Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Each kid necessarily gets less attention. I think that's a good thing, though. It necessarily means that I can't helicopter as much and I have to focus on what's really important.
This is so true! I'm a SAHM, 3 kids, ages 7-10
+1.
I am the mom to 4 children ages 22, 20, 18 and 13. I worked part time when the 3 oldest were in ES and full time for the past 10 years. The oldest had serious health issues the first 10-12 years, which complicated matters and of course there were times when I wished I could focus on them more individually but I absolutely believe there was/is enough of DH and I to go around. The 3 oldest are on the cusp of adulthood and each is independent, responsible and resilient (cook, clean, do laundry for everyone in the household, mow the lawn, hold down jobs during school year and summer), have great relationships with each other and got into great colleges. The verdict is still out on the 13 year old but s/he is on track like the older ones.
I see some of my friends with only one or two kids worry way too much about the small things, interfere way too much in things the kids should handle themselves and unconsciously not foster independence. That's just less likely to happen with more kids.
I think the real questions you should ask yourself are: how do you handle chaos, how do you balance needs v. desires (bc with more kids there are more needs and more desires), how do you feel about being very busy with little downtime, and can you afford it - because with 3 going through college right now, let me tell you it's a lot of $$$!
Great perspective- thanks. As one of 4 kids I find the "less helicoptering" thing to be true, though of course it was a different era! We all ended up to be very self-sufficient. DH and I both have differing notions about college- the 3 of us (one of my sibs didn't go) who went to college did it ourselves and came out alright so I kind of want mine to have some skin in the game. Not sure how we'll address it but we definitely won't be paying full cost for all, no matter 2 or 3 but that's another story.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Each kid necessarily gets less attention. I think that's a good thing, though. It necessarily means that I can't helicopter as much and I have to focus on what's really important.
This is so true! I'm a SAHM, 3 kids, ages 7-10
Anonymous wrote:Each kid necessarily gets less attention. I think that's a good thing, though. It necessarily means that I can't helicopter as much and I have to focus on what's really important.
Anonymous wrote:I only have 2 but the main reason we aren't having a third is the attention thing, as you mention. We both work though my job is flexible (can go to all school events, etc) but I think what people don't take into account enough is that IT DEPENDS ON THE KIDS.
My oldest child is extremely emotionally needy. He's a great kid - empathetic, bright, athletic, etc - but he's just always been very emotionally in tune and hates being alone, always wants to be smothered in love, etc.
My younger child is very easygoing. Independent, loves to do his own thing, can entertain himself for hours on end.
I have friends who have 3, but most of them have kids who are much more easygoing than my oldest. As my DH says, if they were all like DS2, we could have 3.
Anonymous wrote:Yes I think we do. However, I will caution you that every child is different and obviously there is no way to tell beforehand what you will get. My oldest is very high energy, emotionally sensitive, and tightly wound. It's somewhat difficult to give him the amount of one on one time he requires with two younger siblings. His emotional needs require careful balancing. He's not technically special needs as he's never received a diagnosis (we did have him evaluated several times) but he's probably in the neighborhood. I always think he is like a hot house flower who can only flourish under certain circumstances.
Anyway, he would have been an ideal only child. But he has two younger siblings, one who was conceived before we knew what type of child he would be and one who was an accident (though we love her dearly).
Anonymous wrote:I only have 2 but the main reason we aren't having a third is the attention thing, as you mention. We both work though my job is flexible (can go to all school events, etc) but I think what people don't take into account enough is that IT DEPENDS ON THE KIDS.
My oldest child is extremely emotionally needy. He's a great kid - empathetic, bright, athletic, etc - but he's just always been very emotionally in tune and hates being alone, always wants to be smothered in love, etc.
My younger child is very easygoing. Independent, loves to do his own thing, can entertain himself for hours on end.
I have friends who have 3, but most of them have kids who are much more easygoing than my oldest. As my DH says, if they were all like DS2, we could have 3.