# The Hazards of having too many kids



## Rollermommy (Jul 1, 2002)

I would like to hear some advice from you mama's with more than 3 kids. I am desprately trying to talk dh into ttc, but he says because i'm so baby crazy I cant see the whole picture







: I have always dreamed of having a big family--like 6 kids, and it kills me to think that we're done after only 3. My boys are even begging daddy to "let's have more babies" as they adore theyre baby sister








So my question is: What are the downfalls to having a lot of kids? What aspects am i not thinking about here?

TIA mamma's


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

well i come from a family with 5 children. my parents were definitely not model AP-type people, and i'm sure that would have affected things. nevertheless, i hated having so many siblings.
i never once got to use the bathroom alone. there was always someone in the shower, someone on the toilet and someone using the sink.
i was often overlooked and ignored since i was a low-maintenance child. when the other kids are loud and demanding, have dramatic outbursts, learning disabilites, etc. a quiet kid in the middle can be totally ignored. parents shouldn't just say "oh thank god that one's quiet!" maybe the kid is quiet because they've given up on getting anyone to notice them.
there wasn't enough money to go around. unless you're at the top of the financial scale, having multiple kids who want to participate in extra-curricular activities is simply too expensive to fathom. musical instruments are expensive, uniforms too, registration and activity fees for sports add up, and don't forget quality shoes, and head gear. it sucks to get left out of things because of money, and it's even worse when you know your sister is the one who got dance and gymnastic lessons and thus nothing was left for you.
there's no privacy.
we had to take 2 vehicles to go anywhere as a group, and we had ONE family vacation in the first 18 years i was alive because of the cost of doing things as such a large entity.
there's always someone else taking your parents' time.

only you know how much you can do and when your family is complete.


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

Elphaba: I'm with you on the bathroom thing. :LOL I grew up in a house with 6 people, four of us were female, and there are times when you have to use the toilet even though someone is in the shower, or someone else is going to walk in and start showering while you're brushing your teeth. (This completely threw my dh, though; he had no idea what to make of my complete lack of understanding about bathroom privacy. :LOL)

The biggest disadvantage for me was that I was always being compared to someone else, and they were likewise being compared to me. Not necessarily by our mother (though that happened too







), but teachers will inevitably do it, and perfect strangers too. "Oh, you've got three skinny ones and a fat one, guess the fat one ate all the food and you didn't have enough left for the other three."





















Or if three are crying and one is sleeping, you might hear "Looks like you kept going until you got a good one!"





















For some reason, people think it's appropriate to say these things about kids, right in front of them, even.







.

Then there's the fact that we are multiracial and people were constantly accusing my mother of having 4 different children by 4 different men, because we all look different.























Or "Haven't you ever heard of birth control?"

The nasty comments that any parent can get become more vicious the more children you have. Unless you're scary rich, you'll probably hear some of these things (if you don't already for having more than 2







). Like I said, I have no idea why people think these things are appropriate to say to anyone, much less to a child, but they do. I'm already stockpiling witty responses to nasty people, because we're planning on having four kids. Unless we suddenly become scary rich... then we'll just keep going! :LOL


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

oh yes, the comparisons. one is "the smart one" one is "the athlete" one is "the pretty one" one is "the princess" etc. i hated that.
oh and that bullshit where parents use their older kids as free babysitting for the younger ones. i was continually left at home alone with my 2 younger siblings and my nephew, from age 11 on. it was so much fun being an adolescent and not getting to go out and do fun things with my friends because i had to stay home with the little ones. older siblings are not substitute parents. it's so unfair to dumo that kind of responisbilty on a kid.


----------



## Aster (Aug 12, 2002)

Elphaba, im with you on the free babysitting crap. I'm the oldest of nine! My mom started leaving me at home with younger sibs when i was 6







. I was oh, so, responsible. I ended up moving out of my parents home in my last year of high school because i just *couldnt* be mama number 2 and focus on my studies and have any kind of a social life at the same time. My youngest sister used to call ~me~ mommy--she was heartbroken when i moved out. I was almost 30 before i even considered starting a family of my own, i had spent my childhood and my adolescence raising my mom's children.







:


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

Argh!! I was 4 when my mom started leaving me home with my siblings. And I was the one that they called when they were afraid of the thunder, or needed help in the bathroom in the middle of the night. God forbid anyone wake mom up!








I think that has a lot to do with parenting style, though, and the fact that I was in a single parent family. Speaking of which, (and back to the original topic) the divorce rate climbs with each sucessive child.. and so does the rate of bedwetting past the age of 5: if you have four children, the chance of at least one of them being a bedwetter goes up to something like 85%. If you have more than 5, it's something like 99% certain that you'll have at least one. (We had 2 in a family of 4 +1 kids).


----------



## grian (Feb 26, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by eilonwy_
*the divorce rate climbs with each sucessive child.. and so does the rate of bedwetting past the age of 5*
Eilonwy, or anyone else, do you remember where you found this information? I'd like to know more. Thanks!


----------



## ChildoftheMoon (Apr 9, 2002)

any positive thoughts on big families? I was one of three, we were very far apart, and I always wished for more syblings. We are currently trying to add dc #3, and may have more. (Taking it one at a time)


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by grian_
*Eilonwy, or anyone else, do you remember where you found this information? I'd like to know more. Thanks!*
I remember reading a newspaper article about bedwetting, and that it was mentioned in a medical journal, but i can't remember which one. I'm *really* bad at internet searches, for some reason (probably because I get distracted! :LOL) but I will try to find it.

The divorce rate I read in a newspaper as well, but I remember seeing something on TV about it, and for some reason I want to associate it with Barbara Walters, so maybe it was on 20/20?

Oh, and I want to clarify: while there are bad things about having lots of kids, I think there are lots of good things too; otherwise I wouldn't want four







. But the OP asked for negative aspects to think about. Perhaps a new thread is in order?


