs. They are cool little people.

Defensive much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the parent of an only child. That was not our plan; we wanted two kids. But my DW had two miscarriages after DD was born. We tried to adopt after the second, but a few months into the process I was diagnosed with metastatic cancer. The social worker we were working with said that it would be disqualifying.

DD is now a HS student. Socially, there are huge disadvantage to being an only child: many of the conflict resolution skills she would have developed with a sibling are undeveloped.

OP here.

I'm sorry for your losses.

We have a large family. It's right for us. That said, there are also disadvantages of being one of several children and the stereotypes, negative and positive, that exist regarding children in large families probably exist for a reason.

I'm guessing your kid probably benefited in many ways from being an only child...

PP here. There are several ways she has and will benefit....first, we have more resources. If she needs something, there is no competition. Second, she gets more attention. As in, any event will have a parent present. Usually 2. (I do not understand how parents with 4 kids manage soccer Saturdays...). Third, (maybe an extension of 1st), more financial options for college: we can pay for 1 kid to go anywhere. Two would be a problem. And finally, she will inherit more money.

So, money, money, money?

You are correct that your one child will likely have more financial resources than some. But is that necessarily a good thing?

I'm one of four. My parents attended our school and sporting events for the most part. Mom was a sahm and had leadership positions at our private school. Dad coached a number of teams. Sometimes we carpooled to games with our friends. (Note to pp: *That's* how families handle busy Saturdays with conflicting events...carpool...google it.)

My parents invested in private school K-12 for the four of us, and they made it clear that they could cover in-state tuition.

I babysat starting as a young teen, had summer jobs, and worked PT during college and FT over summer. I learned how to budget and invest better than my more privileged counterparts who were handed things on a silver platter. Many of my friends from law school are still in debt. I am not. Many of my friends who were singletons or only have 1 sibling were essentially spoiled and are unequipped to cowboy up and be self-sufficient.

I have four kids. They are loved. They have everything they need. They have passports and have traveled extensively. They are not spoiled. They realize they are part of a family unit of 6, and that sometimes they need to wait. They seem to be more independent and self-sufficient than some of their counterparts. They seem to have better self-control and more empathy. They know how to pitch in and help (even without being asked). We can cover in-state tuition, and we will counsel them against student loans and debt.

When we're old and sick, they'll have their siblings and won't shoulder any burdens alone. They're being raised with the mantra: one team, one fight. And while they are being taught the value of a dollar, how to save, etc., they are also being taught that money isn't everything. They realize they are blessed and privileged despite going to public school, wearing their siblings' hand me downs, and not being shipped off to sailing camp. They aren't snobs. They are cool little people.

As 1 of 4 myself, major +1 to this. I'd take the unshakeable deep bonds and lifelong friendship (...that's not a strong enough word) I have with my siblings over a larger inheritance ANY day

Two quick points here:

1. I don't think PP was saying money is the chief reason to have an only. She was stating that it is a clear advantage to being an only. And it is. Assuming there is money to be had.

2. I don't think you and the other PP's status as 1 of 4 is an automatic ticket to lifetime friendship and feel-good bonding. But if you get that, then yes, it's a clear advantage.

Every situation will have advantages, disadvantages, guarantees, and risks. Your situation is no better than the only PP's. Her stating that her child will inherit more is not an implication that your family is worse and hers is better - she's just answering a question. You don't need to defend your position or make her feel less than with a defensive response.

I am the PP. We would much rather of had two kids (or three). But it was not in the card. OP pointed out there must be advantages. I listed them, and yes, there are financial advantages. However, those are secondary to the social disadvantages of being an only child.

Am I understanding correctly that you have one child, wanted but couldn't have more, and are saying your child is at a social advantage because of being an only? That makes me sad and I wholeheartedly disagree. If that's a parent's perception it will show through, and negatively affect, a child. I wish you peace and clarity.

[Anonymous]

^ that should read DISadvantage

[Anonymous]

^total non-reply throwaway and you know it. Attempt to say something even semi-intelligent (or even interesting), or just don't bother replying at all. It makes you sound quite dumb

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the parent of an only child. That was not our plan; we wanted two kids. But my DW had two miscarriages after DD was born. We tried to adopt after the second, but a few months into the process I was diagnosed with metastatic cancer. The social worker we were working with said that it would be disqualifying.

DD is now a HS student. Socially, there are huge disadvantage to being an only child: many of the conflict resolution skills she would have developed with a sibling are undeveloped.

OP here.

I'm sorry for your losses.

We have a large family. It's right for us. That said, there are also disadvantages of being one of several children and the stereotypes, negative and positive, that exist regarding children in large families probably exist for a reason.

I'm guessing your kid probably benefited in many ways from being an only child...

PP here. There are several ways she has and will benefit....first, we have more resources. If she needs something, there is no competition. Second, she gets more attention. As in, any event will have a parent present. Usually 2. (I do not understand how parents with 4 kids manage soccer Saturdays...). Third, (maybe an extension of 1st), more financial options for college: we can pay for 1 kid to go anywhere. Two would be a problem. And finally, she will inherit more money.

So, money, money, money?

You are correct that your one child will likely have more financial resources than some. But is that necessarily a good thing?

I'm one of four. My parents attended our school and sporting events for the most part. Mom was a sahm and had leadership positions at our private school. Dad coached a number of teams. Sometimes we carpooled to games with our friends. (Note to pp: *That's* how families handle busy Saturdays with conflicting events...carpool...google it.)

My parents invested in private school K-12 for the four of us, and they made it clear that they could cover in-state tuition.

I babysat starting as a young teen, had summer jobs, and worked PT during college and FT over summer. I learned how to budget and invest better than my more privileged counterparts who were handed things on a silver platter. Many of my friends from law school are still in debt. I am not. Many of my friends who were singletons or only have 1 sibling were essentially spoiled and are unequipped to cowboy up and be self-sufficient.

I have four kids. They are loved. They have everything they need. They have passports and have traveled extensively. They are not spoiled. They realize they are part of a family unit of 6, and that sometimes they need to wait. They seem to be more independent and self-sufficient than some of their counterparts. They seem to have better self-control and more empathy. They know how to pitch in and help (even without being asked). We can cover in-state tuition, and we will counsel them against student loans and debt.

When we're old and sick, they'll have their siblings and won't shoulder any burdens alone. They're being raised with the mantra: one team, one fight. And while they are being taught the value of a dollar, how to save, etc., they are also being taught that money isn't everything. They realize they are blessed and privileged despite going to public school, wearing their siblings' hand me downs, and not being shipped off to sailing camp. They aren't snobs. They are cool little people.

As 1 of 4 myself, major +1 to this. I'd take the unshakeable deep bonds and lifelong friendship (...that's not a strong enough word) I have with my siblings over a larger inheritance ANY day

As one of 5 who shouldered the caring for an ill parent alone and who has three no account siblings who stole money took advantage and left when the well ran dry..it isn’t always happily ever after.

[Anonymous]

Only when it is an older Dad. We call it rusty sperm.