Talk to me about having a large family

[Anonymous]

What do you do during a family meeting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have three and the only reason we make it happen is a live-in nanny and a bunch of outsourced housework. I cook and drive the kids. That's the extent of it.

That's pretty sad you don't spend time with them.

I do spend time with them, and the only reason it's possible is that I have lots of help. If I did all the housework myself, I wouldn't be able to spend time with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9 kids in my family. You basically don't get to develop a deep parenting relationship with each individual kid. There are other benefits for the kids (independence, fun, family belonginess) but a lot fewer parental resources for each one.

I think 4 kids is really the max if you want to be close to your lids.

Based on your one experience. It really depends on financial situation; what you can hire out. The temperament of your children. So many things.
We have hashed and rehashed the really large families on this board and had all the haters come out. OP is talking about four here, not fourteen.

How many people can have 4+ kids and still afford to "hire out" to a significant degree? Also hiring out doesn't really solve the issue of individualized attention. My family had paid help, and they couldn't really pay attention to individual kids either.

Lots of people in this area can afford it. I’m a SAHM to more than four, and we hire stuff out. I personally know 6-7 others in the same situation although it’s not representative given my husband is in a high paying job.
Just because you can’t fathom it, or don’t like it, doesn’t mean it can’t work.

you can't hire out parental 1:1 time with the kids. If you have 4 under 8 to put to bed, everyone is getting 1 bedtime story all together.

You seem really rigid about this 1:1 time. There are two parents. So one parent could take two kids each. Or one parent could take three and the other child gets alone time. Or maybe two kids are older and don’t want stories read to them, and each parent takes one of the younger kids. Or - gasp! - they all do bedtime together and have great memories all cuddle up together. All of these options are great.

right - you don't care about 1:1 time. Other parents find it essential.

OMG. What are you doing during all this 1:1 time?!

We go on activities, walks, sports, go out to eat, movies, travel. Hang out at home - games, video games, read, cook, get music concerts from child. Why have a child if you are not willing to spend that time with them? We have so many selfish people in the world and it starts out with their childhoods.

Likewise, I feel strongly parents should pay for college if they can afford it. Much easier to do with 2 vs.4/5/6+.

You can do all those things having more kids. Should people only have one child because everything must be 1:1 in your world? You shouldn’t have two because it takes away time from the first.
It’s good to come out of your bubble and realize other people have different preferences.

you really can't. money, time, and energy are finite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I guess you didn’t get the memo. DCUM despises anyone with more than two kids. It’s simply unacceptable to veer off the two-kid path. Sorry.

+1
Pretty much this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
NP. I have two kids. 1:1 time is time to do activities that one child wants to do but the other doesn't. For example my 5 year old likes when we have time to build huge structures, play music duets, and do complicated crafts together. My 2 year old likes the sensory bin, watching me draw the the same thing over and over, I'm-gonna-get-you games, and leafing randomly through Richard Scarry books.

1:1 time is also time where they get undivided attention. With the oldest one, I lie in bed and we talk about the highlights of our day -- happiest, saddest, funniest, silly moments. I tell stories from my childhood. Inevitably he brings up things that were emotional at school or with friends and we talk about them. I heard someone say once that bedtime is when you see your children's souls, and that seems about right. There's something about curling up together in the dark that invites him to share things he wouldn't otherwise. Just being present and having the time to listen helps us connect.

A third would lead to more "group" herding and I'm not sure how it would change our relationships. My friend who has 3 certainly went through a rocky time adding the 3rd, and she is in a Scandanavian country where both parents get a year off from work. I think the middle child was upset for about a year and the marriage struggled.

My mom is from a family with 9 kids. 1:1 parental attention for them was if my grandfather took one on his bike to school, or my grandmother gave an individual spanking. I think a large family works best when there is extended family around and a somewhat group-centered culture or religious ideology.

I'm intrigued by the idea of group spankings. Can you tell me more? It seems like a great time saver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9 kids in my family. You basically don't get to develop a deep parenting relationship with each individual kid. There are other benefits for the kids (independence, fun, family belonginess) but a lot fewer parental resources for each one.

