I’m so freaking tired of parents with 3+ kids complaining

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - LOL y'all are worked up! A few clarifications, from myself only (can't speak for others who share some of my perspectives).

- I have NOTHING against large families. I know plenty, and am close with many. My issue is with the ones who can't manage the logistics and therefore the kids suffer - missing birthday parties, missing swim practice and therefore getting timed out of meets, etc. The soccer thing was an example. Of course, there are smaller families who struggle with this stuff also. But the larger families I know often blame it on having so many kids.

- I got pregnant twice on the first try and strongly considered a third. Decided against it ultimately, for a myriad of reasons. But infertility and/or jealousy (I agree with others - why would anyone be jealous of something they CHOSE not to do and could have done?) weren't factors.

I initially posted this because I feel bad for the kids, who in at least a few families I know like this, are definitely missing out.

Are there other kids who miss out on things? Of course. Are there larger families who have it all together and kick ass? Of course. Not debating either of those.

Carry on!

You still don't get it, op.

How on earth are you qualified to determine these kids are "missing out"?

Guess what? Sometimes we say we have a conflict with another kid's sport when we decline a birthday invite our kid simply isn't interested in attending. It's a polite way to decline. (Sometimes kids don't want to attend parties for little bullies.)

Sometimes we skip a practice or game...even "the defining ones"...for family events, another game etc. NBD.

As a mother of older kids, I can assure you that there really aren't any defining games or critical birthday parties in the life of an 8 year old. I promise.

I always think that part of the reason my friends with large families skip some stuff is that they have older kids along with the younger kids and therefore a different perspective on the “defining soccer game.”

Exactly.

Forget the stupid soccer game comment. Imagine you’re the one kid whose parents couldn’t get it together to help with your diorama on science day. Or forgot to print out the lyrics when everyone else knew the class song. It’s not about sports.

I'm not convinced that happens.

Gentle tip from a mother of many: you aren't doing your kid a favor by doing his diorama. The teacher knows you did it. My kids are responsible for their own school work. I'm only responsible for purchasing the supplies. Teachers consistently compliment my kid for doing his own projects (and they comment to me as well).

The sports example is legit precisely because most parents realize there is no such thing as a defining swim meet or soccer game.

So nothing they do is important, even if it’s important to them? Got it.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up Mormon and have dozens of friends and family members with 5+ kids. Literally all of them tell me that 3 is when the dynamic shifts. With one or two the family can carry on in a way that is still largely about the parents’ preferences. With 3, you switch into being in kid mode 100% of the time. With 2, you can micromanage them. With 3, one of them at all times will be at least somewhat outside your sphere of supervision and influence. And if you are the right kind of family, you will quickly see that centering your life on the kids and backing off and letting them be more independent is actually better for everyone involved. I think the problem comes because a lot of people don’t perceive a family of three as being a lot of kids, so they go for one more but they are not mentally prepared to make that shift. So instead of leaning into the big-family dynamic, they fight against it and try to run their family of three the same way that they ran their family of two. Since that’s not really possible, they feel like they are in over their heads and are constantly stressed and flustered.

Basically, IMO, the families who are on the fence about 2 vs. 3 are usually happier with 2, but the families who are on the fence about 3 vs 4 are happy and capable with 4.

Yeah, OK. I wonder if that Duggar girl would have been sexually abused by a sibling in a household with fewer kids. Kids slip through the cracks when there are too many kids for the parents to properly raise them. My mom is the oldest of 5. The middle brother is a disaster and no one spent the time, energy or resources to focus on his very obvious learning disability and resulting mental health issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have no concerns about other people's kids "missing out," etc. They can do whatever or not do whatever, none of my business.

I do, however, take issue with obnoxious parents of 3+ using the well-worn phrases, "You have no idea..." or "I thought I was busy with two" (never mind the fact that I wasn't commenting or talking about being busy AT ALL).

Uh, YEAH. I have no idea because I don't want to have any idea what it's like not to have the space, time, freedom, energy and capacity to enjoy my life, my spouse, and my children. You have the family you wanted--great. I have the family I wanted. So yeah, "I have no idea," but don't bitch to me, because I didn't impregnante you or your wife with that third or fourth kid.