----------



## andreac (Jul 13, 2003)

I'll chime in with a positive! I can't speak for really big families (whatever that means) but I'm one of four and absolutely loved it!!! I have 2 older brothers, who are 2 years apart, then me (four years later), then 1 younger brother (2 years younger than me). While my parents were always really good about not depending on the older boys as babysitters, it was always nice that we younger two always had a bigger sibling to help us out! We are all pretty close to this day, and I know that someday, when our parents are no longer with us, it will be wonderful to have each other! Now as a caveat, my parents are divroced, but I think that getting pregnant and married at 18 had a lot more to do with that than the NUMBER of kids they had, and I think partly because of us, they get along great to this day! I also think that starting a family so young made it easier to deal with a larger family, my mom was only 26 when my younger brother was born...and I'm sure it's not the case for everyone, but I think they had more energy to deal with the chaos than they would have if they were older.

DH and I just had a discussion/argument this weekend about family size...he is one of 2. I would love to have 4 kids, but he is worried about having anything leftover for US. I do sort of see his point about wanting a life after kids, but I still think big families can be easier in a way...we were able to entertain each other a lot.


----------



## Kim (Nov 19, 2001)

@


----------



## ChildoftheMoon (Apr 9, 2002)

Quote:

Oh, and I want to clarify: while there are bad things about having lots of kids, I think there are lots of good things too; otherwise I wouldn't want four . But the OP asked for negative aspects to think about. Perhaps a new thread is in order?








Sorry I hijacked the thread! Thanks for the positives everyone!

Brandi


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

I dont see how anyone can afford to have a lots of kids in this day and age. How do you save for college, pay for orthodontics, dance or sports activities??

I was also one of 5 and it sucked! My mom kept having kids even though the marriage was long over. Im grateful to have my sibs now, but then it was a war zone! I left when I was 17 also. TOO NOISY!

And with the environment and population problems today, I just dont see the reasoning behind having lots of kids. JMHO


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

It's not a question of "reasoning," rainsmom. The OP wants a lot of kids. Some things just don't have logic behind them.

Think about the amount of work involved in just one child. Is it logical to want to totally turn your life upsidedown like that? No. No reasoning involved here. Pure visceral emotion ... or something like that, anyway ... :LOL

Had 3 kids growing up, working on number 4 right now ... but have really had my eyes opened by this thread, things to pay attention to.

It's interesting, the money problem. We're relatively broke as it is, were broke with only one child, now still broke with three, even though DH is well employed and I'm WAHM'ing. And now that the whole school thing is starting ($6 for this class trip, $7 for that class activity, and do you want your child to be the only one not eating pizza on pizza day?) it's really starting to be difficult. At the same time, the extremes of wealth in our neighborhood (Madonna lives up the block) and poverty (housing projects one block away) make it easier to deal with teaching the children how to deal with it.

Family vacations ... didn't anybody here go camping? Whenever we go, we see lots of large families. Cheap and totally entertaining. It was the same when I was a kid, and my folks took us camping all the time ...

Okay, more late-night rambling, and not checking for typos (my theme for the night) ...


----------



## normajean (Oct 21, 2003)

I think it completely depends on the parents whether a large family is right.

My husband and I are both from large families, 6 kids in each family. I was the second oldest, and I can relate to a lot of the things people mentioned, like babysitting, wanting to move out early, the labeling. My hubby was the youngest, and he loved being the youngest of a large family. (Someone mentioned bedwetting--DH did wet the bed longer than is usual for kids.)

Both sets of parents are still together, his for over 40 years, mine for over 25.

We both came from happy families. Luckily, both families were well off enough that we didn't have the bathroom problems some of you mentioned. I don't remember ever not being able to be alone in the bathroom, but we had 3 bathrooms at our house. I did have to share a bedroom and even a bed for a long time, which I hated.

I do think its important to be able to afford the kids you have. I see so many problems with my brotther in law's family. They have six kids, and they are not financially able to care for them in the way I feel kids should be cared for. The kids also don't get enough attention, and consequently are badly behaved. Its a constant competition for attention, they are all very loud and rowdy, which I can't handle.

My family growing up, and my hubby' s family growing up were not that way at all. I am a person I cannot handle balls being thrown in the house. I picture things falling off the wall and hurting someone.

I know that my husband and I probably won't have a "large" family. We will have four kids at the most. I know some of you consider four kids to be a HUGE family, but from what we are used to, its kindof small. I have one right now and we are ttc another. My hubby and I both want at least 3.


----------



## Rollermommy (Jul 1, 2002)

Well this has been a real eye opener. I wasnt really thinking about this from a "sibling" point of view. You guys have given me a lot to think about. Hmmm......









Any mom's out there care to respond?


----------



## simple gifts (Feb 27, 2003)

I have 5 kids, but they are pretty spaced out. The oldest is 25, then 15, 13, 10 and 18 months. We have two bathrooms, which so far has been plenty.

One thing I make a point of is to never ask the older kids to babysit. Maybe watch a napping baby while I run to the store, but not babysit while I go out or work or anything like that. My two middle dd's (15 and 13) watched the 18 month old while I went to a concert two weeks ago. I was gone 3 hours, and I paid them each $10.

They also don't change diapers, etc. They don't have a baby, I do. One of them out of the four actually asks if she can change the baby, change his clothes, etc. Two of them have never changed a diaper ever.

I love having several kids. I do think money is an issue, and it's much worse as they get older. I thought about doctors, dentists, etc. Like mrpk said, it's the school stuff that kills us. I wrote checks for over $100 last week to the schools for field trips, pictures, fundraisers, etc.

My dh and I sort of disagree about spending for the kids. I think they should get whatever we can get them he thinks we sacrifice too much. Sometimes they have to wait a little while, but they all manage to get the things they want. (Well, I have so far refused the 15 year old a cell phone.)

My take, anyway. My kids are very close, my grown daughter and I are very close. I admit I think love makes up for money and the kids don't. The oldest does, but she didn't until she had a child of her own. So I try very hard, at my own expense often, to make sure that they have "things" as well as love.


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

I think there's too much emphasis put on "things" though. We had no money at all growing up, and DH's family was very poor for a while too. Honestly, the only thing I felt I missed solely because of money were birthday parties and Apple Jacks. (I had them at a neighbor's house once when I was 2.5 and wanted them forever after.)

