What the number of children you have say about you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The thing is people with the large families put people with onlys at a disadvantage. Obviously, with in excess of 4 or 5 kids the need based financial scholarships will go to those families ("we have 6 kids and can't afford college for all.") I have seen it happen and it sucks.

Okay, that's just a bizarre thought process. I guess you're assuming that all child-bearing couples will make exactly the same amount of money. Financial aid isn't based on number of offspring, it's based on financial need, and that varies widely from family to family, regardless of number of children. You can be poor and have one child or very wealthy with six kids.

Bummer that those only children in your example weren't "poor" enough to get the financial aid. Time to throw a pity party.

But "financial need" for tuition assistance takes into account how many tuitions the parents are going to have to pay. If a family wants to forgo [whatever] in order to support more kids, that's their call. But once kids are of college age, why should they be getting more aid because their parents chose to have more children? (And I'm not saying that there isn't an argument to made for this, just saying that I think it would also be valid for a financial officer to look only at the parents' income when determining aid, not at their expenses, or at least not at their tuition expenses.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The thing is people with the large families put people with onlys at a disadvantage. Obviously, with in excess of 4 or 5 kids the need based financial scholarships will go to those families ("we have 6 kids and can't afford college for all.") I have seen it happen and it sucks.

Okay, that's just a bizarre thought process. I guess you're assuming that all child-bearing couples will make exactly the same amount of money. Financial aid isn't based on number of offspring, it's based on financial need, and that varies widely from family to family, regardless of number of children. You can be poor and have one child or very wealthy with six kids.

Bummer that those only children in your example weren't "poor" enough to get the financial aid. Time to throw a pity party.

But "financial need" for tuition assistance takes into account how many tuitions the parents are going to have to pay. If a family wants to forgo [whatever] in order to support more kids, that's their call. But once kids are of college age, why should they be getting more aid because their parents chose to have more children? (And I'm not saying that there isn't an argument to made for this, just saying that I think it would also be valid for a financial officer to look only at the parents' income when determining aid, not at their expenses, or at least not at their tuition expenses.)

This is a ridiculous argument and can be turned a million ways. If one family lives in WV and makes $60K, should they be entitled to the same financial aid as somone who lives in downtown DC and makes $60K. The DC people are poorer bc they have higher expenses/cost of living. Is it not fair to the WV family that the DC people chose to live somewhere more expensive?

Financial aid is a complicated process where they look at the income, the expenses and the circumstances surrounding the request. If you dont get the money you want/need, reconsider your options. Dont blame another family for making different choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If a couple has more than 2-3 kids, they remind me of rats and cockroaches.

Seriously? So if you saw a family out somewhere and they had, say, a cute little 5-yr old and adorable twin toddlers, your immediate reaction would be "they remind me of rats and cockroaches?" If so, something is definitely wrong with you.

I see that you're not good in math either. Were you neglected as a child because there were so many kids in your family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:3=foolish
more than 3= gross.

Couldn't hack it, huh? That's OK. Not everyone was meant to raise a family.

Happy raising a family. Wouldn't be happy raising a litter.

I agree with the litter comment. When there are 4, 5, 6 critters, it looks like they're all squirming around, like rats and other animals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If a couple has more than 2-3 kids, they remind me of rats and cockroaches.

Seriously? So if you saw a family out somewhere and they had, say, a cute little 5-yr old and adorable twin toddlers, your immediate reaction would be "they remind me of rats and cockroaches?" If so, something is definitely wrong with you.

What if the twin toddlers weren't adorable, and the 5-year old wasn't cute?

Or what if they don't stay cute?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget spousal compromise... I wanted 3, but dh won't agree to 1 more.

We've had heart-to-heart and 2 it shall be.

I think ppl with 3 or more kids of same gender were trying for other gender.

wrong on that one sister. I've got three girls and am pregnant with #4. Secretly hoping for another girl.

[Anonymous]

I see that you're not good in math either. Were you neglected as a child because there were so many kids in your family?

OK, let me double check my math. Poster thinks more than 2 or 3 kids = rats & cockroaches. Five-yr old plus two toddlers = 3 kids. 3 kids >2 kids, therefore reminds poster of rats & cockroaches. Am I missing something?

This entire thread is nauseating. Frankly I think all of you who find more than 2 kids to be so repulsive are just bitter and jealous of those who can handle, provide for, and enjoy bigger families. If you were completely happy and content with your one or two, you couldn't be bothered judging and making such hateful comments about someone who has 3 or 4. What kind of person refers to other people's CHILDREN as rats, cockroaches, or a litter? It's sickening, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to 19 kinds, you're no longer raising a family...you're hoarding.