I think 4 kids is really the max if you want to be close to your lids.

Based on your one experience. It really depends on financial situation; what you can hire out. The temperament of your children. So many things.
We have hashed and rehashed the really large families on this board and had all the haters come out. OP is talking about four here, not fourteen.

How many people can have 4+ kids and still afford to "hire out" to a significant degree? Also hiring out doesn't really solve the issue of individualized attention. My family had paid help, and they couldn't really pay attention to individual kids either.

Lots of people in this area can afford it. I’m a SAHM to more than four, and we hire stuff out. I personally know 6-7 others in the same situation although it’s not representative given my husband is in a high paying job.
Just because you can’t fathom it, or don’t like it, doesn’t mean it can’t work.

you can't hire out parental 1:1 time with the kids. If you have 4 under 8 to put to bed, everyone is getting 1 bedtime story all together.

You seem really rigid about this 1:1 time. There are two parents. So one parent could take two kids each. Or one parent could take three and the other child gets alone time. Or maybe two kids are older and don’t want stories read to them, and each parent takes one of the younger kids. Or - gasp! - they all do bedtime together and have great memories all cuddle up together. All of these options are great.

right - you don't care about 1:1 time. Other parents find it essential.

OMG. What are you doing during all this 1:1 time?!

We go on activities, walks, sports, go out to eat, movies, travel. Hang out at home - games, video games, read, cook, get music concerts from child. Why have a child if you are not willing to spend that time with them? We have so many selfish people in the world and it starts out with their childhoods.

Likewise, I feel strongly parents should pay for college if they can afford it. Much easier to do with 2 vs.4/5/6+.

You can do all those things having more kids. Should people only have one child because everything must be 1:1 in your world? You shouldn’t have two because it takes away time from the first.
It’s good to come out of your bubble and realize other people have different preferences.

you really can't. money, time, and energy are finite.

We do all those things you mentioned with more than two kids. Time is really the only finite thing you have listed here. Everyone gets 24 hours in a day. Money and energy are not the same for every family.

[Anonymous]

I’ve noticed a few things about parents of only children that cannot fathom having any additional kids:
1) They don’t realize that siblings actually enjoy spending time together.
2) Often the fathers are not very engaged. I had a mother of an only ask me how I handle my kids being in different activities at the same time. I thought it was pretty obvious that my husband took one kid. But after I told her, she responded that she handles the activities...okay...
3) They have some time-consuming hobby or job with weird hours and fail to consider that others do not have that taking up their time
4) They are low energy people

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed a few things about parents of only children that cannot fathom having any additional kids:
1) They don’t realize that siblings actually enjoy spending time together.
2) Often the fathers are not very engaged. I had a mother of an only ask me how I handle my kids being in different activities at the same time. I thought it was pretty obvious that my husband took one kid. But after I told her, she responded that she handles the activities...okay...
3) They have some time-consuming hobby or job with weird hours and fail to consider that others do not have that taking up their time
4) They are low energy people

I have noticed this a lot. I try and remember back when I had one kid and wonder if with each kid I just got more energy (Kinda like a fake it till you make it theory) or if Ive always had a lot of energy and that contributed to my desire to have 3 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP. I have two kids. 1:1 time is time to do activities that one child wants to do but the other doesn't. For example my 5 year old likes when we have time to build huge structures, play music duets, and do complicated crafts together. My 2 year old likes the sensory bin, watching me draw the the same thing over and over, I'm-gonna-get-you games, and leafing randomly through Richard Scarry books.

1:1 time is also time where they get undivided attention. With the oldest one, I lie in bed and we talk about the highlights of our day -- happiest, saddest, funniest, silly moments. I tell stories from my childhood. Inevitably he brings up things that were emotional at school or with friends and we talk about them. I heard someone say once that bedtime is when you see your children's souls, and that seems about right. There's something about curling up together in the dark that invites him to share things he wouldn't otherwise. Just being present and having the time to listen helps us connect.

