We have 3. When our second was born we thought we were done. By the time she was 2.5 we started thinking about a third, but time was bad for me career wise. I got pregnant after a night out drinking and we had our third. We are so happy about it and love him (only boy), but financially is hard. They are on private school, but every year we consider moving them to public. We are European and planning for EU universities that are much cheaper than American ones. Also, we plan on giving them real estate each... but nit planning on weddings... maybe we should.
All of this to say that we did not do it for status, but I hear people saying “oh you are 3 in private school” like if it’s some kind of accomplishment... so maybe it does signal something???
Not sure... but we are struggling to achieve all we had plan on giving them (money wise)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people think so! It’s like “hey I can afford to send THREE kids to private school, take that!”

This is so bizarre to me. Of all the reasons to bring a child into the world, turning it into a form of conspicuous consumption seems odd to me. But hey, as long as the kids are loved and cared for, more power to them?

But do you really love a kid if that's how you view them? Some parents don't actually love their kids, and if your kid is a way to show off your wealth, you don't love them, any more than you love your SUV or your Birkin bag or whatever your Veblen good du jour is.

Is there another message board on the Internet where someone would reference Veblen casually? Love DCUM.

Ugh why would you like that. This place is disgusting.

Didn't you just ask this same question last month? There's a whole thread on this for about 14 pages. Must be a troll poster.

Anonymous wrote:No, I truly don’t think people have kids for status outside of some fundie groups like Mormons. They definitely do.

However, raising a kid to be MC/UMC in a coastal city is extremely expensive, especially if you are doing private school. Private college alone will run you at least 300k per kid. So that’s where the status comes in: they’ve basically turned into luxury items.

Exactly. We stopped at two kids. I could have had a third but the cost of another college education, help with grad school, wedding and house downpayment (things we want to give our kids) would have just been that much more money. Plus also each of our two kids will get more inheritance with just the two of them. We are trying to provide a nice lifestyle plus generational wealth. Maybe that's not a worthy goal. But its true.

My sister is planning to have 4+ kids (currently has 3) on less income than we have and she only plans to "help" with college and isn't concerned about any of the things I am. And that's perfectly okay too.

No, I truly don’t think people have kids for status outside of some fundie groups like Mormons. They definitely do.

However, raising a kid to be MC/UMC in a coastal city is extremely expensive, especially if you are doing private school. Private college alone will run you at least 300k per kid. So that’s where the status comes in: they’ve basically turned into luxury items.

3-4= status symbol. 5+= religious nutter.

I sure hope not. I don’t know many with 3 or 3+ young kids that isn’t a mess! Except, of course, a few with high paying jobs and nannies.

It is, but only if the kids/family unit are well groomed, high functioning. If the mom is a thin high powered career women and she still manages to have 4 well adjusted good looking kids.. then yes-- I think others will look at her enviously

I have four and in no way is it a status thing. That's how many I wanted and with the oldest only being 7 you can imagine all the chaos. But my baby #4 is.....so far.....very low maintenance. gee, I wonder where she is?

Anonymous wrote:It's funny how people think UMC people with 3+ kids is a status thing but think poor people in struggling communities with 3+ kids are irresponsible.

How is that “funny”?

If people have kids and cannot manage it and create chaos for their kids and others, that is irresponsible. It’s cut and dry, really,

By the way, there are people, typically in immigrant or religious communities, who have large families responsibly because they get and stay married, do not use public assistance (if they use public assistance they are no longer responsible), draw from and contribute to a large community of support, and have the self discipline and emotional maturity to live within their means and keep their priorities consistent (apparently for them the main priority is family). I admire families like this personally and consider them high status even if they don’t have a lot of money.

But yes, having kids with multiple partners and living a chaotic life that brings other people around you down instead of up is irresponsible, by definition!

It's funny how people think UMC people with 3+ kids is a status thing but think poor people in struggling communities with 3+ kids are irresponsible.

I want 3 kids, but one thing I keep thinking about is how everyone at my SLAC reunions is going to judge me for having a planet-destroying "big" family. Definitely doesn't feel like a status symbol.

Anonymous wrote:I have 3 kids and I don’t feel like it’s a status thing. I’m a hot mess.

+1 I have 4 kids. Love them with all I am, but not what I planned for myself. Definitely a hot mess here.

It is absolutely a status thing if done well. “Well” means different things to different people but to me it means happy, healthy kids and parents. If you can have 3 kids and take good care of them without falling apart and create a happy, loving family you are a high functioning family!! That is high status.

Okay, maybe if you're talking 4 or 5. But a LOT of families with three are just families that would have had two if not for an oops baby.