What the number of children you have says about you

[g-mama]

I read on another message board recently a thread that asked what people thought the number of children a person has "says" about that person. It was very interesting, and more than a bit surprising to me. I wondered what the parents here would say.

This is in Washington, DC (for reference) and the vast majority, I would say, seemed to have two children. Many people said that seeing someone with even THREE kids gives them the impression that that person must be either "crazy" or "well-off," or both. That shocked me.

More than three kids seemed to say "insane." Several people said that "one" meant that the person realized after having a child how hard it is and basically quit while they were ahead. The most "accepted" number of kids was two. Manageable, sane, one-parent to one-child ratio....

Your thoughts?

[ChunkyNicksChunkyMom]

Well I have two kids and ALL that means is that I am old and tired.

[Melaine]

Many people have said that I must be "brave" to have twins. I couldn't help wondering if they didn't quite understand where twins come from or how they are conceived. It's not as if I checked the box for "BOGO" when I was filling in my order form, or something.

I think it's very weird when people make comments about 3 or 4 children being a large family or anything negative about the size of a family. 3 is definitely not large in my book, 4 isn't anything remarkable and neither are noteworthy, IMO.

But it all comes down to people like to make comments about others and they'll figure out something to talk about even if there isn't anything much to say.

[m448]

Figures (the area and the socioeconomic level). But those are the same types to overshoot for preschool, private school, colleges, cars, partners, etc. and then sit around wondering why their grown kids don't want to visit them. ;) Because don't you know that if you just do everything right things will turn out EXACTLY as you wish?

[HIU8]

I think that twin comment may come from the higher number of people that undergo fertility treatments to have children--especially in DC where you have a high number of affluent people who can afford multiple attempts. In that, if you go that route, there is a higher chance of having twins.

I still think it's a stupid comment, but I think I can relate to where it may have come from.

Also, most people I know have 2. I do know a few people with 3 and one person with 5. I always thought 3 was an average # of children--not to many or to little.

[TamiRuns]

Well I have two kids and ALL that means is that I am old and tired.

:yeahthat: Add "broke" after 2 adoptions and that's us!

[twowhat?]

Many people have said that I must be "brave" to have twins. I couldn't help wondering if they didn't quite understand where twins come from or how they are conceived. It's not as if I checked the box for "BOGO" when I was filling in my order form, or something.


Or "When are you going to start trying for a boy?"

That drives me nuts - as if our family isn't "complete" without at least one of each sex.

[truly scrumptious]

3 kids and up seems large to me, but only because I grew up with just one sibling. I always thought I would end up with two. But then again, now that I have #1, having 3 doesn't seem so far-fetched...so who knows where I'll end up!
But I would NEVER make a negative judgment/comment about how many kids a couple chose to have - if it is fewer or more than I choose, I just think - that's what works for them, this is what works for me.
Although I'm sure there are studies about trends linking number of children to any number of things (income, education, region, nationality, etc.) it is so easy to think of example of outliers to any generalizations, that the generalizations themselves seem pretty useless.
And to tell the truth, if I'm observing/thinking about another parent, I am more likely to be interested in HOW they are parenting (so I can see another point of view) than I am in how MANY they are parenting.

[arivecchi]

Families with more than 3 kids are a rarity in my area. Frankly, I just don't know how I would be able to afford more than two kids here. I think people might think it is insane for that reason?

[Minnifer]

Ugh, I really hate these kinds of sweeping generalizations b/c the underlying assumptions are often so wrong (and can be so judgmental).

Many people have 1 child b/c they CAN'T have more than one - it's so irritating when people assume that the world is fertile and that everyone can just make babies whenever they feel like it. And, the assumption that 2 is manageable etc b/c of the 1-parent-1-child ratio fails to acknowledge that many households do not have two parents and still have more than 1 kid.

Bottom line, you can't read anything into this, IMO.

[sidmand]

Well I have two kids and ALL that means is that I am old and tired.

