Parents of 3- do you wish you’d stopped at 2 or 1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

Whatever you have to tell yourself sweetie. Sorry you can't walk and chew gum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a parent of three but I have had several of them tell/warn me to stop at two so I don't think you're entirely alone in your sentiment, OP.

That’s interesting. Are your two kids of different genders? I had two girls and not only did no one ever tell/warn me to stop at two, I cannot even count the number of times people (both strangers and close friends!) would ask if we were going to have a third in order to “try for a boy.”

I think either way - telling someone to stop at two or encouraging someone to try for a boy - is pretty rude and presumptuous. Unless you solicited that advice from them.

Same to the bolded. We have 2 boys, 3rd is a girl. People were so rude in asking if we were going to “try for a girl”. People still do sometimes ask if we are going to have a 4th but I don’t mind it as there isn’t the implication that we are trying for a specific gender.

Everyone said this to me after I had my first- a boy. When I was pregnant with my second (my daughter) everyone asked if I was “so excited to be getting a girl.”

People say those types of things because there are only so many inane things you can say to an expectant mom/couple - when all you really think is oh great you had sex and now you’re spawning. Polite smiles and comments about doing it again, maybe? Nevermind that much of the female gossip around childbearing and childrearing is rooted in thousands of years of experience when that was the only real option in life except for ‘spinster’ aunties who had the good sense to reject it all, the whole treadmill of domestic enslavement that marriage and motherhood brings.

While many parents go around thinking the whole world cares, we all know the truth that nobody actually gives a hoot about anybody else’s spawn or their accomplishments - with the possible exception of grandparents although this forum is rife with complaints about absent and uncaring grandparents.


On another note, there is something a little bit gross about a conversation about multiple child families among folks who are UMC and beyond. Your spoiled UMC American children are massive drivers of climate change, and you are, by having 3 and 4 and more kids, very actively contributing to making a world that will make their later lives miserable and their children’s lives a horror. And yet not a single mention of this glaring truth in the conversation about how many new humans to spawn so that you can have your ideal experience of motherhood and family. The selfishness is mindblowing.

So you had no children right? Right?

[Anonymous]

Lets face it, for an upper middle class family, educational costs are too high without aid eligibility and limited resources. They just can't afford more than two and provide them opportunities they would want without ruining their own retirement.

If you are aid eligible or wealthy, you can be more adventurous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly its true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not do you wish your last child didn’t exist - I’m sure for the large majority of people no matter how many kids they had and how bad of a situation it was, they’d never say they wished a particular kid didn’t exist and they couldn’t imagine their life without them.

But imagining a generic future life with generic children - knowing what you know now, would you stop earlier?

(I would. And I love my children so much and they each feel so very loved and I can’t imagine life without any of them now that they exist, but I do not think 3 kids is my ideal family size for the type of relationship I value with my kids)

If you know human psychology, you obviously aren't expecting honest answers here. Is this just an exercise to see how people try to justify their choices? To themselves and others!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a parent of three but I have had several of them tell/warn me to stop at two so I don't think you're entirely alone in your sentiment, OP.

That’s interesting. Are your two kids of different genders? I had two girls and not only did no one ever tell/warn me to stop at two, I cannot even count the number of times people (both strangers and close friends!) would ask if we were going to have a third in order to “try for a boy.”

I think either way - telling someone to stop at two or encouraging someone to try for a boy - is pretty rude and presumptuous. Unless you solicited that advice from them.

Same to the bolded. We have 2 boys, 3rd is a girl. People were so rude in asking if we were going to “try for a girl”. People still do sometimes ask if we are going to have a 4th but I don’t mind it as there isn’t the implication that we are trying for a specific gender.

I don't know a single person who would ask or expect anyone to have a fourth child. I would like to research your social circle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly its true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

I mean, unless you’re wealthy. My SAHM/big law partner parent combo provided far more resources, time and opportunities for their four kids when I was growing up than I now have in my dual-income/two working parent UMC household with two kids. It’s mostly about money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a parent of three but I have had several of them tell/warn me to stop at two so I don't think you're entirely alone in your sentiment, OP.

That’s interesting. Are your two kids of different genders? I had two girls and not only did no one ever tell/warn me to stop at two, I cannot even count the number of times people (both strangers and close friends!) would ask if we were going to have a third in order to “try for a boy.”

I think either way - telling someone to stop at two or encouraging someone to try for a boy - is pretty rude and presumptuous. Unless you solicited that advice from them.

Same to the bolded. We have 2 boys, 3rd is a girl. People were so rude in asking if we were going to “try for a girl”. People still do sometimes ask if we are going to have a 4th but I don’t mind it as there isn’t the implication that we are trying for a specific gender.

Everyone said this to me after I had my first- a boy. When I was pregnant with my second (my daughter) everyone asked if I was “so excited to be getting a girl.”

People say those types of things because there are only so many inane things you can say to an expectant mom/couple - when all you really think is oh great you had sex and now you’re spawning. Polite smiles and comments about doing it again, maybe? Nevermind that much of the female gossip around childbearing and childrearing is rooted in thousands of years of experience when that was the only real option in life except for ‘spinster’ aunties who had the good sense to reject it all, the whole treadmill of domestic enslavement that marriage and motherhood brings.

While many parents go around thinking the whole world cares, we all know the truth that nobody actually gives a hoot about anybody else’s spawn or their accomplishments - with the possible exception of grandparents although this forum is rife with complaints about absent and uncaring grandparents.


