Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
What a gross thing to say.
What's "gross" about it? Are you 9? It's not logistically or mathematically possible for parents of 4 kids to parent as much as a parent of two kids or 1 kid. It's just not. And rather than admitting they are fine with this arrangement, parents in big families argue their kids aren't short changed at all. I can't believe these families are getting babysitters 3-4 nights a week so that the younger kids don't have to be schlepped around. And even if they are, that's a lot of time to spend with a babysitter when you've already spent the entire day away from your parents at school. We had kids because we actually wanted to parent them ourselves.
DP. If I'm tracking, you have two kids, right? I really hope you lose your dichotomous thinking before life throws a curveball your way. You say it is not "logistically or mathematically possible" for 2 parents to successfully parent 4 children. So under your logic, it would not be "logistically or mathematically" possible for 1 parent to successfully parent 2 children, right?
So what will you do if your spouse (heaven forbid) dies? Put your kids up for adoption so they can have 2 parents?
I know, I know. You'll say in the case of the former, the parents chose to have four kids. The latter scenario is involuntary. But the end result would be the same, no? 1 parent for 2 kids...
DP. I also hope she’s not using *gasp* aftercare or regular date night sitters or going to the gym after work or having any sort of hobby. Because her kids are already away from her during the day and she otherwise would not be truly parenting them.
Joke all you want but there are many many times that both of my kids need something at the same exact time - homework help, a ride, a shoulder to cry on, whatever, and if there were more of them, there would be less attention to go around per kid. You can keep denying it, but it’s just basic math. Obviously you are okay with each kid having less individual attention. To each his own.
How neglectful of you to have 2 children!
Your poor first child is not getting all the attention they deserve because you were too self centered to stop at 1 child.
I know! I actually do feel badly for each of my kids sometimes when they are being short-changed and why I did not have any more!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
What a gross thing to say.
What's "gross" about it? Are you 9? It's not logistically or mathematically possible for parents of 4 kids to parent as much as a parent of two kids or 1 kid. It's just not. And rather than admitting they are fine with this arrangement, parents in big families argue their kids aren't short changed at all. I can't believe these families are getting babysitters 3-4 nights a week so that the younger kids don't have to be schlepped around. And even if they are, that's a lot of time to spend with a babysitter when you've already spent the entire day away from your parents at school. We had kids because we actually wanted to parent them ourselves.
DP. If I'm tracking, you have two kids, right? I really hope you lose your dichotomous thinking before life throws a curveball your way. You say it is not "logistically or mathematically possible" for 2 parents to successfully parent 4 children. So under your logic, it would not be "logistically or mathematically" possible for 1 parent to successfully parent 2 children, right?
So what will you do if your spouse (heaven forbid) dies? Put your kids up for adoption so they can have 2 parents?
I know, I know. You'll say in the case of the former, the parents chose to have four kids. The latter scenario is involuntary. But the end result would be the same, no? 1 parent for 2 kids...
DP. I also hope she’s not using *gasp* aftercare or regular date night sitters or going to the gym after work or having any sort of hobby. Because her kids are already away from her during the day and she otherwise would not be truly parenting them.
Joke all you want but there are many many times that both of my kids need something at the same exact time - homework help, a ride, a shoulder to cry on, whatever, and if there were more of them, there would be less attention to go around per kid. You can keep denying it, but it’s just basic math. Obviously you are okay with each kid having less individual attention. To each his own.
How neglectful of you to have 2 children!
Your poor first child is not getting all the attention they deserve because you were too self centered to stop at 1 child.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
What a gross thing to say.
What's "gross" about it? Are you 9? It's not logistically or mathematically possible for parents of 4 kids to parent as much as a parent of two kids or 1 kid. It's just not. And rather than admitting they are fine with this arrangement, parents in big families argue their kids aren't short changed at all. I can't believe these families are getting babysitters 3-4 nights a week so that the younger kids don't have to be schlepped around. And even if they are, that's a lot of time to spend with a babysitter when you've already spent the entire day away from your parents at school. We had kids because we actually wanted to parent them ourselves.
DP. If I'm tracking, you have two kids, right? I really hope you lose your dichotomous thinking before life throws a curveball your way. You say it is not "logistically or mathematically possible" for 2 parents to successfully parent 4 children. So under your logic, it would not be "logistically or mathematically" possible for 1 parent to successfully parent 2 children, right?
So what will you do if your spouse (heaven forbid) dies? Put your kids up for adoption so they can have 2 parents?
I know, I know. You'll say in the case of the former, the parents chose to have four kids. The latter scenario is involuntary. But the end result would be the same, no? 1 parent for 2 kids...
DP. I also hope she’s not using *gasp* aftercare or regular date night sitters or going to the gym after work or having any sort of hobby. Because her kids are already away from her during the day and she otherwise would not be truly parenting them.
Joke all you want but there are many many times that both of my kids need something at the same exact time - homework help, a ride, a shoulder to cry on, whatever, and if there were more of them, there would be less attention to go around per kid. You can keep denying it, but it’s just basic math. Obviously you are okay with each kid having less individual attention. To each his own.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
What a gross thing to say.
What's "gross" about it? Are you 9? It's not logistically or mathematically possible for parents of 4 kids to parent as much as a parent of two kids or 1 kid. It's just not. And rather than admitting they are fine with this arrangement, parents in big families argue their kids aren't short changed at all. I can't believe these families are getting babysitters 3-4 nights a week so that the younger kids don't have to be schlepped around. And even if they are, that's a lot of time to spend with a babysitter when you've already spent the entire day away from your parents at school. We had kids because we actually wanted to parent them ourselves.