:yeahthat:

And just personally, I had/have a hard time with just two and just personally, I can't imagine how I would handle three. But that is MY personality and my two. I thought I've heard that "three is the new two." :)

I see a lot of people with three children. Not so many with more than three but there are a handful with four that I know IRL. To me, four kids and up seems like a large family but I agree that a lot of that comes from what you are used to. When I grew up it was twos and threes for the most part.

[SnuggleBuggles]

3 is the norm where I live. I know a lot of 2's and fewer ones and 4's. But I see a lot of families of 3 around me and I don't put any judgment on their reasons. Most of my friends who have 4, #4 was not planned.

Beth

[Ceepa]

This does not take personality or family resources into account. Not all moms, dads or children can be reduced to a number or ratio. It's not fair to simplify the situation that way.

[mamicka]

Ugh, I really hate these kinds of sweeping generalizations b/c the underlying assumptions are often so wrong (and can be so judgmental).

Many people have 1 child b/c they CAN'T have more than one - it's so irritating when people assume that the world is fertile and that everyone can just make babies whenever they feel like it. And, the assumption that 2 is manageable etc b/c of the 1-parent-1-child ratio fails to acknowledge that many households do not have two parents and still have more than 1 kid.

Bottom line, you can't read anything into this, IMO.
:yeahthat:

[KpbS]

I am one of 3 so 3 seems perfectly normal to me. Busy, yes, but normal. I know that I could NEVER handle 4+. On the occasion I have had my sister's plus mine it feels like a total zoo. The noise level alone would do me in :) I love my kids but they are so loud and active and can be really challenging so adding 2-3 more seems totally overwhelming. Some people can do it really well. Not me!

[WatchingThemGrow]

I often wonder this too... like is it generational? Do older people think one thing, and younger people think another? Or is it more regional? I can't BELIEVE we have 3. Truly...it just feels weird. I grew up basically as an only child. Since I married late, I'd just written off "hoping" for this or that and just put it all in God's hands. I never dreamed of having this many or that many, and maybe that's why I feel unprepared what actually happened.

People sometimes think I can handle anything, that I'm prepared, and that kind of thing, while the truth is so far from that.

When I see families with more than 3 DC, my mind just goes, "Wow. HOW in the world do they manage?" But then I realize they likely have more than 18 mos between their DC. That may be more of a factor of what I think than the number.

[TwinFoxes]

I think that twin comment may come from the higher number of people that undergo fertility treatments to have children--especially in DC where you have a high number of affluent people who can afford multiple attempts. In that, if you go that route, there is a higher chance of having twins.

I still think it's a stupid comment, but I think I can relate to where it may have come from.



But Melaine, who made the twin comment, isn't from DC.

[JBaxter]

LOL Everyone will tell you Im crazy. Right Susan LOL. I love my 4 boys and IF my births were a little easier I would have had one more. My " dream family" would have 6 children but since I have 17yrs between first and last my body said enough.

[Dcclerk]

I have 4, and I hear it often enough to know many people equate that with being a bit crazy. Probably not truly off-in-the-head, but definitely of the we-can't-relate-with-you variety. I actually know a fair number with 4 kids, which is decidedly unusual in our area. Most of us fit in the can-tolerate-chaos-better-than-most camp. (Our houses tend to be relatively loud.) We also tend to be ones that don't mind if our kids aren't bathed quite as often, and dress themselves in a rather unfortunate variety of ways.

[Piglet]

I think it is more a statement of geography than anything else. In some places where the cost of living and real estate is very expensive having more kids is very costly. I am also thinking about the cost of private school in places where public schools aren't great. In our city, 3 is def. the new 2. Among my friends, we are all from a similar soci-economic class and are seeing this trend among friends of friends as well.

[gatorsmom]

In our neighborhood, 2 in the norm. Our neighbors all think I'm crazy because I have 4. As if I could stop at 3!!! Not much choice in the matter with twins.

I know a handful of people with 4 kids in our town. People around here definitely think that 4 kids means we are either crazy or well off. I totally ignore it because I haven't met one person yet who didn't have some sort of opinion about any aspect of raising kids.