If I'd been pushy enough about ballet lessons, I would have had them. I was pushy about the violin, and I got to do that too; there are ways to get these things done with very minimal money involved. I don't think that parents need to be well off in order to have lots of kids. We're probably never going to be wealthy, but we still want four and we're fairly certain that they'll be fine.


----------



## party_of_five (Feb 13, 2002)

Well, I grew up with 4 sisters. I hated it, but I know it was because of how we were raised....not the number of siblings I had. My mom was NOT very ap at all. I was the oldest. She worked nights, so much of the housework and baby sitting got pawned off on me.....with very little appreciation I might add







: They were abusive as well. I think I would have hated being in my family weather I was an only child or one of 10.

I left home at 17 and joined the Air Force. I married my high school sweetie.....which I am still VERY happily married to 10 years and 4 kids later.









I decided to change what I didn't like about how I was parented. I know that I am 100 times more connected with my children than my mom ever was. I am 100% ap. I am a stay at home mom. We homeschool. My husband and I adore our children. I think we have a very close knit family. We spend a lot of time together doing fun things with the kids. We all just really enjoy being together.

My husband and I also take time for ourselves once in a while. We make it a point to have a "date" when we can. Right now, that means bringing the baby along since he is nursing.

I love having a large family....and we plan on having more kids(at least 2 more) I really hope to provide a warm and loving home for my children. Family is very important to me, and I want it to be important to my children. Having a large family is a lot of work, but its rewards are outstanding....IMHO!









http://www.piercefamily.50megs.com
http://www.logensbirthday.50megs.com


----------



## simple gifts (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by eilonwy_
*I think there's too much emphasis put on "things" though. We had no money at all growing up, and DH's family was very poor for a while too. Honestly, the only thing I felt I missed solely because of money were birthday parties and Apple Jacks. (I had them at a neighbor's house once when I was 2.5 and wanted them forever after.)*
I totally agree that there is too much emphasis on things. I have tried to raise my children to know the truly valuable things in life are people, not things.

Still, the truth is that my teens like things, and they think things are important. While I don't feel responsible for providing them with every whim they have, I also don't want them to grow up feeling that they had a less than happy childhood because we had too many children for them to ever have anything.

We used to homeschool, and even my oldest dd, who homeschooled through high school, had "things" she wanted very badly. I made sure she got them, even if it meant saving up, getting only that for a holiday gift, or doing without myself.

Teens often think things are valuable that you and I may know are not. In my experience, if they can satisfy at least some of those desires, they come around to the realization that those things didn't make them happy. If they never get the chance to have those things, when they are older they sometimes still think that those things would have made a difference in their life.

Does that make sense?


----------



## Peppermint (Feb 12, 2003)

I have been watching this thread with interest. What I have gotten out of it, is that some people equate too many siblings with their unhappiness in their families, as opposed to what I saw from what they said, which sounded like their parents expected them to be parents to the younger ones, or didn't have enough money. So, it sounds like generally the people who were unhappy in their large families growing up were not really raised AP, or were poor, not really sibling issues. I have found that very often people will be just as "poor" with only one child as they will be with 4.

I grew up in a family of 4, my mom was a SAHM when we kids were small, then she worked when we went to school, mom was a nurse and dad a cop, we went on many vacations each year (camping in Myrtle Beach, Disney, etc.) and my parents put all of us through 4 years of college each. So, my parents knew how to make money work well (if I could just figure it out







) They also never used my siblings as babysitters and we had 2 bathrooms which was enough. All of my siblings would like to have large families, me included









As with having one child, how easy or hard it will be will depend on so many factors, such as parenting style, personalities, (both parents wanting them-which would be something to consider in the OPs case), money, etc.

Good luck and I hope you and dh are able to decide together what is best for your family


----------



## Irishmommy (Nov 19, 2001)

I only have two permanent kids (plus foster kids), and my bios are 6 years apart. Wouldn't it be okay, though, to have the older/oldest kid babysit for a night out, as long as they were paid? I remember having to turn down paying babysitting jobs as a teenager, 'cos my parents just assumed I'd be available for them unpaid (assumed to the point of abuse if I didn't.).


----------



## Aster (Aug 12, 2002)

Quote:

So, it sounds like generally the people who were unhappy in their large families growing up were not really raised AP, or were poor, not really sibling issues.
I just want to make a quick comment here. My parents did a lot of ap things... My mom breastfed all of us, there was always a baby in the cradle beside her bed and usually a couple of kids crashed out on sleeping bags beside the parent's bed. Babies were almost always held. We usually cooked from scratch, and my mom ground her own wheat for bread for years, we always canned hundreds of jars of food every year too. I changed many a flat fold cloth dipe on my younger sibs (ugh, diaper pins!!). We werent poor all the time, but we werent rich all the time either. I was always told that my education would be paid for, but when i was ready to go to college, circumstances had changed and that wasnt possible, so i have student loans. Probably the only ap-thing my parents didnt do was gentle discipline--they had people in their church telling them that they needed to beat us or that it was okay to hit, or whatever.

There simply was never enough of them to go around for all of us. How could there have been? NINE children is a LOT!!! Two of my younger brothers spent almost a year in juvenile detention facilities and i lay the responsibility for that squarely on my parents shoulders. They didnt spend the time with the kids that the kids needed. They still dont. My dad hasnt even met my son!

Another problem that i have with kids raising kids in big families is that children need to learn from ~adults~ how to become adults. I still feel very responsible for my younger siblings, and i wonder what things i did contribute to their successes or failures as adults. I treated my siblings much differently than i wish i had have. I had a lot of resentment towards them for just being there. Everytime my mom announced that she was pregnant *again*, i just felt crushed because it meant more responsibility for me, and less time/attention/energy from my parents.

Quote:

If I'd been pushy enough about ballet lessons, I would have had them. I was pushy about the violin, and I got to do that too
This 'pushy' thing is very common in big fam's too. The kid who makes the most noise gets the most attention. Quieter kids dont necessarily get their needs met. Or they fall thru the cracks so to speak.