A third would lead to more "group" herding and I'm not sure how it would change our relationships. My friend who has 3 certainly went through a rocky time adding the 3rd, and she is in a Scandanavian country where both parents get a year off from work. I think the middle child was upset for about a year and the marriage struggled.

My mom is from a family with 9 kids. 1:1 parental attention for them was if my grandfather took one on his bike to school, or my grandmother gave an individual spanking. I think a large family works best when there is extended family around and a somewhat group-centered culture or religious ideology.

I'm intrigued by the idea of group spankings. Can you tell me more? It seems like a great time saver.

Group spankings: Line them up, pants down, over the table, paddle one at a time. The ones who are waiting their turn have the worst of it, listening to the others cry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My dad was unhappy in a large family. He never said as much outright, but it’s pretty clear from a lifetime of being close to him. I’m not an only child because of fertility or health or financial issues. Two of his siblings each have four children and would have had more if finances allowed. The rest are either parents of an only or childfree. I guess my point is that you never know and can’t know how family size will affect your children, so make your own choices. I had a joyful childhood and never had a problem, for example, making friends, sharing a dorm room, feeling lonely, etc. It could have easily gone quite the other way, obviously. No number of children is superior to any other number of children. It’s like arguing over what we find attractive in a partner. These preferences and aspirations aren’t made in a vacuum.

This is a great post and I couldn’t agree more.
I had one sibling growing up and hated it. I have 7. There are always posters saying how they grew up in big families and would never have that many. It works both ways. Enjoy the family you have!

OP - I was also pretty lonely. Lots of time spent alone I’m my room. I’m already envious of the bond my daughters have.

My sister and I hated each other growing up and she was always the favored child because she was more like them. Not all siblings get along.

OP - agreed. I don’t get along with my brother. That’s why I had a 3rd. And planning on a 4th. And why I started this post!

[Anonymous]

I have a brother but I'm close to people from 5-kids and 9-kids wealthy Catholic families and they told me it was chaos growing up and never enough parent attention or affection, despite all the nannies and housekeepers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have found I get a lot more 1:1 time with each kid since I had the third. Often, I will be doing something with one (reading, studying, listening to music/performance/creative endeavor, talking, etc.) while the other two play, interact, or talk. This rotates regularly so that I am easily able to meaningfully engage with each on a regular basis. Much more often than I did when there were two. They also each get 1:1 time every night at bedtime. We’re done having kids so don’t want a fourth, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how great it is with three.

That’s interesting. Most parents I know with 2+ spend a lot of time navigating sibling rivalry. For every 10 min of play, you’ve got 5 min of fighting or fussing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have found I get a lot more 1:1 time with each kid since I had the third. Often, I will be doing something with one (reading, studying, listening to music/performance/creative endeavor, talking, etc.) while the other two play, interact, or talk. This rotates regularly so that I am easily able to meaningfully engage with each on a regular basis. Much more often than I did when there were two. They also each get 1:1 time every night at bedtime. We’re done having kids so don’t want a fourth, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how great it is with three.

That’s interesting. Most parents I know with 2+ spend a lot of time navigating sibling rivalry. For every 10 min of play, you’ve got 5 min of fighting or fussing.

NP here. If there’s that much fighting going on that’s ahuge parenting fail. I have 2 children, and nobody I know has a household like that. Yes, of course there’s the occasional sibling argument, but if you’re spending almost half your parenting time breaking up fights - you’re doing something (or a lot of things) very wrong.

[Anonymous]

DH was/is miserable in a large family. He was the odd numbered child, and MIL has metal issues (depressed, anxiety, checked out) - and passed that on to most of the family - so, good times. DH in no way wanted a large family, because of what he went through - he was always outnumbered. Bad things are magnified, not good things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a brother but I'm close to people from 5-kids and 9-kids wealthy Catholic families and they told me it was chaos growing up and never enough parent attention or affection, despite all the nannies and housekeepers.

That’s interesting. You have the same writing style as the “kids need 1:1 attention” poster and these facts seem to be exactly what you have been spewing. How convenient.