What constitutes a large family, in your opinion?

[Anonymous]

What do you imagine when you think of a large (immediate/nuclear, not extended) family? Parents and how many kids?

[Anonymous]

4 or more kids

[Anonymous]

4+ kids

[Anonymous]

4 kids. When you need a car bigger than a standard size to transport everyone around, I consider that to be a large family.

[Anonymous]

I had one sibling and growing up most of my friends also had one sibling, so this always felt like the norm to me. Based on that I've always considered 4 or more kids a big family.

[Anonymous]

3 kids- 5 people is a big family. i have 3 kids- grew up with 1 or 2 being the norm and teh religious having 5+ kids. If you need a special car, special hotel arrangements, cant sit in a single unit at the amusement parks- you are an unusuallyl arge sized family.

[Anonymous]

4 or more kids.

[Anonymous]

4+

[Anonymous]

At this point I consider 3+ kids large. When I was young it was 4+. But I think as parenting standards have risen to expect more involved, intensive parenting, 3 kids now taxes the ability of parents to meet those standards in a way it didn't back in the 80s and 90s.

I know so many 1 or 2 kid families now. It's the vast majority of families I know (2 is most common but I know a LOT of onlies, likely because I am in a field where many women marry and start families later). This also makes the 3 kid families seem so much bigger than they used to. The third child adds an element of noise and (for lack of a better word) chaos that does not exist with most of the families I know.

[Anonymous]

Four or more kids. Several nuclear families in my extended family have three, so that seems normal to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:4 kids. When you need a car bigger than a standard size to transport everyone around, I consider that to be a large family.

It is very hard to fit 3 kids and two adults in a standard sedan or even a small SUV. Especially once the oldest hits middle school.

[Anonymous]

4+ kids. I have 3 kids and it seems pretty standard for UMC families. Every house on my culdesac has 3 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At this point I consider 3+ kids large. When I was young it was 4+. But I think as parenting standards have risen to expect more involved, intensive parenting, 3 kids now taxes the ability of parents to meet those standards in a way it didn't back in the 80s and 90s.

I know so many 1 or 2 kid families now. It's the vast majority of families I know (2 is most common but I know a LOT of onlies, likely because I am in a field where many women marry and start families later). This also makes the 3 kid families seem so much bigger than they used to. The third child adds an element of noise and (for lack of a better word) chaos that does not exist with most of the families I know.

Sort of the opposite! I didn't know a single family that had more than 2 kids when I was growing up (I was born in the 80s). I have tons of cousins and they all only had one sibling each.

Now 3 seems to be standard for those who can afford it. Everyone seems to have either no kids or 3 kids.

[Anonymous]

5 or more kids is "large".

[Anonymous]

I’d say three kids just because that’s when you can’t fit in a standard car or restaurant table. But I’m a family of five and it doesn’t “feel” big, just full. 4 or more kids is most definitely large.