Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Family of four fits in the log flume at an amusement park. More would be tricky, so we stopped.
Interesting “test”. Do you particularly love log flumes or what?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed something - but I can't believe that, in three pages, NOT ONE person mentioned environmental considerations.
For such a seemingly educated group of women, I don't quite understand - in light of global pressures that have a high potential to affect this planet into the future - how three or four (or more?!?) can even be a consideration... Seems very, very selfish, IMHO.
Have one... Maybe two? Then. just. stop. already.
https://www.npr.org/2016/08/18/479349760/should-we-be-having-kids-in-the-age-of-climate-change
Yes, you did.
Middle of second page.
I did note that. And corrected myself.
My point still stands.
Time, body, career, finances were the majority reasons offered. Where is the discussion about the impacts of choosing to have so many children - and the impacts on the world that they and their kids will inherit?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed something - but I can't believe that, in three pages, NOT ONE person mentioned environmental considerations.
For such a seemingly educated group of women, I don't quite understand - in light of global pressures that have a high potential to affect this planet into the future - how three or four (or more?!?) can even be a consideration... Seems very, very selfish, IMHO.
Have one... Maybe two? Then. just. stop. already.
https://www.npr.org/2016/08/18/479349760/should-we-be-having-kids-in-the-age-of-climate-change
Yes, you did.
Middle of second page.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed something - but I can't believe that, in three pages, NOT ONE person mentioned environmental considerations.
For such a seemingly educated group of women, I don't quite understand - in light of global pressures that have a high potential to affect this planet into the future - how three or four (or more?!?) can even be a consideration... Seems very, very selfish, IMHO.
Have one... Maybe two? Then. just. stop. already.
https://www.npr.org/2016/08/18/479349760/should-we-be-having-kids-in-the-age-of-climate-change
Yawn, there are plenty of ways to reduce your environmental impact.
Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed something - but I can't believe that, in three pages, NOT ONE person mentioned environmental considerations.
For such a seemingly educated group of women, I don't quite understand - in light of global pressures that have a high potential to affect this planet into the future - how three or four (or more?!?) can even be a consideration... Seems very, very selfish, IMHO.
Have one... Maybe two? Then. just. stop. already.
https://www.npr.org/2016/08/18/479349760/should-we-be-having-kids-in-the-age-of-climate-change
Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed something - but I can't believe that, in three pages, NOT ONE person mentioned environmental considerations.
For such a seemingly educated group of women, I don't quite understand - in light of global pressures that have a high potential to affect this planet into the future - how three or four (or more?!?) can even be a consideration... Seems very, very selfish, IMHO.
Have one... Maybe two? Then. just. stop. already.
https://www.npr.org/2016/08/18/479349760/should-we-be-having-kids-in-the-age-of-climate-change
Anonymous wrote:Financial. HHI of $165. We can’t afford more than two. Knowing that fewer people on Earth is better for the environment helps. Knowing that my husband only wanted two helps, but I still want to meet those other two kids. I don’t talk about it, because I don’t want DH to feel pressured. Just can’t shake the feeling.
Anonymous wrote:We currently have 2 kids and are expecting our 3rd. We are on the fence about having a 4th and will need to decide sooner than later due to our ages (36 years old). Did you have a "feeling" and just know you were done having kids? Or was it more a financial decision? We can afford more (decent HHI - $450K) but not sure if it would make sense. Our kids will be 3 and 5 when the new baby comes. I have a super flexible job and work from home but DH works a lot of hours and has a very inflexible job.
Also FWIW our older two are pretty easy going and I haven't found it very difficult dealing with the two of them. They have both been sleeping through the night since 4 months old and are pretty chill kids (with their mix of insanity like any normal toddler thrown in).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Family of four fits in the log flume at an amusement park. More would be tricky, so we stopped.
Interesting “test”. Do you particularly love log flumes or what?
Anonymous wrote:Its not so much the money, but time. Can you really give 4 kids the 1-1 they need.