Spare me your comments and passive-agressive remarks, and I'll spare you my eye-rolls and smirks. It's pretty simple.

I feel like this is one person you know. I am catholic and have a lot of friends with 5-10 kids. I have never heard any of them say this. If anything, they tend to act like it’s no big deal.

Nope, sorry. I used to be Catholic and know plenty, plenty of families like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have no concerns about other people's kids "missing out," etc. They can do whatever or not do whatever, none of my business.

I do, however, take issue with obnoxious parents of 3+ using the well-worn phrases, "You have no idea..." or "I thought I was busy with two" (never mind the fact that I wasn't commenting or talking about being busy AT ALL).

Uh, YEAH. I have no idea because I don't want to have any idea what it's like not to have the space, time, freedom, energy and capacity to enjoy my life, my spouse, and my children. You have the family you wanted--great. I have the family I wanted. So yeah, "I have no idea," but don't bitch to me, because I didn't impregnante you or your wife with that third or fourth kid.

Spare me your comments and passive-agressive remarks, and I'll spare you my eye-rolls and smirks. It's pretty simple.

You sound really angry.

You sound really defensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up Mormon and have dozens of friends and family members with 5+ kids. Literally all of them tell me that 3 is when the dynamic shifts. With one or two the family can carry on in a way that is still largely about the parents’ preferences. With 3, you switch into being in kid mode 100% of the time. With 2, you can micromanage them. With 3, one of them at all times will be at least somewhat outside your sphere of supervision and influence. And if you are the right kind of family, you will quickly see that centering your life on the kids and backing off and letting them be more independent is actually better for everyone involved. I think the problem comes because a lot of people don’t perceive a family of three as being a lot of kids, so they go for one more but they are not mentally prepared to make that shift. So instead of leaning into the big-family dynamic, they fight against it and try to run their family of three the same way that they ran their family of two. Since that’s not really possible, they feel like they are in over their heads and are constantly stressed and flustered.

Basically, IMO, the families who are on the fence about 2 vs. 3 are usually happier with 2, but the families who are on the fence about 3 vs 4 are happy and capable with 4.

Yeah, OK. I wonder if that Duggar girl would have been sexually abused by a sibling in a household with fewer kids. Kids slip through the cracks when there are too many kids for the parents to properly raise them. My mom is the oldest of 5. The middle brother is a disaster and no one spent the time, energy or resources to focus on his very obvious learning disability and resulting mental health issues.

DP, and while I agree that kids often do slip through the cracks with too many kids, three kids is usually not at that level of tipping point. I mean, how many do the Duggars have? 12? Not even comparable. But, I have often seen those parents of two who are on the fence about a third REALLY struggle once they have the third, because as PP said, they're still trying to be a small family, and that doesn't work with three. You have to parent differently.

We have three, wanted three, and I agree that it's either a tipping point or a sweet spot. For us, it's the latter. They benefit both from us not micromanaging them and yet still having the time and attention for them that really isn't possible with more kids. We're not having a fourth specifically for that reason: while we'd likely be happy and capable with four, we want to give our three a little more attention. With four, there's no way we could do that. With three, it feels somewhat possible, and in a beneficial way, not a hovering way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up Mormon and have dozens of friends and family members with 5+ kids. Literally all of them tell me that 3 is when the dynamic shifts. With one or two the family can carry on in a way that is still largely about the parents’ preferences. With 3, you switch into being in kid mode 100% of the time. With 2, you can micromanage them. With 3, one of them at all times will be at least somewhat outside your sphere of supervision and influence. And if you are the right kind of family, you will quickly see that centering your life on the kids and backing off and letting them be more independent is actually better for everyone involved. I think the problem comes because a lot of people don’t perceive a family of three as being a lot of kids, so they go for one more but they are not mentally prepared to make that shift. So instead of leaning into the big-family dynamic, they fight against it and try to run their family of three the same way that they ran their family of two. Since that’s not really possible, they feel like they are in over their heads and are constantly stressed and flustered.