[MontrealMum]

And to tell the truth, if I'm observing/thinking about another parent, I am more likely to be interested in HOW they are parenting (so I can see another point of view) than I am in how MANY they are parenting.
:yeahthat:

I also agree with Minnifer, family size isn't necessarily a choice. Seems kind of rude to make sweeping judgements based on that alone.

[slworld]

Both DH & I grew up with 1 sibling, so 2 is kind of the norm for us (I don't know a lot of people with 3 or more kids). 3 is ok but 4 or more is large to me. I am just in awe of folks who have 4 or more kids. I just can't do it. I just think they love having a large family.

[TwinFoxes]

I had to dash after my first post...

My opinion has changed since have DDs. Now I totally understand why people want big families. I've really enjoyed being a mother, even though things didn't start off so smoothly. I'd definitely consider one more, but that's not in the cards I don't think. Before DDs I thought anything more than 2 was nuts, even three seemed a little "out there" to me. :)

[maestramommy]

Sorta agree with the pp said in your area people might overshoot for private schools and all that, which will make anything over 2 feel undoable.

3-4 is very common in my area. I've even had one person say it's my town:p

I think what 3 says about us is that we're too old and tired to try for 4:loveeyes: Or that we really weren't thinking when we decided to "allow" for 3. Some days I wonder that myself:p

[g-mama]

It's definitely this area, I think. I just met a woman who lives on Capitol Hill in DC and sends her daughters to private elementary school. Between the two tuitions, she is paying $28K a year!!! Thank goodness I live in the suburbs and our county has excellent schools. There is no way. I guess if that were my reality, I'd have to let finances dictate the number of kids we had. This area is so over-achiever, type A, etc., etc.

[jjjo1112]

I get comments all the time about having 3 kids-more because they are so young (4 and under). I hear "Wow, you have your hands full" at least once a day. And when people find out we would like more, usually they say we are crazy. If they happen to hear me say that I work part time as well, they just don't get it. 2 is the norm here. However, most of the people I hang out with have 3 or 4 children. I find it easier to hang out with moms that have more children-they seem to understand/deal with the chaos much better :)

[maestramommy]

These days when I get the "boy, you got your hands full!" comment, I just grin and say, "yup, that's right!" Cuz it's true! I've GOT 3 under 5 (for a while it was 3 under 4). Why get offended?

[Raidra]

I think some of it is geographical, and some is dependent on the circles you run in. Three is becoming more and more common around here, but I rarely see more than three except in our homeschool community. In our area, at least, I associate bigger families with people who don't buy into the private school, multiple extracurricular classes, big vacations sort of thing. It seems like we're just regular people who prefer having lots of family to other things. Both my parents were one of five, and so I grew up with tons of extended family around. That's what feels right to me. Sure, sometimes I feel bad that we can't afford to take big extravagant vacations, but there's a huge payoff in other, less tangible things. I always wanted four and I've been lucky.

I wonder what sort of comments we'll get when I've got a newborn in a wrap, a newly two-year-old in a stroller, and two rowdy boys alongside.. should be interesting. :)

It's really hard to generalize, though, because some people want big families but can't, or didn't plan on big families but got them anyway. It's inevitable that you'll see a family and get an impression, but that impression could be way off.

As for the twin thing, I assume those comments are all well meaning.. if you have children, it's all too easy to imagine it's like to have twins in the early days, and I assume that people are looking at parents of twins and recognizing the work that involves. :)

[salsah]

Many people have said that I must be "brave" to have twins. I couldn't help wondering if they didn't quite understand where twins come from or how they are conceived. It's not as if I checked the box for "BOGO" when I was filling in my order form, or something.



:hysterical:

[Katigre]

I actually tend to assume that families with more children are less 'well-off' than those with just 1-2 kids.


In our area, at least, I associate bigger families with people who don't buy into the private school, multiple extracurricular classes, big vacations sort of thing. It seems like we're just regular people who prefer having lots of family to other things.
I tend to agree with this too. I was just talking with my mom about this today - that there are some types of families where the definition of 'afford another baby' means fully funding college, private school, multiple extra-curricular activities, fancy vacations, etc... That's just not in my values (even though I was raised with every single one of those things and would like to provide as much of them for my kids as I can).