Quote:

One thing I make a point of is to never ask the older kids to babysit. Maybe watch a napping baby while I run to the store, but not babysit while I go out or work or anything like that.
I'm sure that my mom would say the same thing you just said here--she was a sahm. I dont know how often this kind of thing happens in your home, but for me, when i was the oldest kid and was asked to "just watch the baby for a few minutes", i was very resentful towards my mom and towards whichever sib it was i was watching when that few minutes of baby watching meant that i had to give up something that was important to me. I was never given a choice, and was always expected to "do my part as part of the family"

There always was, and still is a great deal of sibling rivalry in my family. It's VERY common for one sibling to pit themselves against another and try to rally support for themselves amongst the parents and the other siblings. It's an ongoing battle for energy. I try to stay out of it. I try never to live in the same city as my family of origin. It's wayy too draining. Would i be saying this if there were fewer of us? Maybe, but i doubt it.

I really liked what the celestine prophecy says about children and their energy needs. It put into words a lot of things that i already believed in before i'd read it. The 8th insight talks about how children need constant unconditional energy and at least one adult committed to focus full attention, all of the time, on each child. This doesnt necessarily have to be a parent, but the parent is responsible for making sure that the energy needs of their children are met. If their energy needs arent met, then there are a series of control drama's that come into play...sibling rivalry being one of them. IMO, it is VERY difficult, if not impossible for a parent of many to ensure that their childrens' energy needs are met.

Quote:

Adults should never take responsibility for more children than they can give attention to.
Any one adult can only focus on and give attention to one child at a time.
If there are too many children for the number of adults, then the adults become overwhelmed and unable to give enough energy.
In this situation, children will begin to compete with each other for the adult's energy and time.
Adults often glamorize the idea of large families and children growing up together, but children should learn the world from adults, not from other children. In too many cultures, children are running in gangs.
We should not bring children into the world unless there is at least one adult committed to focus full attention, all of the time, on each child.
All the energy does not have to come from the parents alone; in fact, it is better if it does not. But whoever cares for the children must provide this one on one attention.
http://homestar.org/bryannan/celistin.html


----------



## summerdgo (Sep 17, 2003)

Let me preface by saying that there is nothing I would ever change about how many kiddos I have, but this is supposed to be the hazards.

*laundry - my household produces 2 loads a day not including diapers
*money - matinee movie tickets for everyone is nearly $50, lunch at a fast food place $30
*vehicles - I traded in my 35mpg sedan for a 20mpg minivan
*food - I had my fullsize freezer stuffed with premade meals for when the baby was born, took one week to EMPTY it
*noise - increases exponentially as each child feels the need to yell louder than the others
*competition - even if there is plenty for everyone, they want to compete over who got the most or who got theirs first or who got the best color etc.
*public opinion - whether or not this matters to you, it can still be incredibly irritating to hear people commenting on your family size, finances, childrens' behavior, genetic makeup (do they all have the same dad?), how full your hands must be, etc.

Each one of my children is a unique and amazing person. They are happy and they do have as many 'things' as they can keep track of. If my husband and I had not married, they would all have only one parent at home and be in daycare after school. This is by far the better alternative for them.


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

I hope no one took offense to my post. It was just an opinion.....

I think definetly how you were raised plays a big part in your decision to have children and how many.

As far as having money for "things", these days the school system doesnt have music, art or dance, programs like these have been cut in most schools, not like when we grew up. I think these are important for any child to have exposure to. I dont view them as luxuries, but essentials to a childs development.

and having one child is NOTHING like having more than 2, or even more than one. Yes, it does turn your world upside down, but its quite different to have multiple children. I think children should be brought in consciously, with all things considered, if thats at all possible. Sometimes it just isnt.

For me, coming from a large family meant not getting the attention I needed, amoung other things. My mother had kids bc she wanted them, she didnt think about raising them in the environment that existed in our house, she wanted to keep the marriage going. Having a father who didnt participate in the family didnt help either.

I think if you have a dh who is as committed to AP parenting as you are and wants alot of kids, you can make anything work.


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Well this thread is sure a downer! I know it was supposed to be the negatives but it seems like everyone blames their family problems on their family size. My family only had two children and sounds exactly like what you are describing in regards to how the kids were treated. I personally want 5-6 children and have no fears about it. No we don't make a lot of money (32000 a year) and our kids wear thrift store clothes ($5 for baby gap and old navy!) but they do not do without. Our son takes Gymboree classes which cost $150 for 12 weeks but we manage. I just personally don't think "things" are that important to a happy unbringing. If my teens are sad that they can't have "things" they can work for those things like everyone else has to do. It is not my job to cater to materialisism. They will have what they need and of course some luxuries besides. But there is no way in hell I'd ever buy a $80 pair of shoes like my inlaws do with my 16 year old SIL. That is just nuts! Anyways I think you should have a large family if that is what you want. Only YOU will determine how your kids can be raised. Take this thread and learn from it, learn about things you SHOULDN'T do with your large family. But other people's bad experiences should not influence your life choices IMHO.


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

we weren't poor. we weren't billionaires, but we weren't hurting for money either, except for a period of 2-3 years when the texas economy went in the shitter.
all i can say is that before adding more kids to the mix, to look long and hard at your existing children's needs and personalities. if you already have one or more children who NEED quiet, who NEED their own space and who NEED your attention to be undivided, it's going to hurt them to have to compete with a number of siblings for limited resources. not just money and the "things" so many are dismissive of, but your time and the available space in the house. the houses we had growing up were fairly large, but with 7 people, at still got cramped.
i was one of those kids who needed a lot of quiet time, and to have my personal space respected and some one on one time with my parents and i did not get those things at home. i voluntarily stayed at school 2-3 hours after everyone else went home, until finally my teacher would tell me she had to go home. that's how desperate i was to have a little peace and quiet.
and i can't tell you how hurt and bitter i was and sometimes still am at how my 2 younger siblings took up all of my mother's time. if she was holding both of them in her arms, where the hell was i supposed to fit in? she only had 2 arms and she was doing the best she could, but she was still only one woman with 2 arms.
and later on, when you have 3-4-5-6 school functions to go to, who will get the pleasure of having mom or dad (never both of course) in the audience, and who will get dropped off at the door and picked up after everyone else has gone home? maybe by homeschooling you can avoid a bit of that, but you're still going to have a large number of people who have different interests and you are going to be the one who decides who gets to pursue those interests and when, and who gets left out. and kids do remember all the slights -- percieved and real -- their parents commit.
there are lots of large happy families, and that's great. i think it's lovely that some women feel called to have big families and that they can fulfill that longing, but the kids may have a different perspective.


