Anonymous wrote:We'd adopt a third.

same here. I'd love to adopt, but financially that is not an option.

Anonymous wrote:Money is not the issue. Hyperemesis is,so there is not enough money in the world to pay me to go through that again. If that wasn't an issue, then I'd have as many kids as I was given. Heck, it might still work out that way but it makes me feel better to pretend that I am in control.

This is me too. It was so bad I had a tubal after my second child. If money was no object I'd hire a surrogate and have two more kids. Going through Hypermesis twice was enough for me.

4, I think. I have two kiddos and I found the first years of constant pregnancy/nursing/pregnancy/nursing to be very draining, also had undiagnosed PPD

If I had another, I may have PPD again, but I would be more likely to know the signs and get help. If I had money, I would hire someone to CLEAN MY HOUSE (ah the dream!) and someone to cook when I didn't feel like it, a babysitter when I wanted to go to the store by myself and have time to myself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Money is no object for me and I have zero (for the moment only, I hope.) I have been trying for seven years and am now trying to adopt. Money doesn't actually "buy" you as many kids as you would like. For some, it is pretty hard to get a kid even if you throw money at the problem.

I am really sorry for your struggles PP. All the best.

PP, been there too and hope things work out for you soon. We finally adopted 1 (China) and are now trying to adopt a 2nd (also China). Best of luck to you.

Anonymous wrote:

I'll give you an example, OP. I know someone who has 3 kids, 3 family members next door (literally) who are extremely helpful, and still can't handle her kids. It has nothing to do with money, she has free childcare (x3) which most of us will never have. It depends on the mothers personality and if she is able to handle as many children. Don't have more than you can handle. Period.

OP here. I could handle another, but our family finances would suffer and that's not the life we want. I agree with you though - it's not all about the money. I certainly don't see myself as the mom of 5 or whatever, regardless of cost.

4. 6 if we could figure out a way to not make prior medical history an issue (c-sections, pre-e).

Same number, 4. And I wish there were 4 year gaps between each one. But I would have had to start earlier.

I'll give you an example, OP. I know someone who has 3 kids, 3 family members next door (literally) who are extremely helpful, and still can't handle her kids. It has nothing to do with money, she has free childcare (x3) which most of us will never have. It depends on the mothers personality and if she is able to handle as many children. Don't have more than you can handle. Period.

4 or 5, and we'd all go live on a farm. Of course, there's a whole other "money is no object" route to go, and I bet there are days with 5 days that traveling the world with one's partner, enjoying luxurious meals and sleep, would sound pretty darn appealing.

And then when they grew up, I might try to adopt some older kids. But maybe that's just because I'm reading Melissa Fay Greene's latest book.

Anonymous wrote:Money is no object for me and I have zero (for the moment only, I hope.) I have been trying for seven years and am now trying to adopt. Money doesn't actually "buy" you as many kids as you would like. For some, it is pretty hard to get a kid even if you throw money at the problem.

I am really sorry for your struggles PP. All the best.

I have 2 - I would adopt 2 more - toddlers or preschoolers.

I would retire from my job - I would work in a school for children with mild learning disabilities and invent cool technology that help kids learn - okay I might have to provide money for grants - but I'm rich - I can do both - right.

I would not be a SAHM - but I would not work for money.

I would go broke giving kids scholarships to schools.

Money is not the issue. Hyperemesis is,so there is not enough money in the world to pay me to go through that again. If that wasn't an issue, then I'd have as many kids as I was given. Heck, it might still work out that way but it makes me feel better to pretend that I am in control.

Money is no object for me and I have zero (for the moment only, I hope.) I have been trying for seven years and am now trying to adopt. Money doesn't actually "buy" you as many kids as you would like. For some, it is pretty hard to get a kid even if you throw money at the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still just the 2. I don't have the emotional space for more.

Same here, for me its about the time and the emotional energy not the money.

Same here for me as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two, because it's not just about the money, but about the time, and we all get 24 hours in a day no matter how wealthy.

Besides, I like to cook and shop. I don't think I would outsource those, necessarily.

If you won the lottery, though, you could stop working. That would free up 8 to 10 hours a day for additional parenting.

Yes, but some people WANT to work.