Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

More bandwidth? Do you think having one less kid would make watching a parent die easier? What is wrong with you?

More kids is more stress, more financial pressure, and yes, less bandwidth. This is simply the truth.

So what exactly is the reduction in grief, per child? 30%? 25%? Do you have a formula?

Do you think having a sibling would reduce the grief you feel about your parent passing? I can assure you it would not.

So your point is that by me having three kids, I don't have the "bandwidth" to grieve my parents. But by the same token, having a sibling would have no effect on that grief. Is that right?

Whew. You have a lot of anger.

I am saying that having siblings does not make the difficulty or grief of losing parents easier for many people, including me. I think you are upset and grieving and imagining an idealized scenario better than your own. It does not exist.

And yeah, having more kids increases stress. Every parent knows this. parenting is hard.

Which is why you stopped at one right

Lot of granny moms trying to make themselves feel better on this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

More bandwidth? Do you think having one less kid would make watching a parent die easier? What is wrong with you?

More kids is more stress, more financial pressure, and yes, less bandwidth. This is simply the truth.

So what exactly is the reduction in grief, per child? 30%? 25%? Do you have a formula?

Do you think having a sibling would reduce the grief you feel about your parent passing? I can assure you it would not.

So your point is that by me having three kids, I don't have the "bandwidth" to grieve my parents. But by the same token, having a sibling would have no effect on that grief. Is that right?

Whew. You have a lot of anger.

I am saying that having siblings does not make the difficulty or grief of losing parents easier for many people, including me. I think you are upset and grieving and imagining an idealized scenario better than your own. It does not exist.

And yeah, having more kids increases stress. Every parent knows this. parenting is hard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

More bandwidth? Do you think having one less kid would make watching a parent die easier? What is wrong with you?

More kids is more stress, more financial pressure, and yes, less bandwidth. This is simply the truth.

So what exactly is the reduction in grief, per child? 30%? 25%? Do you have a formula?

Do you think having a sibling would reduce the grief you feel about your parent passing? I can assure you it would not.

So your point is that by me having three kids, I don't have the "bandwidth" to grieve my parents. But by the same token, having a sibling would have no effect on that grief. Is that right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

More bandwidth? Do you think having one less kid would make watching a parent die easier? What is wrong with you?

More kids is more stress, more financial pressure, and yes, less bandwidth. This is simply the truth.

So what exactly is the reduction in grief, per child? 30%? 25%? Do you have a formula?

Do you think having a sibling would reduce the grief you feel about your parent passing? I can assure you it would not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

It's human nature to try to correct the mistakes of your parents for your own children. My DH is vehemently 1 and done in part because his two siblings are just two more people he has to worry about taking care of. They do not help with his parents at all.

+1, we had one child in part because we are worried about being expected to care for DH's brother after his parents pass. BIL is not helping with them at all. To the contrary, he is currently blocking their desire to sell their home and move into assisted living because he lives with them and does not want to have to pay rent elsewhere.

Siblings are not exactly the blessing people often envision for their kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

More bandwidth? Do you think having one less kid would make watching a parent die easier? What is wrong with you?

More kids is more stress, more financial pressure, and yes, less bandwidth. This is simply the truth.

So what exactly is the reduction in grief, per child? 30%? 25%? Do you have a formula?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

More bandwidth? Do you think having one less kid would make watching a parent die easier? What is wrong with you?

More kids is more stress, more financial pressure, and yes, less bandwidth. This is simply the truth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

+1, I have three siblings and dealing with them is actually the HARDEST part of my parents getting older, two of them are feuding with each other and use it as a way to lash out at each other, it is miserable.

I don't think being an only is automatically easier, but having siblings does NOT make it automatically easier.

My guess is that having a functional family unit, regardless of size, is the most important thing. If that's one kid and then everyone has a good, functional relationship and the parents make sure they don't financially or emotionally burden their only as they age (which should be easier with fewer mouths to feed and colleges to pay for), I don't see any reason why it would be worse than the situation I am currently in. And if you have multiple kids, I hope you do a better job than my parents did in creating functional sibling relationships, because IME, however you interact as kids follows you into adulthood. My brother and sister have always been hyper-competitive with each other, I've always been the one to quietly fade into the scenery to stay out of it, my little brother has always been the one to crack jokes to mask crushing anxiety and depression caused in part by all the conflict. Well guess what, I just described my life at age 5, age 15, and also the last three visits with my family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

More bandwidth? Do you think having one less kid would make watching a parent die easier? What is wrong with you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

It's human nature to try to correct the mistakes of your parents for your own children. My DH is vehemently 1 and done in part because his two siblings are just two more people he has to worry about taking care of. They do not help with his parents at all.

Anonymous wrote:As an only, there was a long period of time where I was very sad about how small our family holidays were, how quiet and how my parents focused only on me. I was incredibly lonely because I didn't have friends to play with in the neighborhood or siblings. I basically had to rely on my parents to drive me to friend's houses (same as kids today who also don't play outside).

As an adult now who has 3 kids of my own, I'm thrilled not to have siblings. There is no discussion of whose house to go to for holidays- it's always mine! I never have to share my parents. It's only my parents and dh and I who discuss where to vacation. DH has a sibling, but they are childless. It's fun how my kids are the only grandkids on both sides. We bring the party. I do agree that as an adult it's lovely to not have siblings. Likely all the elderly caregiving would fall to me anyways.

While I did have 3 kids, I didn't do it so they had siblings. I did it for myself because I LOVED babies and wanted a big family. I agree that you shouldn't do it for your kids.

Oh, I could have written that first paragraph!

Both of my parents as well as DH are not close to their siblings, for good, unknown, and no reason, respectively…so I don’t see siblings as any sort of insurance or forever relationship.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.

Kindly, maybe it would be easier if you had fewer kids and more bandwidth? My sibling was zero help and made end of life for my parents harder, and DH is an only and his father dying was as easy as possible because his parents planned really well. Point being, many of us with and without siblings know what it’s like to deal with aging parents on their own and the grass is not always greener.

My firstborn would agree with this thread title when his younger siblings annoy him.

But seriously, I hope they grow up to appreciate each other. Nothing is a guarantee but as an only child, I’ve always felt this was a life experience I’m sad I missed. Especially as my parents age and I don’t have cousins and it’s just the end of the line with me.

Anonymous wrote:Offering a different perspective. I’m a doctor and seeing elderly patients who rely on their siblings in their old age and that bond enduring decades, has made me want to have at least two kids. The bottom line is nothing is guaranteed but the way this country works, usually your family is your support system. Having a sibling *can* mean you have a support system for life. Plus with your siblings comes nieces and nephews, which also serves as a support esp if you don’t have kids of your own. I don’t see as many friends fill that role.

I'm an only. Dealing with my aging parents without any siblings is absolutely horrible. I have three kids and would have liked a fourth. Everyone only I know (and I know several) has 3 or more kids, precisely for this reason. For those of you who had onlies, I'm sorry if it worked out that way. But I really don't want to hear "oh it's so much better!" from anyone other than an only child, because kindly, you have no idea what it's like.