----------



## crazy_eights (Nov 22, 2001)

Perhaps some of the negitivity that people feel about large families has to do with the society around them? I live in a community where large families are the norm. Kids with only a few siblings feel deprived. Seriously. You never (ok, I'm sure there are some that do, but it sure isn't the norm) hear a kids say "I'm one of too many", just "I wish my mom would have another". Shoot - even *my* kids are after me to have another one! My neighbor across the street has 10 kids over 18 years. The younger ones are if anything, spoiled rotten from all the attention and "mothering" they get from the older ones, not to mention that the parents seem to enjoy the later ones more b/c they know that they are the last and have a better perspective on child rearing than younger, less experienced parents. Absolutely not neglected.

We aren't wealthy and the kids have to share the bathroom (horrors!) but they aren't any different than any of their friends, so I don't think it has ever occured to them to be upset about it. I work very part-time (2 nights a week) to be able to afford "extras" - sports, lessons, etc.

I am the oldest of 5 myself and dh is the middle of 5 as well. I agree with what people have said about using your kids as babysitters and don't plan on repeating that error. I don't think it is the end of the world to ask your child to watch a sibling for a short period of time *on occassion*, but when the child has no social life (what happend to me in Jr. High and later what happend to my younger sister in high school) b/c they have to babysit while the parents go out - not cool. That would be one of my only "issues" about growing up in a lg. family, but I don't think dh has any issues with it at all! The rest of our "issues" revolve around the choices our parents made in raising us that had nothing to do with family size. You can be a lousy parent with only 1 kids too and that fact seems to be lost in this discussion!

As for bedwetting - since most things I've read seem to see this as a developmental/physical maturity issue, I suspect that the more kids you have the more likely you are to have one that has this problem. I have had only 1 bedwetter - my oldest. And he only had 1 sibling (and then later a 2nd) when it was a problem. Divorce might be more related to sociological factors other than just the # of children as well.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Interesting (and disheartening) idea that how we feel about growing up in a large family is culturally determined. If we are surrounded by large families, we won't focus on our own family's size as a detrimental factor in our upbringing. But if we are surrounded by small families (and small is the norm in most of America), than the largeness of our family will be something we grow up feeling is weird and thus a root of our unhappiness.

My dh grew up in a large family surrounded by large families (Catholic area of rural Michigan; his extended family is HUGE) and he didn't mind at all. It was the norm, and so I guess he didn't focus on it as a negative in his life despite all the stuff described here- one bathroom for 6 people, forced babaysitting. He NEVER complains about this stuff - it was just the way it was - and indeed loved his childhood. Now he does complain bitterly about having to get up at 5am and feed the goats . . .

I guess, based on his experience and my experience reading Little Women and The Five Story Mistake







: , I thought we could replicate his childhood, but since we live admidst one child or widely spaced two child families, perhaps not


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

Quote:

You can be a lousy parent with only 1 kids too and that fact seems to be lost in this discussion!


Definetly.

I think for me, having time for myself is really important, even an hour a day. To recharge, to be able to be present for my child and to be able to parent the way I want/need to. For me, having one is what works for me and the way I parent. AND for the child I have and the mother I am.

Im still astonished that parents can juggle all those kids and have time for themselves, their marriage, friends, outside interests, etc etc.....AND parent in whatever degree of AP parenting they do and do it well. Just like some people are born teachers and have that gift.......its the same with parenting.

I love this quote from the book "WOMENS BODIES,WOMENS WISDOM" by Christiane Northrup:

"the author Lynn Andrews once wrote that there are two kinds of mothers: Earth Mothers and Creative Rainbow Mothers. Earth Mothers nurture their children and feed them, and they thrive on this. Our society rewards this kind of woman as the "good mother". Creative Rainbow Mothers, on the other hand, inspire their children w/o necessarily having meals on the table on time.......I once read the cookbook Laurels Kitchen and fantasized about how wonderful it would be to bake bread daily.......and be "keeper of the keys", and create that ever important nurturing home space. This is not who I am, and to try to be something Im not would ultimately do my children and me a great disservice. I love to be alone...to read...I love quiet and music and writing. My soul is fed by long hours of unbroken creative time. Young children require a much different type of energy-a type of energy I dont have in abundance."

So its such an individual choice to have children, to have more than one or two or three. Its either who we are or not. One is not worse or better than another. ITs just a choice, one that should be made consciously, knowing who we are.... and not trying to be what we arent, as parents and mothers.


----------



## Danesmama (Dec 15, 2001)

Hello all

I just picked up this thread and found it interesting that no one has brought up the point that having a big family contributes to overpopulation. I'm sorry to bring such an un-emotional point on to the table, but it is something that I think about when trying to decide how many children to have myself.

_Please do not take offense at this post! I am not trying to say that having a large family is wrong, I'm just bringing up some issues to think about. And ultimately, what matters the most is that your children are loved and wanted (which obviously is the case







)._

I was not part of a large family (had two siblings - one much older from my Mom's first marriage), so I don't have any input from personal experience. That said, I wonder if you consider that if you have 4 kids, they each get married and have four more, and so on and so on. . . you would be responsible for bringing a lot of people into the world as your progeny multiply (resulting in exponential population growth).

