Anonymous wrote:Not being able to send another kid to an expensive private school, not being able to take annual trips abroad, not being able to buy luxury cars, not being able to live in a huge house, etc. does not equal not being able to afford another child. Those are choices. You don’t WANT to spend the money on another child, you’d rather have luxuries for yourself and current kid(s). That’s totally fine! But it is not not being able to afford another child. Big difference.

Nobody said they couldn't afford kids on those salaries. They said a second and third kid cost more than just one, and the financial impact was a major reason for not having another. Not that they couldn't afford it. But the OP's question was whether anyone considered finances when deciding to have more kids. The question was not whether they could afford to have more kids. When someone making $1m a year decides they don't want to spend another $1-2m (lifetime, including college, etc) on more kids (even though they have the money in question), then they are considered finances when deciding to have more kids.

It's the same as car buying. I personally make around $500k a year (DH makes the same). I need a new car. We can easily afford to go out and buy the $125k mercedes jeep thing that looks super cool and drives beautifully. We have that money in the bank. But spending that much on a car is ludicrous for me. So we'll buy a $50k car for cash instead. The only reason i'm not buying the more expensive car is because of the cost. hence, my decision for not buying it is financial. even though i can afford it.

Not rocket science.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We want a third but since the eldest is already in private school I don’t know how we could do it. HHI of 700k but unlike PP we don’t take luxury vacations or have luxury cars.

Classic dcum.

Gentle caution: my SIL’s husband convinced her they couldn’t afford a third child (she desperately wanted one). He earned north of $750. Long story short: he was planning his exit strategy once the youngest hit a certain age and he had a certain amount of savings/investments to cover the divorce and maintain his standard of living.

If you can’t afford a kid at $700k, then you are doing something wrong or something is up with your husband.

If you aren’t traveling, then something is definitely up with your husband. He’s likely using vacation time with someone else.

What in the world. Just stop.

Any man who earns $750+ should have vacation time. If he isn’t taking his family on vacations, then he is using his vacation with someone else. Trust me. Most men are smart enough to send the wife and kids on trips, but anyone close to leaving is keeping expenses down.

Go ask some women in their 40s in Great Falls, McLean, Alexandria, Bethesda, etc. Hindsight being 20/20, it’s a big red flag.

It's a question of choice:

Choice #1 - one child, expensive cars and home, nice vacations etc.

Choice #2 - three children

I was one of seven so my parents definitely chose #2 and they seem very happy with their decision. We stopped at three and I'm very happy with the decision and the finances should work out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. When DH and I sat down to figure out if we wanted a 2nd kid (we were both on the fence) we basically decided the life we could give DS as an only was better than if we had 2 kids. And we've never regretted our decision. DS has had a lot of opportunities that wouldn't have been possible if we had another child.

I truly don’t want to be mean bc I respect everyone’s decision. But did you ever consider the opinion of your kid or any kid? If you asked a kid would they have rather have had whatever it was you could give him or her as an only (vacation, school, etc) or give them a sibling, what do you think they would say now? Or say at age 20, 30 when we all start analyzing our childhood?

Maybe he or she would say I’m glad I was an only so I got those things. But most only a I know want more than one kid bc they don’t want the childhood they had as an only.

Consider the other side.

LOL. My sibling is a drug addict that has torn my family apart. I would take those things over growing up with him. He was also cruel to me as a child. You just don't know. A sibling isn't a guarantee to a best friend or family for life.

Anonymous wrote:Not being able to send another kid to an expensive private school, not being able to take annual trips abroad, not being able to buy luxury cars, not being able to live in a huge house, etc. does not equal not being able to afford another child. Those are choices. You don’t WANT to spend the money on another child, you’d rather have luxuries for yourself and current kid(s). That’s totally fine! But it is not not being able to afford another child. Big difference.

PP, Yup, that sums it up. And no, I don't have much saved for college. But you know what? My kid can go to trade school or enroll at the local state u for a lot less. Or god forbid! Community college! From what I hear, there's a demographic college student cliff happening in 2026, which is a couple years before my oldest graduates high school. The current state of affairs isn't going to continue forever, it's just not.

So yeah, I'm having a third. We'll figure it out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would consider my husband and I to be very well educated but we never considered the cost per child when we were in the baby phase. We both came from families with 3+ kids and having three just felt like the right thing to do. We stopped at three for reasons of age and careers, not for money. We did spend a lot of money on childcare and educations (one year it was $130,000 for colleges) but it was worth it. We certainly spent a lot more on our three children then we did on ourselves and it was very nice when the tuition checks ended as it felt like a huge raise!

You're very well educated but never considered that the cost of raising a child is prohibitive for some? I mean I guess if you can afford to pay $130k per year on college then money is not an issue for you so that's why it didn't cross your mind. But talk about clueless.....

PP - We saved and saved and saved from the day baby #1 was born and invested well which put us in a position to pay for their educations. Our vacations were limited to visiting family, we bought basic cars and we lived in a modest home but we were always very happy. Too many people aren't willing to deny themselves the luxuries of life so raising a child is prohibitive. And yes, for many lower income families the cost of raising a child is prohibitive.

Not being able to send another kid to an expensive private school, not being able to take annual trips abroad, not being able to buy luxury cars, not being able to live in a huge house, etc. does not equal not being able to afford another child. Those are choices. You don’t WANT to spend the money on another child, you’d rather have luxuries for yourself and current kid(s). That’s totally fine! But it is not not being able to afford another child. Big difference.