Ideally, I would love to have five children (I don't think we'll have that many though). I know a lot of big families and I really value the strong networks of support and relationship they provide.

I am always surprised when I'm out and about with DS and DD and people comment 'you have your hands full' because two children feels really small to me and not overwhelming (stressful at times, time-consuming, but not 'i can't handle, this i am so overwhelmed!'). Maybe 3 kids will tip me over to feeling that way, we'll see.

[GaPeach_in_Ca]

Well, I only have 2 kids, but I get "you have your hands full" quite a bit. Does that mean my 2 are just crazier than most? :D

[GaPeach_in_Ca]

Oh, one assumption I have is when I see people with 3+ kids who are not the same age, I think "SAHM."

I don't know why exactly because my 2 mom friends with 3 kids are both WOHM, so really that thought makes no sense.

[salsah]

These days when I get the "boy, you got your hands full!" comment, I just grin and say, "yup, that's right!" Cuz it's true! I've GOT 3 under 5 (for a while it was 3 under 4). Why get offended?

one of dh's bachelor friends once told me that he was watching me taking care of the girls and thought, "wow, she is a real trooper." that comment made my day. (it was a rough day, first time we went out to a social event with dd2 -- she was about 2 months old (dd1 was 2.5) and just when we were all dressed and ready to go, dd2 threw up (she had reflux) all over me, herself, dd1, and my closet -- yes everything in my closet was splattered with baby vomit.) it was nice to hear someone acknowledge that my job is hard. "you have your hands full" comments are essentially the same. not offensive, just sympathetic.

so when i see someone with a lot of children, i think that person "is a real trooper" not that (s)he is insane.

i also do not think that the person is wealthy. i have heard (and seen in some cases) that wealthy people are wealthy because they care about money. people who care about money do not have a lot of kids because kids are a money suck. those people want to protect their wealth and maintain a certain life style that requires a lot of money. having more kids may mean living at lower standards and giving up certain luxuries that people who care about money will not want to do. obviously that is a generalization and not always true. i do however personally know some people who are like that. both parents work because they want to be able to live in a mansion, both drive mercedes, go on fancy vacations, dress the entire family in designer clothes (even the baby and kids), have a full time house keeper, etc. they have said that they don't want more than 2 kids so that they can maintain that lifestyle. on the other hand, i know people that live simple lives on a single income and have four or more kids and say that they would love to have more kids, even if it means less having less spending money even for just the bare necessities.

i don't think that we can generalize what the number of kids you have says about you. there are too many factors determining family size to do that.

[LarsMal]

It's definitely this area, I think. I just met a woman who lives on Capitol Hill in DC and sends her daughters to private elementary school. Between the two tuitions, she is paying $28K a year!!! Thank goodness I live in the suburbs and our county has excellent schools. There is no way. I guess if that were my reality, I'd have to let finances dictate the number of kids we had. This area is so over-achiever, type A, etc., etc.

Oh yeah, definitely the area. I'd say I can't believe the comments in your OP, but I've heard them, so I *do* believe that they came out of the mouths of people around here. I get told I'm crazy all the time!!

[LarsMal]

These days when I get the "boy, you got your hands full!" comment, I just grin and say, "yup, that's right!" Cuz it's true! I've GOT 3 under 5 (for a while it was 3 under 4). Why get offended?

I've started saying, "Yep, overfull" (so leave me alone so I can be on my way!)- which I don't really think is used correctly, but whatever!

[lmwbasye]

Hmm...well, I have two simply because that's all we've been able to have so far (after 5 pregnancies).

I've seen completely overwhelmed parents (financially, emotionally, etc) with one child and parents that are more organized/calm/financially stable than I am with 4+ children. I think every situation is different and it really is nearly impossible to make sweeping generalizations as these.

[citymama]

Couples with 1-3 kids I think - normal, typical, whatever. This is the typical demographic of my friends with kids.