Sort of an unrelated question. I don't think it's gross to have more than 3 children, but who can afford to have more than 3 children in this area? If you've got the means and the patience to deal with the chaos, good for you.

Somehow I don't think you'll find many in this area who want a lot of children - 19! Aghhhh!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I see that you're not good in math either. Were you neglected as a child because there were so many kids in your family?

OK, let me double check my math. Poster thinks more than 2 or 3 kids = rats & cockroaches. Five-yr old plus two toddlers = 3 kids. 3 kids >2 kids, therefore reminds poster of rats & cockroaches. Am I missing something?

This entire thread is nauseating. Frankly I think all of you who find more than 2 kids to be so repulsive are just bitter and jealous of those who can handle, provide for, and enjoy bigger families. If you were completely happy and content with your one or two, you couldn't be bothered judging and making such hateful comments about someone who has 3 or 4. What kind of person refers to other people's CHILDREN as rats, cockroaches, or a litter? It's sickening, really.

More than 2-3 is the key, not 3. Are you the one who asked if the kids were cute, it wouldn't be so bad? What if they don't stay cute?

In reference to the bold print, I'm the kind of person who can't bear to watch kids come into this world only to be neglected. Maybe the parents are breeding kids to create a social security network for themselves in old age at the expense of the development of the kids. There are too many street kids in this world, including in the US of A, in the upper middle class suburbs.

[Anonymous]

In reference to the college financial aid matter. It's true. It is also true that childless people's taxes fund public schools and universities for other people's kids to attend. Whether you have one child or more, they're subsidizing your children.

Cross-subsidy happens in every walk of life. Suck it up.

I have one child. Never wanted more. Wasn't sure I wanted one, but went for it. Most of the mothers I know who have more than two really love being a parent. Maybe that's what it takes to commit to #3 unless you oppose contraception. Good for them. My kid likes playdates in noisy houses and I don't like living in one. We're all winners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In reference to the college financial aid matter. It's true. It is also true that childless people's taxes fund public schools and universities for other people's kids to attend. Whether you have one child or more, they're subsidizing your children.

Cross-subsidy happens in every walk of life. Suck it up.

I have one child. Never wanted more. Wasn't sure I wanted one, but went for it. Most of the mothers I know who have more than two really love being a parent. Maybe that's what it takes to commit to #3 unless you oppose contraception. Good for them. My kid likes playdates in noisy houses and I don't like living in one. We're all winners.

Grew up in a noisy house and cant wait to have one of my own. Your only is welcome anytime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In reference to the college financial aid matter. It's true. It is also true that childless people's taxes fund public schools and universities for other people's kids to attend. Whether you have one child or more, they're subsidizing your children.

Cross-subsidy happens in every walk of life. Suck it up.

I have one child. Never wanted more. Wasn't sure I wanted one, but went for it. Most of the mothers I know who have more than two really love being a parent. Maybe that's what it takes to commit to #3 unless you oppose contraception. Good for them. My kid likes playdates in noisy houses and I don't like living in one. We're all winners.

Grew up in a noisy house and cant wait to have one of my own. Your only is welcome anytime.

Thanks, 12:59. She'll provide PLENTY of noise for you, free of charge.

[Anonymous]

In reference to the bold print, I'm the kind of person who can't bear to watch kids come into this world only to be neglected. Maybe the parents are breeding kids to create a social security network for themselves in old age at the expense of the development of the kids. There are too many street kids in this world, including in the US of A, in the upper middle class suburbs.

I can't bear it either. We can all agree that child abuse and child neglect are terrible tragedies. But it's quite a leap to go from there to saying that families shouldn't have more than 2 or 3 kids, or that those who do are just "breeding" to create a social security network for their old age or that they otherwise don't care about or take proper care of their kids. Really?

The gist of this thread has largely been to attack families that don't have the "standard" 2 kids. We're always talking about not attacking each other's choices to work, stay home, breastfeed, formula feed, blah, blah, blah, but now it's ok to attack the choice to even have the child in the first place??

More than 2-3 is the key, not 3.

If you mean "more than 3," just say "more than 3."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:3=didn't plan to have TWINS!

Me neither!

[Anonymous]

I have 1 kid and it means the following for me:

More kids = less in retirement savings
Medically not a good idea to have more
Hated pregnancy, labor and childbirth
I know my limitations
She was unexpected (depo-provera pregnancy)

Having said that, I so love my kid!!! She rocks and I'm glad that I have her. Another reason for no more kids is that I hated having sisters. My home was always loud and there was always arguing. There were times when money was so tight that my parents would have to not pay one bill to pay another to prevent shut-offs. But then there were other times when we did have utilities shut off.

My sisters have 3 kids and 4 kids respectively, and I wouldn't trade lives with them for anything. Not because of the amount of kids they have, but because they are terrible parents.