On another note, there is something a little bit gross about a conversation about multiple child families among folks who are UMC and beyond. Your spoiled UMC American children are massive drivers of climate change, and you are, by having 3 and 4 and more kids, very actively contributing to making a world that will make their later lives miserable and their children’s lives a horror. And yet not a single mention of this glaring truth in the conversation about how many new humans to spawn so that you can have your ideal experience of motherhood and family. The selfishness is mindblowing.

Man, what a troll.

But to respond to the first part of your post, people don’t have to say anything about a pregnancy. Just ask how far along and how you’re feeling and move on to any topics about life apart from pregnancy. No need to make awkward conversation about gender preferences.

Move your second part to the environmental forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly it’s true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so I yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

All of this starts with the false premise that, no matter what, you will be a good parent. My BIL has an only child,
and he and his wife should have never had any children. My SIL has four children, and clearly she has the ability, patience, and desire because she and her husband are doing a fantastic job. This notion that the main driver to good outcomes is number of children is mostly a mirage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly it’s true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so I yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

All of this starts with the false premise that, no matter what, you will be a good parent. My BIL has an only child,
and he and his wife should have never had any children. My SIL has four children, and clearly she has the ability, patience, and desire because she and her husband are doing a fantastic job. This notion that the main driver to good outcomes is number of children is mostly a mirage.

+1. I’d say the main drivers are (1) parent personalities and (2) financial resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly its true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

I mean, unless you’re wealthy. My SAHM/big law partner parent combo provided far more resources, time and opportunities for their four kids when I was growing up than I now have in my dual-income/two working parent UMC household with two kids. It’s mostly about money.

It is the ultimate status symbol to have a beautiful smart SAHM with lots of children in private school. You know you made it if you can afford to live a nice life with a wife who doesn’t work with a nanny and have 3-4 kids in private school.

This is different than having a dual income UMC household saving to full pay college for 2 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly its true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

I mean, unless you’re wealthy. My SAHM/big law partner parent combo provided far more resources, time and opportunities for their four kids when I was growing up than I now have in my dual-income/two working parent UMC household with two kids. It’s mostly about money.

It is the ultimate status symbol to have a beautiful smart SAHM with lots of children in private school. You know you made it if you can afford to live a nice life with a wife who doesn’t work with a nanny and have 3-4 kids in private school.

This is different than having a dual income UMC household saving to full pay college for 2 kids.

This describes my family to a T, but you know what? I would be the same parent even without the money and extras. At the end of the day your kid just wants you present and patient. Those of you saying you ability to parent three kids well comes down to the ability to pay for travel sports and vacations in Maui are totally missing the point. If that's what you think you offer to your kids that's really sad.

[Anonymous]

^^also, I grew up an only of UMC parents with tons of money for extras and had a terrible childhood. My husband is one of six with amazing, loving parents and had a great childhood. Money has zero to do with how good of a parent you can be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly its true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

I mean, unless you’re wealthy. My SAHM/big law partner parent combo provided far more resources, time and opportunities for their four kids when I was growing up than I now have in my dual-income/two working parent UMC household with two kids. It’s mostly about money.

It is the ultimate status symbol to have a beautiful smart SAHM with lots of children in private school. You know you made it if you can afford to live a nice life with a wife who doesn’t work with a nanny and have 3-4 kids in private school.

This is different than having a dual income UMC household saving to full pay college for 2 kids.

This describes my family to a T, but you know what? I would be the same parent even without the money and extras. At the end of the day your kid just wants you present and patient. Those of you saying you ability to parent three kids well comes down to the ability to pay for travel sports and vacations in Maui are totally missing the point. If that's what you think you offer to your kids that's really sad.

Pp here. I only have 3 kids and our kids attend public. DH does earn a seven figure income and I stay home. We are not about status. I was just stating that there are plenty of people who can afford it all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My second and third children were literally five minutes apart. No regrets. Some people rise to the occasion, some people would still be overwhelmed with an only child or two children. I think it has less to do with the number of children, and more to do with the parents’ outlook and abilities to make peace with a little chaos.

+100
I had three under three and I would never say this to anyone in real life, but I'm markedly less frazzled than some of my friends with one kid. It comes down to temperament and outlook.

It comes down to standards.

It sounds snobbish but sadly its true. You sure can have multiple children and raise them to adulthood but you are just spreading resources of time, care, supervision, involvement and opportunities too thin so yes standards are compromised. Insisting and pretending they aren't is deluding self not others.

I mean, unless you’re wealthy. My SAHM/big law partner parent combo provided far more resources, time and opportunities for their four kids when I was growing up than I now have in my dual-income/two working parent UMC household with two kids. It’s mostly about money.

It is the ultimate status symbol to have a beautiful smart SAHM with lots of children in private school. You know you made it if you can afford to live a nice life with a wife who doesn’t work with a nanny and have 3-4 kids in private school.

This is different than having a dual income UMC household saving to full pay college for 2 kids.

It is different. That said, my mom went back to work (in a somewhat flexible career) once all kids were in school - not for the money, but because she wanted to. We never had a nanny and we lived in a modest house because my parents are not ostentatious people. They enjoyed having a large family, providing a good education (we did go to private school and nice camps) and investing in activities (like skiing and private tennis) and whatever tutors we needed. So there’s a whole spectrum of wealthy including the typical you’re thinking of and the more down to earth.

Both are vastly different than UMC. We have two kids and sending three to private school and camp would just be very difficult without tuition help from grandparents (which we don’t receive.) but there are lots of UMC families with three kids getting tuition paid for by grandparents.