Third child: just not sure!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To those of you contemplating - or already have - a third, did you ever consider the environmental impacts of an additional person? I can't get around it. I'd love another, but it just seems selfish to me. And, does anyone else feel three is an awkward number?

I don't think it is selfish, thank goodness your mom did not feel that way. Have 10 if you can afford to feed them without welfare assistance. and can love that many. Who knows, someones third may fix the enviromental problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The movie itself is about some future America where no one has an IQ over 80, because only the dumb, irresponsible people had children, and the whole society is on the brink of starvation because no one is smart enough to manage the economy. Again, it's seriously un-PC, but for all that, a reasonable mental exercise.

All this to say, people who love children should have children. They will raise them to be good people, and an asset to society.

What is the name of this movie. The premise behind it (as you describe it) is nuts. Intelligence is not inherited, just because a "dumd" person had a child does not mean that the child will be dumb. If given similar educational opportunities this child will likely do just a well or better than the child of the educated, affluent people. Please lets not do down the road of suggesting that only rich people should have children.

It's called "Idiocracy". It's a joke movie. I actually enjoyed it. It is terrible, but I had really low expectations and hadn't even heard of it before. My husband thought I'd enjoy the beginning and then I just kept watching it! But you are right, it is a silly premise but it is supposed to be.

BTW, as the youngest of three girls and the wife of the youngest of three children (oldest son, middle daughter and then my husband is the youngest).....I do think that Middle Child Syndrome is real, but it is not EVERY middle child. It is true in both of our families, though. I think that boys handle being the middle better than girls, but again....not always the case. Because of our own experiences, I think we would be more likely to have a third if our second is a boy. It's not rational or logical, just anecdotal. And....never say never anyway. We may have three children even if our next is a girl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For us comes down to pure finances. I don't know how anyone can afford 3 kids in this part of the country...but I come from a large family - 5 siblings, and it is fabulous. IF you can do it, the love that stems from it is great !! But know your limits, financially and emotionally.
Good luck with your decision...i am a little envious as we'd love 3 but cannot afford

Can someone share their math? How much additional expense did number 3 add to the family budget. I guess I'm focused mainly on food and clothing, but I'd also like to hear about day care, college savings, vacations, etc.

[Anonymous]

I figure each child (if you need daycare) is abou t$2k a month. Here is our math.

Our children go to a pricier daycare (but we are thrilled w. it) -- although, the flip side of this is we dont go out on weekends and never get sitters...spend it all on daycare, but thats ok - allows me to have a career and not worry about the kids while at work. Anyhow, my math:

$1675 daycare
$50 529 (i know we should do more, we will when daycare costs drop as kids get older)
$50 clothes (seasonal target is just fine)
$125 diapers/wipes
$100 food or formula

Cost isn't really much less for multiple kids but does help on toys/clothes/furniture start ups, etc.

[Anonymous]

Can someone share their math? How much additional expense did number 3 add to the family budget. I guess I'm focused mainly on food and clothing, but I'd also like to hear about day care, college savings, vacations, etc.

We are middle-income and live quite frugally. Honestly, our second child hasn't really added any expense to the family. The biggest cost of having children for us has been my lost income (I'm a SAHM). This would be true if we had one child or five! Our second child uses only used clothing and toys, I breastfed and never used any formula, and we used cloth diapers that were saved from the first child. The only easily identifiable extra cost has been when we eat out, since we now have to buy meals for both children usually. (And obviously eating out is not a necessity, but something we really like to do.) I can envision more costs to come in the future with regard to tuition (our second is not in school yet), although if we can't afford to send both kids to private school, we will find a public school that works or I will homeschool. We are planning to have three or four children, and we really do not have a ton of money; however I think it is going to work out just fine. It's all about figuring out what your priorities are. For example, we don't take vacations where we need to fly. Not to say that we won't EVER do this with our family; it's just not something that we normally do. If it's really important to be able to go overseas with your family every year then yes, extra children will drastically change your vacation budget. And so on.

Also, regarding population and resource issues.....there are massive things you can do to reduce your environmental impact, even as an individual. I often like to think that with the way my family lives, we could have 10 children and still use far fewer resources than other families who only have one child. I won't list out everything we do, but seriously, there are huge variations in how people live and what kind of impact they leave....starting with what you drive, what you eat, and where you live. Plus, hasn't anyone heard that it won't be long before our population stops even replacing itself?

[Anonymous]

PP: will you raise my third child for me since there is no additional cost in your household ??? Problem Solved!!!