Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am pregnant with #4 (my oldest just turned 5). I don’t work anymore and we have a lot of help (nanny + part-time housekeeper, and I’ll have a night nurse for the first 12 or so weeks). It’s not uncommon in my circle to have 3 or 4, but I definitely have gotten a few “whoa!” comments. All of our children were planned, but I get a lot of assumptions that we couldn’t possibly want 4 under age 5. We always set out to have a big family and I’d rather get the baby stage finished! Plus it’s so lovely to have them near in age. My oldest two are 17 months apart and they are very close.
I can’t even tell you how many people freely and vocally assumed or asked if my third was an “accident” when I was pregnant just because I already had one boy and one girl and then looked at me like I had multiple heads when I told them the third was very much planned. It was very strange. And rude.
Speaking of strange and rude, as someone who has two boys, people are ALWAYS asking us if we are "going to try for a girl". Like why can't our two existing kids be enough??
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?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think most people with 6+ kids are crazy, but I know a wonderful mother with 10(9 girls 1 boy) and she isn’t crazy at all. The kids all go to public school, they play sports, older kids don’t raise the littles ones, and she seems to really know and appreciate her kids individually, not as a unit or set. Her older 3 are in college. 1 on a soccer scholarship, the other two music related scholarships.
Of course. I don’t know any family of 3+ kids that doesn’t rely mostly on scholarships and grants for their kids education.
We’re paying for all these families.
Also, they heavily rely on government programs and handouts and church’s charity because in reality very very few of them can afford all those children.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am pregnant with #4 (my oldest just turned 5). I don’t work anymore and we have a lot of help (nanny + part-time housekeeper, and I’ll have a night nurse for the first 12 or so weeks). It’s not uncommon in my circle to have 3 or 4, but I definitely have gotten a few “whoa!” comments. All of our children were planned, but I get a lot of assumptions that we couldn’t possibly want 4 under age 5. We always set out to have a big family and I’d rather get the baby stage finished! Plus it’s so lovely to have them near in age. My oldest two are 17 months apart and they are very close.
Also, the earlier comment that all families with lots of children are relying on government handouts and scholarships is so inaccurate in my experience. Everyone I know with lots of kids is able to have lots of kids because they are financially capable of doing so. I would have never had so many children if we couldn’t easily swing it financially without cutting out the extras. We don’t have enough bedrooms to give each kid their own room, but that’s about the only sacrifice. We live in a large city in Europe so that’s not an unusual “problem”.
Why do you live there? Military or FS?