Couples with zero kids who I know don't want kids, I try and not be judgmental (eg - "I wonder if she wants kids but he doesn't," or "why don't they like kids?"). It's ridiculous and unfair to have those thoughts because these are personal choices and doesn't make someone selfish or whatever.

Similarly, modern families with 4 or more kids (and no twins in the mix) I have to hold back my knee-jerk reaction which is to assume some kind of religious reason for having many kids. I generally assume that today the norm is to keep families small unless you are opposed to birth control - which is not fair or accurate on my part, I know! So yes, I do make assumptions based on family size outside of the "norm" of 1-3 kids, but I don't think it's always correct to do so.

[egoldber]

I just met a woman who lives on Capitol Hill in DC and sends her daughters to private elementary school. Between the two tuitions, she is paying $28K a year!!!

If this is the case, then she sends her kids to incredibly inexpensive private schools for this area. Most schools are $20K+ per child.

[1964pandora]

Ugh, I really hate these kinds of sweeping generalizations b/c the underlying assumptions are often so wrong (and can be so judgmental).

Many people have 1 child b/c they CAN'T have more than one - it's so irritating when people assume that the world is fertile and that everyone can just make babies whenever they feel like it. And, the assumption that 2 is manageable etc b/c of the 1-parent-1-child ratio fails to acknowledge that many households do not have two parents and still have more than 1 kid.

Bottom line, you can't read anything into this, IMO.

Yeah, there are a whole bunch of us you can't tell anything about. I have two kids because I could only have two kids. If I had started having children when I was young, I would been open to many, many, many.

[Jo..]

Well I have two kids and ALL that means is that I am old and tired.

Sing it, sister.

[g-mama]

If this is the case, then she sends her kids to incredibly inexpensive private schools for this area. Most schools are $20K+ per child.

OMG, Beth, you are right! Our mutual friend quoted me that tuition cost but I just looked it up on the school's website to see if you were right, and $28K is the cost for ONE child! Unreal.

[spanannie]

3 is the norm around here. I know plenty of people with more than that.

[hellokitty]

In our area 3 is becoming the norm. However, I DO feel that it has to do with the fact that our area is mostly populated by ppl who are extremely conservative and religious. The trend in our area is to bam, bam, bam have at least 3 kids by the time you are 30. Heck, didn't even have my first child until I was almost 31! So, I am considered an, "older mom" in our area, although I feel that if we lived in a more metropolitan area, I would be considered the norm. The mom who went to college, established her career, was financially stable and a homeowner before starting a family. The COL is also lower than it would cost to live on either coast.

Ppl look at me with my 3 boys and automatically think, "Oh, she tried for a girl and didn't get one." Then I have to put up with the, "So, are you going to try for a girl," comments or ppl telling me I am a saint (yeah, like I had any control over this???), and even worse ppl who pity me for not having a girl, and tell me how much they enjoy being a mother to a dd. And it sucks, but that is exactly what happened. I won't lie. We went for #3 to get our girl, but it just didn't happen for us. I know I sound bitter. I love my sons, but all I wanted was ONE daughter, and it seems like just about everyone I know has at least one dd or they got their perfect pigeon pair (boy and girl), so they were able to stop at two. Three is our limit, DH had his vasectomy and adoption at this point isn't really an option anymore for us, b/c of a variety of factors.

[kijip]

Ugh, I really hate these kinds of sweeping generalizations b/c the underlying assumptions are often so wrong (and can be so judgmental).

Many people have 1 child b/c they CAN'T have more than one - it's so irritating when people assume that the world is fertile and that everyone can just make babies whenever they feel like it. And, the assumption that 2 is manageable etc b/c of the 1-parent-1-child ratio fails to acknowledge that many households do not have two parents and still have more than 1 kid.

Bottom line, you can't read anything into this, IMO.

:yeahthat: Word.