Anonymous wrote:HHI of 160k and 2 kids. There is no way we could afford a 3rd. Financially it was a a very poor decision to have a second child. While before we could just pay for any extracurricular activities we (or child) wanted, any camp for any number of weeks, full college, etc... now we have to prioritize and limit choices.

But there are other considerations in life besides finances alone, so while I don’t regret our decision, we CANNOT afford a 3rd without pretty much giving up a solid middle class standard of life - my view of middle class that is.

I'm pregnant with #3. We make about $130 K. I guess it depends on debt and size of mortgage but I'm not too worried about the finances. I'm certainly not worried about not being middle class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We want a third but since the eldest is already in private school I don’t know how we could do it. HHI of 700k but unlike PP we don’t take luxury vacations or have luxury cars.

Classic dcum.

Gentle caution: my SIL’s husband convinced her they couldn’t afford a third child (she desperately wanted one). He earned north of $750. Long story short: he was planning his exit strategy once the youngest hit a certain age and he had a certain amount of savings/investments to cover the divorce and maintain his standard of living.

If you can’t afford a kid at $700k, then you are doing something wrong or something is up with your husband.

If you aren’t traveling, then something is definitely up with your husband. He’s likely using vacation time with someone else.

What in the world. Just stop.

New poster.

No, the poster with the SIL is correct.

There are people in this country making less than $100,000 that can afford 4+ kids! There is something very WRONG when someone making several hundred thousand dollars a year says they "can't afford" children!

If you don't WANT children, fine...totally your business. But it's absolute BS to pretend you need to be a multi billionaire to afford more than one kid.

People have lots of kids when they’re dirt poor, too. To me, people with high income that choose to have fewer children aren’t necessarily saying they can’t afford children, but that they don’t want to make the compromises in their lives that it would take to have those children. Could be as simple as ‘I want to retire at 50, and I can’t do that if we add a third kid’. Some might find that an unreasonable choice, but it makes perfect sense to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We want a third but since the eldest is already in private school I don’t know how we could do it. HHI of 700k but unlike PP we don’t take luxury vacations or have luxury cars.

Classic dcum.

Gentle caution: my SIL’s husband convinced her they couldn’t afford a third child (she desperately wanted one). He earned north of $750. Long story short: he was planning his exit strategy once the youngest hit a certain age and he had a certain amount of savings/investments to cover the divorce and maintain his standard of living.

If you can’t afford a kid at $700k, then you are doing something wrong or something is up with your husband.

If you aren’t traveling, then something is definitely up with your husband. He’s likely using vacation time with someone else.

What in the world. Just stop.

New poster.

No, the poster with the SIL is correct.

There are people in this country making less than $100,000 that can afford 4+ kids! There is something very WRONG when someone making several hundred thousand dollars a year says they "can't afford" children!

If you don't WANT children, fine...totally your business. But it's absolute BS to pretend you need to be a multi billionaire to afford more than one kid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We want a third but since the eldest is already in private school I don’t know how we could do it. HHI of 700k but unlike PP we don’t take luxury vacations or have luxury cars.

Classic dcum.

Gentle caution: my SIL’s husband convinced her they couldn’t afford a third child (she desperately wanted one). He earned north of $750. Long story short: he was planning his exit strategy once the youngest hit a certain age and he had a certain amount of savings/investments to cover the divorce and maintain his standard of living.

If you can’t afford a kid at $700k, then you are doing something wrong or something is up with your husband.

If you aren’t traveling, then something is definitely up with your husband. He’s likely using vacation time with someone else.

What in the world. Just stop.

Yes, one of the reasons. We have two. HHI of 260K. We have a nanny and our eldest is in (private) preschool. There's no way we could maintain our current standard of living if we had a third, and that's what we've chosen to prioritize.

I think I might have another if we could have a surrogate and lots of live in help, including night help. So in that sense I guess yes. But we also could have a third if we really wanted to and probably we won’t. I think partly I like the dynamic of two.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you have two children. The $$$ impact of going from having one child to two children is bigger than from two to three, three to four, four to five, etc. So if you didn’t engage in much calculating before going from one to two, it’s not logical to suddenly act differently before trying for a third.

Also, if you want more children and have financial concerns, moving to a lower-cost area is the most important move you can make, even if there’s a hit to your income. A bonus is that financial aid formulas provide negligible credit for high costs of living, but big credits for having multiple children attending simultaneously and for reduced incomes.

Actually, 2 to 3 usually involves an upgrade to a bigger car, if you don't have one already. That's another one for me and my husband. We have two paid of cars right now that we can probably keep for a long time. If we have a third child, we're going to need a minivan.

I know so many families with two kids, or even just ONE child, that have a large SUV or minivan anyway (because "carpool" or "grandparents.") The bigger car thing isn't really a thing.

HHI of 160k and 2 kids. There is no way we could afford a 3rd. Financially it was a a very poor decision to have a second child. While before we could just pay for any extracurricular activities we (or child) wanted, any camp for any number of weeks, full college, etc... now we have to prioritize and limit choices.

But there are other considerations in life besides finances alone, so while I don’t regret our decision, we CANNOT afford a 3rd without pretty much giving up a solid middle class standard of life - my view of middle class that is.