DP. If I'm tracking, you have two kids, right? I really hope you lose your dichotomous thinking before life throws a curveball your way. You say it is not "logistically or mathematically possible" for 2 parents to successfully parent 4 children. So under your logic, it would not be "logistically or mathematically" possible for 1 parent to successfully parent 2 children, right?
So what will you do if your spouse (heaven forbid) dies? Put your kids up for adoption so they can have 2 parents?
I know, I know. You'll say in the case of the former, the parents chose to have four kids. The latter scenario is involuntary. But the end result would be the same, no? 1 parent for 2 kids...
DP. I also hope she’s not using *gasp* aftercare or regular date night sitters or going to the gym after work or having any sort of hobby. Because her kids are already away from her during the day and she otherwise would not be truly parenting them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
I imagine there’s a lot of carpooling and siblings getting toted to practices. That is already how we manage 3 kids with full time jobs. I think if I didn’t work I’d have a bigger network of other moms to trade off with. Anecdotally I know some SAHMs of 3 or 4 and they seem to not mind having an extra kid in tow and will then trade off. Especially the military moms. It’s like an entire village just coordinating getting kids places or hosting a sibling for drop off. I think if I didn’t work/wanted a 4th I’d just lean into like this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
I imagine there’s a lot of carpooling and siblings getting toted to practices. That is already how we manage 3 kids with full time jobs. I think if I didn’t work I’d have a bigger network of other moms to trade off with. Anecdotally I know some SAHMs of 3 or 4 and they seem to not mind having an extra kid in tow and will then trade off. Especially the military moms. It’s like an entire village just coordinating getting kids places or hosting a sibling for drop off. I think if I didn’t work/wanted a 4th I’d just lean into like this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
What a gross thing to say.
What's "gross" about it? Are you 9? It's not logistically or mathematically possible for parents of 4 kids to parent as much as a parent of two kids or 1 kid. It's just not. And rather than admitting they are fine with this arrangement, parents in big families argue their kids aren't short changed at all. I can't believe these families are getting babysitters 3-4 nights a week so that the younger kids don't have to be schlepped around. And even if they are, that's a lot of time to spend with a babysitter when you've already spent the entire day away from your parents at school. We had kids because we actually wanted to parent them ourselves.
DP. If I'm tracking, you have two kids, right? I really hope you lose your dichotomous thinking before life throws a curveball your way. You say it is not "logistically or mathematically possible" for 2 parents to successfully parent 4 children. So under your logic, it would not be "logistically or mathematically" possible for 1 parent to successfully parent 2 children, right?
So what will you do if your spouse (heaven forbid) dies? Put your kids up for adoption so they can have 2 parents?
I know, I know. You'll say in the case of the former, the parents chose to have four kids. The latter scenario is involuntary. But the end result would be the same, no? 1 parent for 2 kids...
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
What a gross thing to say.
What's "gross" about it? Are you 9? Its not logistically or mathematically possible for parents of 4 kids to parent as much as a parent of two kids or 1 kid. Its just not. And rather than admitting they are fine with this arrangement, parents in big families argue their kids aren't short changed at all. I can't believe these families are getting babysitters 3-4 nights a week so that the younger kids don't have to be schlepped around. And even if they are, that's a lot of time to spend with a babysitter when you've already spent the entire day away from your parents at school. We had kids because we actually wanted to parent them ourselves.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Speaking from experience, if you are Mormon (or similar) unless you're the first to have grandkids you can't count on grandparent help because there are so many grandkids. The luckiest in a Mormon family is usually the first grandchild or two because they usually get the monopoly on free grandparent babysitting (that was definitely the case in my family--the first grandkid(s) on each side were the ones that were basically raised by my grandmothers and everyone else had less help) plus usually when the first grandchild is born the grandparents are still super young and energetic. My grandmothers were like 42 when their first grandchild was born.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
What a gross thing to say.
What's "gross" about it? Are you 9? It's not logistically or mathematically possible for parents of 4 kids to parent as much as a parent of two kids or 1 kid. It's just not. And rather than admitting they are fine with this arrangement, parents in big families argue their kids aren't short changed at all. I can't believe these families are getting babysitters 3-4 nights a week so that the younger kids don't have to be schlepped around. And even if they are, that's a lot of time to spend with a babysitter when you've already spent the entire day away from your parents at school. We had kids because we actually wanted to parent them ourselves.
Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, its not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think once you get to the 4th kid you tend to have a parent who is not working or only working very part time. So in that regard there is always a dedicated parent whose life is very kid-centered. I have 3 and my career is my 4th kid. I think one more kid would be the tipping point. I’m also still hanging on to keeping my home fairly near and tidy/organized. Whereas I think once you hit 4 + you’re the type of family that embraces the chaos so to speak. (Unless you’re like a Mormon blogger type with family to help you so you can maintain that Pinterest home).
Once you have 4 kids in after school activities, it really doesn’t matter that one parent is home. There are still only 2 adults to manage driving/dinner/homework/bedtime.
Signed,
A SAHM of two with not much evening bandwidth to spare.
That’s assuming there’s no extended family that helps out, no mothers helpers, and that all 4 kids do after school activities.
Assuming all four kids are neurotypical, by the time the youngest does after school activities and has actual homework (8?), the oldest kid or two should be able to do their own homework and manage their own bedtime, no?
I'm the PP. If I had two more kids right now, (let's call them 9 and 6 since my kids are 3 years apart) they'd either be stuck home all the time with a grandparent or "mother's helper" or being drug to one of their two sibling's activities. Either way, it's not remotely the experience my older two children had at those ages. Seems pretty unfair, but large families aren't concerned with individual attention, or actual parents caring for children.