Basically, IMO, the families who are on the fence about 2 vs. 3 are usually happier with 2, but the families who are on the fence about 3 vs 4 are happy and capable with 4.

I think this is accurate. I stopped at two because I know myself. I still pre-treat every stain and make every lunch and attend every event no matter how minor. I lay with them each in bed at night and shop methodically for all of their clothes. It hit me as a considered a third (that I would have loved very much) that I would not be able to be the same parent to any of them if we added another. So we stopped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have no concerns about other people's kids "missing out," etc. They can do whatever or not do whatever, none of my business.

I do, however, take issue with obnoxious parents of 3+ using the well-worn phrases, "You have no idea..." or "I thought I was busy with two" (never mind the fact that I wasn't commenting or talking about being busy AT ALL).

Uh, YEAH. I have no idea because I don't want to have any idea what it's like not to have the space, time, freedom, energy and capacity to enjoy my life, my spouse, and my children. You have the family you wanted--great. I have the family I wanted. So yeah, "I have no idea," but don't bitch to me, because I didn't impregnante you or your wife with that third or fourth kid.

Spare me your comments and passive-agressive remarks, and I'll spare you my eye-rolls and smirks. It's pretty simple.

I feel like this is one person you know. I am catholic and have a lot of friends with 5-10 kids. I have never heard any of them say this. If anything, they tend to act like it’s no big deal.

I’m not that poster but it is incredibly common.

A theme I’m noticing in this thread is that the parents with the larger families are prioritizing the family as a whole over the interests and/or needs of any particular child. That may be the mentality that leads to the larger families in the first place. But you better believe that if you are an eight-year-old who loves travel soccer and you get cut from that top team because your parents don’t make getting you there a priority, and then you see your former teammates in their higher- level uniforms, you’re going to feel sad. That’s not being a crazy sports parent. It’s taking your kids’ needs as individuals into account.

Good parents realize that travel teams aren't for every child. Having seen kids burn out early on thanks to travel teams, I can report that sometimes it's best to dial it down a notch. More directly: sometimes parents aren't neglecting the kid's needs; rather, sometimes it's a strategic way to ensure the kid gets cut because that's in the kid's best interest.

Bottom line: you really have no business judging. You simply can't know all the facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - LOL y'all are worked up! A few clarifications, from myself only (can't speak for others who share some of my perspectives).

- I have NOTHING against large families. I know plenty, and am close with many. My issue is with the ones who can't manage the logistics and therefore the kids suffer - missing birthday parties, missing swim practice and therefore getting timed out of meets, etc. The soccer thing was an example. Of course, there are smaller families who struggle with this stuff also. But the larger families I know often blame it on having so many kids.

- I got pregnant twice on the first try and strongly considered a third. Decided against it ultimately, for a myriad of reasons. But infertility and/or jealousy (I agree with others - why would anyone be jealous of something they CHOSE not to do and could have done?) weren't factors.

I initially posted this because I feel bad for the kids, who in at least a few families I know like this, are definitely missing out.

Are there other kids who miss out on things? Of course. Are there larger families who have it all together and kick ass? Of course. Not debating either of those.

Carry on!

You still don't get it, op.

How on earth are you qualified to determine these kids are "missing out"?

Guess what? Sometimes we say we have a conflict with another kid's sport when we decline a birthday invite our kid simply isn't interested in attending. It's a polite way to decline. (Sometimes kids don't want to attend parties for little bullies.)

Sometimes we skip a practice or game...even "the defining ones"...for family events, another game etc. NBD.

As a mother of older kids, I can assure you that there really aren't any defining games or critical birthday parties in the life of an 8 year old. I promise.

I always think that part of the reason my friends with large families skip some stuff is that they have older kids along with the younger kids and therefore a different perspective on the “defining soccer game.”

Exactly.

Forget the stupid soccer game comment. Imagine you’re the one kid whose parents couldn’t get it together to help with your diorama on science day. Or forgot to print out the lyrics when everyone else knew the class song. It’s not about sports.

I'm not convinced that happens.