My father-in-law and I discussed the pros and cons of large families in our overpopulated world a while back. He said he didn't mind people (such as americans) having large families because they could provide for their children (feed, clothe and provide good living standards). Although I think that that is important, I also brought up the point that Americans consume a disproportionate amount of the world's resources - probably even the Americans that try to live simply. Therefore having a large american (or western culture) family would put a large strain on the earth's resources.

Like I said, just another point of view.


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

I was trying to bring up that point, when I mentioned the environment in my first post......meaning the impact on the environment......


----------



## somemama (Sep 25, 2002)

I was happy growing up in a large family (one of six kids), BUT I can see in retrospect that it was incredibly draining on my mom. She would come down with horrendous migranes, and that would be the ONLY time she took a break. It was almost as if her body NEEDED a migrane, kwim?


----------



## Aster (Aug 12, 2002)

mamajulie~that's interesting, my mom gets horrible migraines too. DH is 5th of 7 kids and his mom gets aweful migraines too.


----------



## Laurel (Jan 30, 2002)

I wonder too about the impact of the societal environment you're in. I'm Mormon, and growing up most of the kids I knew through church came from large families. LDS families are have shrunk somewhat nowadays, but I'd say it's still unusual to end up with less than four children. Both dh and I come from families of 5 siblings, and to me that's what constitutes an average, middle-sized family. 7 or more is large, and less than 4 is small to me. When I was 10 and my mother was in the hospital having her 5th baby, a girl at school commented to me that "you must be Mormon or Catholic". I had no idea what she was talking about! I had no idea that having five children was anything unusual.

I've been really surprised to hear of people's negative experiences in large families. Not so much that there were negative things, but the depth of the resentment that is there. I am the oldest. I did my share of babysitting, and there were times when I would have rather not, but looking back I feel my parents were very reasonable about it. My parents always worked hard to make sure that no child was neglected and that each child's gifts and talents were recognized and nurtured. My dad didn't make a lot of money, and my parents were burdened by huge medical bills most of the time, but we always got to participate in activities that related to our interests. My brothers played soccer, baseball, football, ran track, and wrestled, both through the schools and on community teams. I took piano lessons and participated in high school music and drama. My brothers also took piano or played in the band. We weren't lacking for extracurricular activities.

My parents helped each one of us through college. We still had to apply for scholarships and get summer jobs, but they did pay quite a bit for each of us. I don't know how they did it, aside from knowing that they started investing money when we were younger to help prepare for the future.

Our house was too small. Since I was the only girl, I always had my own bedroom, and for some time, all four of my brothers shared one room. We did have a lot of land, though--2 1/2 acres to play on. When we were younger, we complained about having to work in the garden and eat made-from-scratch food, but now I have a strong desire to recreate that part of my childhood for my kids. My dad was legally blind, and so from the time I was 10 years old until I learned to drive, my mom was also the sole driver in our family.

My parents had a very happy marriage (my mom was widowed a few years ago.) My mom started working part time when I was in junior high, so I'm sure that helped out with finances too as we were all heading into the teenage years.

As adults, my brothers and I are quite close. We have annoyances and quarrels sometimes, but most of those seem to have more to do with the sils than with my brothers. I do think that some comparing went on between my brothers, but I was out of that because I was the oldest and a different gender. I do have one brother that doesn't seem to fit in as well as everyone else--he has always been different from the time he was very small, and perhaps he may have a different perspective on being the middle child and one of four boys. But I think that some of what he's struggled with would have been the same if he'd had only 1 or 2 siblings.

I really feel like the parents are the determining factor in the success of a large family. I do agree that some parents are not cut out for it and need to recognize that before proceeding. There are other factors that play into it too, like having a particular child that presents extra challenges. I do have a friend who comes from a family of 10 kids who has talked about older siblings who had serious drug and other problems, and how her parents' focus on them impacted her. But I have seen the same effect in smaller families too.

My family will probably be smaller because of our infertility problems, but even then, small to me means that I will still do all I can to have at least 3-4 children because it's hard for me to picture life with anything less than that.


----------



## Marsupialmom (Sep 28, 2003)

I don't care if you have 1 or 6 kids if you do not say thank you, show your appriciation, and allow them to be themselves you are going to have resentment.

There was only three of us growing up. My sister resents having to take care of us younger two because she never got a thank you, money, or do do her "things". She got in trouble when we did not do our work or did it poorly.

If you have to use the older as a baby sitter, make sure if there are chores to be done the "doer" is responcible for them not an older sibling.

Don't ask the older child why she did not make sure JR. had his what ever done and done right. Ask Jr why he did not do his part and do his responciblity.

Many of these more children problems can and do happen in smaller families. Learn and listen to them and learn to find compromises and teach each other respect.


----------



## Danesmama (Dec 15, 2001)

Rainsmom - I'm sorry that I missed your point in the first post. I honestly tried to read the entire discussion before I put in my post, but I have to admit I missed some parts. I stand corrected.

Sorry again!

I'm still surprised that environmental considerations are not a more prevalent part of the discussion.


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

Well, according to the Celestine Prophecy, I guess I'm f*cked.

I have been finding myself in a very weird (and not-nice) position since the boys' birth. On the one hand, I never planned more than 2. In fact, I spent the vast majority of the first 8 weeks with 'buyer's regret', after I found out I was pregnant. Finding out there were twins was not happy or exciting. Then when I was starting to get used to the idea, they were in a fight for their lives, so I didn't have time to sit around and navel-gaze about it.

All our children WERE consciously planned--but one fertilized egg decided to split into two. I came to the conclusion that it is not only the spirit of the parents that has a say so, but also the little ones who choose to use us as their stepping-stones towards their own manifestation.

It IS hard to devote yourself to more than one person at a time. But I was doing that already with my beloved and my daughter. And cherished friends. My kids have a SAHD AND a SAHM, as well as a network of family and friends to cherish them. They may not have one-on-one attention at all times, but they will learn about the world from many people: us, other adults in their lives, their siblings, their friends, and not the least themselves.

I am not always able to graciously bear this blessing that has been laid at my feet, but I would defend my share of it to the death.


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Aster_
*mamajulie~that's interesting, my mom gets horrible migraines too. DH is 5th of 7 kids and his mom gets aweful migraines too.*
It kind of makes sense, but not so much because they had so many kids; tons of migraines are, for many women, a sign of fertility. My grandmother had them, and she only had two children, 7 years apart. (She was very conscious of her body, and decided she didn't want any more children than that.)My mother had 5 children, and she also had them. And I got them too, before and during my pregnancy with ds. Since I've been nursing, I've only had 2 or 3, which lends creedence to the hormonal theory. That, and the fact that all three of us would get them at the same points in our cycles.


----------



## Rollermommy (Jul 1, 2002)

As the OP, i would like to pipe in here and say something. I think the problems you guys have mentioned dont neccesarrily have to do with the # of siblings you had. I have only 1 sister and my mom was a single parent most of our growing up, and we experienced those same issues. My sister was expected to babysit A LOT because my mom worked 2 or 3 jobs at a time. My sister was very resentful and hated me for it. We were poor and lived in tiny places(1 bedroom apt.) which seemed very overcrowed even with just the 3 of us. I played soccer in 3rd grade and basketball in 4th, my mom never came to 1 of my games because she was working, and those are the only ex-cir. activities i ever did....my sis, never did any other activities. I begged for dance lessons, to be a cheerleader, blah, blah...but couldnt because we just didnt have the money. We went on 2 vacations my whole life. My sister and i were constantly being labeled and compared and competed for my mom's attention. But you know what I could sit and name a thousand other things that went on in my childhood that sucked, and they didnt have anything to do with siblings. It was the way my mother chose to handle the circumstances. No it was not ideal, but my mom did the best she could with no help from my father and with nothing but an 8th grade education. I have spent so much time working towards seeing my childhood as a gift, as a learning experience, and there is soooo much there to learn from. I would not be as stong, or as compassionate, or flexible, or patient, or understanding, nor as hardcore AP, had it not been for the "gift" of my childhood,and I'mtruly grateful for it.


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

I'm getting the impression that the moms who are set on having a large family do not like hearing how kids resent having lots of siblings and don't always enjoy being in a large family. No matter what points we've brought up about how uncomfortable we were in our large families, they've been dismissed as "that could happen in a small family, too."
There's good and bad about small and large families. Any mom could look at this thread and see some things to avoid with her children , whether she has 2 or 10. I can't speak for all the other people who told tales of woe that stem from large families, but this thread asked for pitfalls, and I shared the things I hated most about being in a large family. We'll never know if my childhood would have sucked as much as it did if my parents had stopped with 2 children. But I know I would have been better off in a single-child or 2-child family. That's what would have been best for me. I sincerely hope that those of you who love the idea of large families don't have a child who feels as I do. I hope all of your kids enjoy the raucousness of constantly being in big group, because your lives will be better for it. But please stop dismissing the points we've brought up as parenting style problems and saying they are totally unrelated to the number of children in a family. If we perceive the number of siblings we have as being detrimental to our well-being, then IT WAS. Another family of 5-6-7-8 children can and will experience it differently, but we are telling you as honestly as we can what we did not like about being part of a large family. It's possible that some of the children of MDC mommas who want large families may also have some of these feelings, so how about you just listen to what we've said and try like hell not to do what our parents did to us?


----------



## Peppermint (Feb 12, 2003)

Elphaba

Sorry your opinion was asked for and then dismissed by some of us, me included.

I think some valid points have been made about large families, from both sides.

I understand concerns about special needs children, one of my dearest friends was one of 2 children, his younger brother was deaf and had numerous other medical problems, I think that is why his very Catholic parents stopped at 2 kids, but that didn't make my friend's life any easier really, all the attention had to be focused on his brother, there was nothing left even for him, but he is not resentful of it, and loves his brother, he looks at his parents with admiration, and is thankful for the family he grew up in.

I also understand that some children may prefer quiet and always feel overwhelmed in a large family, so I am hearing you on that.

I do think though, that people are well off to look at people who were happy *and* upset with their large families growing up, so far in this thread the examples I have seen, outside of the ones I brought up above, seem to have more to do with parenting style IMO. I do not think only the person who grew up unhappy in their family can correctly determine what the "exact" problem was. You may feel it was the family size, while one of your sibs might think something else (lack of money, parenting style) was the problem, so opinions can vary even within the same family.

I will always be thinking of the children I have and their happiness before having more children, but I also hope that between our parenting style and a great effort to raise children who are able to deal well with people, and be thankful for what they have, etc. that we can make one of the "happy" large families.

Let face it too, you will find people who never went to any extra-curricular activities b/c of lack of money- some will be resentful of that, and others will not. Some will resent having had to babysit and some will not, on and on. Is it personality that determines how they react to this, or is it how they are raised? I do not know.

My grandmother and her family are a great example to me, she was one of 13 ,the second oldest- she had to quit school at 8th grade to get a job to support the other kids, her older sister, also quit school to help raise the other kids, as adults the older sister was loving, caring, giving, not a bit resentful, and my gram? the opposite, she was selfish and resentful, even when she died at 93. They were raised by the same parents, but they turned out so differently. The unfortunate thing was that my Gram allowed her resentment to become a part of who she was. Should her parents have stopped at 2 kids, cause then *maybe* my Gram wouldn't have turned out selfish? I don't think so, I venture a guess that she was simply a selfish person, and could've worked in her life to overcome that, and chose not to, sad IMO. Not sure what my point is, so I'll stop there. Oh, I know- my Aunt (the oldest) was the sweetest, gentlest lady ever, she introduced me to a very AP way of raising children, she told me to "always rock my children to sleep, that I would never regret it, like I would if they CIO", she had CIO with her first 2 children (cause everyone told her to) and with her 3rd, she rocked him to sleep- and he treated her the best in adulthood







She was a great example to me.

One more note on why the environmental impact hasn't been brought up more- for those wondering about that- search for a thread a while back called "Family Size and the Ecological Footprint", this argument has been had, and no mind were changed in the end, at least from what I got from it, the thread is long, but worth reading IMO.

