Reply to Tim Carney in the Post: The Ideal Number of Kids is Four (at a minimum)

Forum Index » General Parenting Discussion

Reply to "Tim Carney in the Post: The Ideal Number of Kids is Four (at a minimum)"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Backward reasoning.

1. The reason mothers of 4 are generally happier than mother of 3, is that they wanted a large family all along, and got it. Not that they ended up with a large family by accident, and then found out that it was "easier".

2. I know lots of people who had to parent their little siblings. Most of them don't have kids of their own, because of the psychological toll it took on their childhoods.

3. While I would have loved a large family, my oldest was born with special needs. Parenting him was a full time job, and I missed my fertile window to expand beyond 2. But I certainly wouldn't have forced my oldest kids to parent the younger kids!

4. This man is a moron.
[/quote]

#2 is definitely interesting. My dad is smack on the middle of 9 siblings, and his four older siblings are either childless or had 1 kid. He and my mom had 3.  His four younger siblings all have kids (2 of them had 4 kids each).  I think where you are in the birth order in large families does influence your perspective.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics