What is a better number of kids? 3 or 4?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having more than 2 kids is extremely selfish IMO.

+1

[Anonymous]

10

[Anonymous]

2 is optimal but wife and I have 3 with no complaints

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who claim they have 4 because they were one of 4 and loved it nee to tell if they were the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th child, what sex they are compared to their siblings, and they age difference.

I am the oldest of 4 and I have 4. My youngest sibling is 7 years younger. We are girl, girl, boy, girl.

My children are boy boy girl girl and we want more. Its a busy house but at least we are never bored! And we have one severe SN (#2).

How many children do your 2nd and 3rd sibling have?

They are very religious and don't use BC. They are recently married and one just had 2 in 13 months and the other 2 in 17 months... So I'm figuring a lot long term. #4 isn't married yet but I expect fewer kids from that one, more like me (isn't against BC)

Oh so your Duggar types this totally explains the big funny happy, house and sibling buddy thing.

We are not. Ivy league educated and high earners. Parents were moderately religious, 2 of my siblings became very religious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having more than 2 kids is extremely selfish IMO.

What if one is adopted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who claim they have 4 because they were one of 4 and loved it nee to tell if they were the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th child, what sex they are compared to their siblings, and they age difference.

I am the oldest of 4 and I have 4. My youngest sibling is 7 years younger. We are girl, girl, boy, girl.

My children are boy boy girl girl and we want more. Its a busy house but at least we are never bored! And we have one severe SN (#2).

How many children do your 2nd and 3rd sibling have?

They are very religious and don't use BC. They are recently married and one just had 2 in 13 months and the other 2 in 17 months... So I'm figuring a lot long term. #4 isn't married yet but I expect fewer kids from that one, more like me (isn't against BC)

Oh so your Duggar types this totally explains the big funny happy, house and sibling buddy thing.

Actually there is research that shows something to the effect that more siblings (I think around 4) is better for the children. While at the same time being worse and more stressful for parents.

Different people make different choices that are right for them. Stop being so judgmental.

Signed, mom of 2

[Anonymous]

4. There is no middle child syndrome.

[Anonymous]

3 or 5. 4 is bad.

2, 3, or 5. Those are the choices. The number must be prime.

Every family I know with 4 kids has been f*cked. I'm not kidding!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who claim they have 4 because they were one of 4 and loved it nee to tell if they were the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th child, what sex they are compared to their siblings, and they age difference.

I am the oldest of 4 and I have 4. My youngest sibling is 7 years younger. We are girl, girl, boy, girl.

My children are boy boy girl girl and we want more. Its a busy house but at least we are never bored! And we have one severe SN (#2).

How many children do your 2nd and 3rd sibling have?

They are very religious and don't use BC. They are recently married and one just had 2 in 13 months and the other 2 in 17 months... So I'm figuring a lot long term. #4 isn't married yet but I expect fewer kids from that one, more like me (isn't against BC)

Oh so your Duggar types this totally explains the big funny happy, house and sibling buddy thing.

Actually there is research that shows something to the effect that more siblings (I think around 4) is better for the children. While at the same time being worse and more stressful for parents.

Different people make different choices that are right for them. Stop being so judgmental.

Signed, mom of 2

All research says that more kids are worse for the environment. Some people will judge on this fact, because it hurts everyone.

[Anonymous]

If you have no kids who are you saving the environment for? Some kids in Africa?

Having children is a blessing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:4. There is no middle child syndrome.

Haha...tell that to my mom who is textbook middle child. She's #2 of 4, with oldest three being girls and a large-ish gap before my uncle. Even my grandmother used to acknowledge this about my mom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you have no kids who are you saving the environment for? Some kids in Africa?

Having children is a blessing.

I have (2) kids. I also care about kids in Africa, because I'm not an a-hole.

Also, the environment affects me and my own kids.

[Anonymous]

We decided to go for a 4th, even though our 3 are more evenly spaced. When #4 is born, our kids will be 7.5, 5.5, and 3.5, so the 4th will have the biggest gap. I am not too worried about it being left out, since I see a 4 year gap does not prevent my current #1 and #3 from playing beautifully together. But I suppose we could always have a 5th to keep it company.

[Anonymous]

It all comes down to family and sibling dynamics.

[Anonymous]

I’m planning on a 4th. I have three boys, 2 years between #1 and #2 and 18 months between #2 and #3. There will ideally be a 2.5-3 year difference between #3 and #4. I love having kids and raising them and just so enjoy our family dynamic. I wouldn’t worry too much about an odd man out situation since I’m not sure that necessarily happens but if you want a fourth I say go for it. And the hand wringing from people with fewer kids is silly. Have what you can personally handle and want, that’s a different number for different people!