Reply to Mom with 1 kid vs more kids have more time/energy for herself

Forum Index » General Parenting Discussion

Reply to "Mom with 1 kid vs more kids have more time/energy for herself"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Yes, obviously all other things being equal, 1 child is a lot less work than 2 or 3+.

I have 3 under 9 and we are busy. I am still able to workout a bit because work is flexible and I work from home so I always find time to go for a 30 min run. Money is much tighter than if we were only putting 2 child through private school, etc.

But I also would never want to have an only and that’s why I have 3. My kids play (and sometimes fight) together all the time, they have their own unique relationships and they are teaching so much to one another. [b]My kids’ lives are so much richer than they would have been had they been onlies[/b].

We all prioritize and want different things. The lucky ones are the ones that are able to have what they want… including parents of onlies. [/quote]

The bolded is not true but I'm glad you got the family you want and it sounds like your kids are having a great childhood. But that's a loaded judgment that is false, it's like people who don't think you can have a meaningful life without becoming a parent or people who think SAHMs can't have intellectual stimulation in their lives. It's based on a narrow experience that assumes the alternatives are not as good. They are, they are just different.[/quote]

+1[/quote]

Eh.  I’m a NP who also has three kids.  That they have each other as siblings enriches their lives in specific ways, at least as children.  It also means trade-offs of less enrichment around things like specialized camps, lots of activities and extracurriculars, etc., because we don’t have the resources (of all kinds) to give those to each kid.  I wouldn’t necessarily say my kids live richer lives than only children, but they do have sibling relationships that only children, by definition, don’t have.  Mostly, so far, I think those are for the better.

I also work FT and have time to myself.  My youngest is six, which helps, but I have always made time for daily exercise and with friends, at the very least.  Now I’m at the point of being able to read for pleasure, which I love.  If I really wanted to do a pottery class or something, DH and I could work it out.  I also agree with a PP who said to embrace this season of life - I signed up to be a working mom of three kids, so I’m certainly not going to complain about it.  I feel like I won the damn lottery.[/quote]

Again, it is great that you feel that your kid's live are rich and that their sibling relationship are worthwhile. But that does not mean their lives are "richer" than if they were only children. For one, an only child might have stronger and closer relationship with parents and grandparents because of less divided attention. That would enrich their lives. And only child might simply be the kind of person who enjoys spending time alone and has a very rich inner life. The idea that the only way for a child to have an enriching childhood is if they share it with siblings is just a very narrow assumption that you are making largely to validate your own choices. You shouldn't need to do this. You made good choices for your kids. There are other choices you could have made that would also be good.

I don't know why this is so hard for people to accept. There's no one way. There's no best way.[/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