Gentle tip from a mother of many: you aren't doing your kid a favor by doing his diorama. The teacher knows you did it. My kids are responsible for their own school work. I'm only responsible for purchasing the supplies. Teachers consistently compliment my kid for doing his own projects (and they comment to me as well).

The sports example is legit precisely because most parents realize there is no such thing as a defining swim meet or soccer game.

So nothing they do is important, even if it’s important to them? Got it.

So dramatic.

Question: how on earth are you equipped to judge what is important to my kid? You simply aren't. Just because your kid believes the soccer game is a defining moment in his life doesn't mean my kid feels the same. Geez.

Another parenting tip: putting so much emphasis and pressure on an 8 year old won't end well...whether it's soccer or social studies.

Who's putting pressure on kids? Interests and enthusiasm isn't the same as pressure. You're SO defensive and taking this all so personally. If you can handle your large family in the way you think best, great! Then move along.

"What do you mean you're too tired for soccer, Larla??? Today is the big game against Potomac!!! It's the defining game! If you don't show, you'll be cut next year."

They're 8. None of this really matters. I promise.

[Anonymous]

What about not knowing about the end of year picnic since they’re too busy to check email, or not sending a white t shirt to autograph - etc etc? None of it matters, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have no concerns about other people's kids "missing out," etc. They can do whatever or not do whatever, none of my business.

I do, however, take issue with obnoxious parents of 3+ using the well-worn phrases, "You have no idea..." or "I thought I was busy with two" (never mind the fact that I wasn't commenting or talking about being busy AT ALL).

Uh, YEAH. I have no idea because I don't want to have any idea what it's like not to have the space, time, freedom, energy and capacity to enjoy my life, my spouse, and my children. You have the family you wanted--great. I have the family I wanted. So yeah, "I have no idea," but don't bitch to me, because I didn't impregnante you or your wife with that third or fourth kid.

Spare me your comments and passive-agressive remarks, and I'll spare you my eye-rolls and smirks. It's pretty simple.

I feel like this is one person you know. I am catholic and have a lot of friends with 5-10 kids. I have never heard any of them say this. If anything, they tend to act like it’s no big deal.

I’m not that poster but it is incredibly common.

A theme I’m noticing in this thread is that the parents with the larger families are prioritizing the family as a whole over the interests and/or needs of any particular child. That may be the mentality that leads to the larger families in the first place. But you better believe that if you are an eight-year-old who loves travel soccer and you get cut from that top team because your parents don’t make getting you there a priority, and then you see your former teammates in their higher- level uniforms, you’re going to feel sad. That’s not being a crazy sports parent. It’s taking your kids’ needs as individuals into account.

Good parents realize that travel teams aren't for every child. Having seen kids burn out early on thanks to travel teams, I can report that sometimes it's best to dial it down a notch. More directly: sometimes parents aren't neglecting the kid's needs; rather, sometimes it's a strategic way to ensure the kid gets cut because that's in the kid's best interest.

Bottom line: you really have no business judging. You simply can't know all the facts.

I honestly don’t know if you’re intentionally being obtuse. I fear not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about not knowing about the end of year picnic since they’re too busy to check email, or not sending a white t shirt to autograph - etc etc? None of it matters, right?

I wonder if you're actually criticizing me? I didn't go to the end of the year picnic. I had a work commitment that was in fact more important than eating lunch with my kid for 30 minutes in the middle of the day. And DH was out of town. Guess what? I explained it to my kid, and said he could hang with Larlo and his mom. NBD. Just because you didn't see me there doesn't mean I dropped a ball or that my kid was devastated.

And what about all the kids with moms who are teachers? They can never be at school events. Want to crucify them for neglecting their kids while they are busy teaching your kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up Mormon and have dozens of friends and family members with 5+ kids. Literally all of them tell me that 3 is when the dynamic shifts. With one or two the family can carry on in a way that is still largely about the parents’ preferences. With 3, you switch into being in kid mode 100% of the time. With 2, you can micromanage them. With 3, one of them at all times will be at least somewhat outside your sphere of supervision and influence. And if you are the right kind of family, you will quickly see that centering your life on the kids and backing off and letting them be more independent is actually better for everyone involved. I think the problem comes because a lot of people don’t perceive a family of three as being a lot of kids, so they go for one more but they are not mentally prepared to make that shift. So instead of leaning into the big-family dynamic, they fight against it and try to run their family of three the same way that they ran their family of two. Since that’s not really possible, they feel like they are in over their heads and are constantly stressed and flustered.

Basically, IMO, the families who are on the fence about 2 vs. 3 are usually happier with 2, but the families who are on the fence about 3 vs 4 are happy and capable with 4.

I think this is accurate. I stopped at two because I know myself. I still pre-treat every stain and make every lunch and attend every event no matter how minor. I lay with them each in bed at night and shop methodically for all of their clothes. It hit me as a considered a third (that I would have loved very much) that I would not be able to be the same parent to any of them if we added another. So we stopped.

I agree too. I have three but honestly could see our family adjusting to handle four just fine, and I would if I thought my body could handle another pregnancy (but it can't), and assuming the kids were spaced out decently/not multiples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about not knowing about the end of year picnic since they’re too busy to check email, or not sending a white t shirt to autograph - etc etc? None of it matters, right?

I wonder if you're actually criticizing me? I didn't go to the end of the year picnic. I had a work commitment that was in fact more important than eating lunch with my kid for 30 minutes in the middle of the day. And DH was out of town. Guess what? I explained it to my kid, and said he could hang with Larlo and his mom. NBD. Just because you didn't see me there doesn't mean I dropped a ball or that my kid was devastated.

And what about all the kids with moms who are teachers? They can never be at school events. Want to crucify them for neglecting their kids while they are busy teaching your kid?

It was in the evening. Kid missed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about not knowing about the end of year picnic since they’re too busy to check email, or not sending a white t shirt to autograph - etc etc? None of it matters, right?

I wonder if you're actually criticizing me? I didn't go to the end of the year picnic. I had a work commitment that was in fact more important than eating lunch with my kid for 30 minutes in the middle of the day. And DH was out of town. Guess what? I explained it to my kid, and said he could hang with Larlo and his mom. NBD. Just because you didn't see me there doesn't mean I dropped a ball or that my kid was devastated.

And what about all the kids with moms who are teachers? They can never be at school events. Want to crucify them for neglecting their kids while they are busy teaching your kid?

It was in the evening. Kid missed it.

Sorry, got cut off. Because parents can't keep up (they admit this) with kid stuff. Not mom had to work (I also work, and have missed many events), not mom cleared with kid ahead of time and kid was ok with it, etc. Kids all asked where he was and he didn't know it had happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here - LOL y'all are worked up! A few clarifications, from myself only (can't speak for others who share some of my perspectives).

- I have NOTHING against large families. I know plenty, and am close with many. My issue is with the ones who can't manage the logistics and therefore the kids suffer - missing birthday parties, missing swim practice and therefore getting timed out of meets, etc. The soccer thing was an example. Of course, there are smaller families who struggle with this stuff also. But the larger families I know often blame it on having so many kids.

- I got pregnant twice on the first try and strongly considered a third. Decided against it ultimately, for a myriad of reasons. But infertility and/or jealousy (I agree with others - why would anyone be jealous of something they CHOSE not to do and could have done?) weren't factors.

I initially posted this because I feel bad for the kids, who in at least a few families I know like this, are definitely missing out.

Are there other kids who miss out on things? Of course. Are there larger families who have it all together and kick ass? Of course. Not debating either of those.

Carry on!

Oh, I get it now OP. The moms with two who considered a third but ultimately didn’t go for it (usually husband wasn’t quite on board) are the worst. It’s like they always hold on to this tiny piece of regret, so they spend the rest of their lives justifying to themselves how superior it is to have 2 kids vs. 3, how sadly neglected all children are from families with more than 2, how their kids will be so much more loved and we’ll-adjusted, etc. Sorry but it’s just not true. If you were truly happy with your life and family size, none of this would bother you so much - in fact, it probably wouldn’t even cross your mind. Sour grapes.