Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weirdest are families with 1. They agonize and obsess over everything precious Larla does. Not all parents. But many.

+1

We are having our fourth and are more laid back than people we know with only one. Like the freaks at the park who follow their kid around the whole time. It’s straight up weird. I’m seeing more and more friends have 4 while still having a career and happy marriage and full life. Already the saying was “three is the new two.” Now that that study found that 4 is the ideal number, will it be 4?

You aren't laid back. You are neglectful. Its your responsibility to make sure your toddler is safe at a park. The adults are happy, but that's not what people are saying. Its about meeting the kids needs. Its very difficult to meet 4 kids needs, spend 1-1 time with them and really focus on each as an individual. Usually parents like you pawn your kids off on others and we end up doing it as we feel sorry for the kids. You will call us to carpool but carpool means we drive your kid and you don't do anything as you don't have the space or a kid is napping or some other excuse. We feed your kid because we pick them up and they are hungry as you were focused on other things or the kids have to fend for themselves. You don't even realize what the impact is on your kids as its really all about you.

Anonymous wrote:4. I was debating between 4 and 5, but if I’m debating, then that means it’s weird to me. I’m in EOTP DC and the only people with 3 have second marriages or a surprise baby.

? Maybe it’s an affluent circle thing but almost every family I know has 3 kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, just be advised that you're going to get a lot of answers here from people who are secretly envious of you. They wanted more kids but most likely waited too late and then couldn't have as many as they would have liked.

Um no it just drives me bonkers when people have 4+ kids and then complain that daycare, college, etc is too expensive and that they are “donut hole.” Huge eye roll re: parents who have that many kids applying for FA for college. And kids get annoyed by their siblings.

Thankfully financial aid officers/policies don’t discriminate against innocent children who didn’t have a say in how many siblings they would have. I’m guessing that kids from big families of modest means have always been and will always be prime beneficiaries of financial aid, and rightly so.

Ugh don’t have that many kids if you can’t afford to.

Your parents don't owe you a college tuition.

Good luck “working your way through college” and not drowning in debt in 2020 and beyond. It’s not possible anymore.

It’s always possible. I worked and paid my way through undergrad and law school (including housing, food etc et ) - way over $250k all in and graduated with $180k in loans. Paid it all off in less than ten years, plus also bought a house, two cars, and had a few kids during those same 10 years. Where there is a strong will and intelligence, adaptability, and creativity, there is a way.

OP - I think 6 or more is a bit weird. I have 3 and am on the fence about a 4th, though it will be several years if I go for another. I also had a few year gap between 2 and 3. I actually am more likely to be curious and raise an inquisitive eyebrow when people have 4 or more super close in age. But when they are spread out, I don’t find it as weird until 6+

Its possible depending on your income. But, for some of us, we feel a duty to pay for college as its our responsibility as parents to give our kids the best possible start in life. $250K a huge amount of money to owe plus buying a house, car and paying for day care. Its selfish to even allow your child to take on that kind of debt.

4 is about max *not weird* territory. Anything over 6 and you are certifiable.

Anonymous wrote:4. I was debating between 4 and 5, but if I’m debating, then that means it’s weird to me. I’m in EOTP DC and the only people with 3 have second marriages or a surprise baby.

There is no such thing as a surprise baby. It was unplanned but you choose to have sex so the baby shouldn't be a surprise especially after that many kids.

Eddie Murphy has 10 kids with five women. That’s too many.

I don’t care how many kids you have, but I think it’s weird when people have kids at 43+.

5 = “wow”

6= weird

4. I was debating between 4 and 5, but if I’m debating, then that means it’s weird to me. I’m in EOTP DC and the only people with 3 have second marriages or a surprise baby.

Anonymous wrote:All of you screaming about overpopulation, you realize the American birthrate isn't at replacement level right? You should be encouraging people to have more children to pay for your social security and Medicare someday.

Hahahahaha, it’s cute you think social security will be around for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In today's world over 2. 3 is an extravagance, 4 is ridiculous. 5 or more is plain selfish and attention-seeking. The only exception is if you are fostering/adopting kids.

+1000

I mean, except that they have *5* kids .... no one with that many children has time to be selfish and attention seeking. Ha!

Ha! I was just thinking this same thing. It’s hard to be truly selfish while you are parenting any number of small children.

All of you screaming about overpopulation, you realize the American birthrate isn't at replacement level right? You should be encouraging people to have more children to pay for your social security and Medicare someday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:7 effing *billion* people and you are pro-creating more than 2? Shame on you.

We currently have some population control going on...

Hey, if you lost a child to Covid, go ahead and replace them. Otherwise, no, you don’t get to use a global pandemic as an excuse for your self-indulgence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weirdest are families with 1. They agonize and obsess over everything precious Larla does. Not all parents. But many.

+1

We are having our fourth and are more laid back than people we know with only one. Like the freaks at the park who follow their kid around the whole time. It’s straight up weird. I’m seeing more and more friends have 4 while still having a career and happy marriage and full life. Already the saying was “three is the new two.” Now that that study found that 4 is the ideal number, will it be 4?

I came from a family of 4 and all of us grew up starved for attention. I have to say we are weird as grown ups. my beat friend, who was an only child, is normal. She has one kid, who is kind, well.spoken and independent. neither me. nor my siblings have kids and we feel it is due to the chaos of growing up in chaos and being ignored. Not to mention. by considering yourselves laid back, and others as freaks says a whole lot of your bitter, angry personality. 4 may work for some but definitely not in our family with "laid back" hands.off parents. I wish my parents followed me around sometimes and showed some interest.

Sorry that this was your experience, sounds like you were neglected. I was one of five and had a radically different childhood. Having 4-5 kids in no way means they will be neglected.

I have 5. The answer in most circles is 4. That’s the number where people stopped congratulating me on pregnancies and couldn’t remember how many children we had and would wildly overestimate to 7 or 8.

I can think of a member of people who should never have existed. It rarely has anything to do with their birth order or how many siblings they have.