[bubbaray]

I don't make comments about family size, BUT I will admit that DH and I both noticed the LARGE families at Disneyland recently. I"m not kidding, it seemed that most of the families were 4 children with 1 (or more?) on the way. Lots of large families. Of course, we live in an extremely high COL area and 1 child, possibly 2 is the norm. I know only a couple of families with three children and none with more than that (well, not counting my friend who has 2 children of her own and married a guy with 2 children -- like a smaller Brady Bunch, LOL. THe kids are all teens though, with 2 already out of the house).

I dunno. Large families seem somehow "opulent" to me? Extravagant? I can't quite put my finger on it. And, yeah, I know people (here in fact) who have large families for religious reasons.

[bcafe]

Well we are having #6 in October! This choice is neither religious nor because we don't know about birth control. We will have 1 in college and 2 in private grade school in the fall. We are so far from wealthy it is a funny thought. I was a WOHM until last August so our finances took a severe blow when we decided that I would stay home. We prioritize and subsequent children are far less costly especially when you already have all baby supplies.

[gatorsmom]

Well we are having #6 in October! .

Congratulations!!!! That is exciting. I have to say, that now that I have children and am enjoying them so much, I wish I'd have gotten married and started having them much earlier so I could have had more and spaced them apart more. I really think that having a big family is less stressful when the older kids are old enough to help with the younger ones.

[JamiMac]

Around here 3 is pretty common, as is two. When we lived in California it seemed in our area (south Orange County) that 4 was common also. Three was very common there. I have to say I don't think anything when I see less than three kids, because how do you know how many they really have? I mean I usually have just one with me during the day. I would have a fourth but I feel that I may have reached my personal limit and also I had some problems mid-pregnancy last time. I don't know, I've never gotten that totally done feeling, although I'm starting to feel more and more done all the time. I guess I have a pang of brief envy when I see families with four kids out to dinner or something, because it's more of a symbol of me being done, but I'm very, very blessed to have my three. I was one of two, the boy/girl pair, and always wished my mom had had another when I was little, so I like big families now.

[TonFirst]

Well we are having #6 in October!

Congratulations! I'm the oldest of 6 - not for religious reasons, although we are Catholic. I went to a private college and elementary school and my 5 sibs all went to private grade and high school (state colleges). We weren't rich, but we weren't poor - solidly in the middle.

I am pretty sure I'm done with my 2. My kids' school is $15K+/year each for elementary school, my husband and I are both very busy, and, frankly, I've BTDT with a large family and I like the smaller dynamic for my own family, with a life filled with oodles of cousins, aunts, and uncles on the periphery.

[strollerqueen]

In our area 3 is becoming the norm. However, I DO feel that it has to do with the fact that our area is mostly populated by ppl who are extremely conservative and religious. The trend in our area is to bam, bam, bam have at least 3 kids by the time you are 30. Heck, didn't even have my first child until I was almost 31! So, I am considered an, "older mom" in our area, although I feel that if we lived in a more metropolitan area, I would be considered the norm. The mom who went to college, established her career, was financially stable and a homeowner before starting a family. The COL is also lower than it would cost to live on either coast.

Ppl look at me with my 3 boys and automatically think, "Oh, she tried for a girl and didn't get one." Then I have to put up with the, "So, are you going to try for a girl," comments or ppl telling me I am a saint (yeah, like I had any control over this???), and even worse ppl who pity me for not having a girl, and tell me how much they enjoy being a mother to a dd. And it sucks, but that is exactly what happened. I won't lie. We went for #3 to get our girl, but it just didn't happen for us. I know I sound bitter. I love my sons, but all I wanted was ONE daughter, and it seems like just about everyone I know has at least one dd or they got their perfect pigeon pair (boy and girl), so they were able to stop at two. Three is our limit, DH had his vasectomy and adoption at this point isn't really an option anymore for us, b/c of a variety of factors.

I'm sorry.

[strollerqueen]

I dunno. Large families seem somehow "opulent" to me? Extravagant? I can't quite put my finger on it.

Yeah, the largest family I know around here has 8 kids. The last few were born by surrogates. And they are hotel chain heirs! :hysterical: I WILL say, however, that they are a lovely, lovely family. The children are all polite, witty, and orderly. Which is a good thing, since they are constantly traveling all over the world to check out their hotels!