I think the OP was asking what was so bad in large families, but just has yet to hear anything that convinced her yet that number of children was the true factor in what caused strife in the families mentioned. I have heard things ,like the free babysitting, expecting the "quiet children" don't need the attention, etc, and doubt those things ever would've happened here anyway, but it was good to have them brought to the forefront of my mind so I am sure they won't happen here. I think that while this thread may not convince people not to have large families, it can tell them what some of the pitfalls are to avoid.


----------



## Rollermommy (Jul 1, 2002)

I'm sorry, i wasnt trying to invalidate anyones feelings. But I think that the horrible things you guys mentioned could be avoided if one intended to do so. I guess i was more looking for things that couldnt be avoided, like one post mentioned laundry and high food bills, things like that i've never really given much thought too.
Sorry, i wasnt trying to pick a fight, this thread was just going a lot different than i imagined.


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

Quote:

Rainsmom - I'm sorry that I missed your point in the first post. I honestly tried to read the entire discussion before I put in my post, but I have to admit I missed some parts. I stand corrected.

No problem Danesmama! I mentioned it, but YOU gave some good points!!

I will look for that thread on the ecological footprint.

I think this thread has been really enlightening and everyone has been respectful all in all. I think when you have your mind made up one way, its hard to hear other views on the subject with any objectivity.

One thing I wanted to add about having multiple siblings......in my family we were all SOOO different and all headstrong and stubborn. We all fought like cats and dogs, no, worse. Even as adults, though we are close, we still tolerate eachother for so long before something sets someone off. My mom doesnt get it cos she has one sister and one brother who was born after she was married and out of the house. I know others who had siblings that were so different from them and were constantly told to get along, etc as adults and they just cant. In our house that was all 5 of us. So it was much more than being used as houseslaves and live-in babysitters, not having enough money and living in chaos.

I just think there is alot more to consider than just the desire to have children.


----------



## Aster (Aug 12, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by gaiamom_
*I'm sorry, i wasnt trying to invalidate anyones feelings. But I think that the horrible things you guys mentioned could be avoided if one intended to do so.*
Could you please reread my post about the energy needs of children and explain to me how a parent of nine children could possibly ever be capable of meeting the energy needs of each and every child? I really dont see how it's humanly possible unless there is a *very* involved network of extended family and friends. In our society, that kind of support network is pretty much unheard of.

I'd like to thank the OP for the opportunity to be able to talk about some of the "hazards of having too many kids". There are so many threads on the board lauding big families, and i've never felt welcome to express my views on those threads. I think it's important to examine the 'dark side' of big families so that those who are planning to have lots of kids, or who already do can really try to make it better for their kids.

I'd also like to point out that although my childhood would have been much 'better' for me without as many siblings, that i love all of my bro's and sis's and cant imagine a world without them (wellll...maybe without one sib who shall remain un-named







). I am not resentful or bitter about my childhood, and i learned a lot of things from that experience the hard way. I am who i am in spite of that experience, not because of it.


----------



## momatheart23 (May 25, 2002)

I think ultimately the decision comes down to that parents emotional, financial, and energy reserves. It takes looking at if you can truly meet your children's needs in all areas, and I think it is important to have both parents on board in that arena because it takes alot of effort. My DH and I originally planned 4 kids each around 2-3 years apart, but after this second pregnancy I told him I didn't have it in me. I couldn't parent the way I want to with that number. I would feel too taxed and not be able to give to all my children what I want to. We have revised our plan to have these two which are going to be 2 1/4 years apart and then wait about 5 years and have 2 more a couple years apart. I feel now that we could handle that and that all my children will get their needs met. I knew if I was pregnant again in a couple years I would probably end up in a looney bin. My mother had 2 kids 2.5 years apart and my brother her youngest was 5 when she found out she was pregnant again. She also knew that she was going to be divorcing my father and felt that she did not have it in her to have another as a single mother. She had no idea how she was going to take care of the two children she had and felt she would be shortchanging us to bring another baby into the world. She chose an abortion,( I am not starting a debate about that) because she knew her limits. I respect her decision for that. I do admit even in a two child family I was the babysitter, which caused resentment towards my brother and I moved out young so I do agree that can happen in small families too. But as I have gotten older I have realized my mom always did the best she could and I am close to my brother now. I think she made the best decision she could because another baby would have definitely been more than she could have handled. So for me it is taking a really true honest look at what that "limit" is for each family and it is different for each family.


----------



## IslandMamma (Jun 12, 2003)

Here's a link to the thread that I started about family size and the ecological footprint.... warning: it's looong, and became quite involved. But IMO it's a very important issue.

http://mothering.com/discussions/sho...ical+footprint

HTH!


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

Thanks Islandmamma!


----------



## Lucysmama (Apr 29, 2003)

I came from a very large (blended) family...I have 5 brothers and 1 sister. I love having so many siblings.
Yes, I babysat my younger sibs. I changed thousands of diapers. My mom was a WAHM daycare provider, so i was helping to raise other people's kids, too - not just sibs. I also did my fair share of cleaning, dishes, pet care, etc....

But my parents made it clear to everyone that we were all helping each other out. Everyone had chores, everyone took care of each other. I remember being a sick when I was about 12 and my two little brothers, age 2 and 6, took care of me all day - bringing me juice and making me soup - this is how we took care of each other.

Life WAS chaotic. The house WAS messy. Sometimes everyone DIDN'T get all the parental attention that was needed. But my family was fun. My brothers and I are close, my dad was always silly and fun-loving, and I grew up having someone to always play with, to love and be loved by, to share friends with, etc.

DH and I are only going to have 2 bio-kids.(We may foster or adopt,though. ) Although I enjoyed having so many siblings, I feel I have spent a large part of my life raising children..and I am only in my twenties. Thus, I only want 2-3 kids now as an adult.

Bottom line: large families can be great. People take care of each other. Older kids, younger kids: everyone can nurture everyone...just depends on the family, I guess.


----------



## Rollermommy (Jul 1, 2002)

""Could you please reread my post about the energy needs of children and explain to me how a parent of nine children could possibly ever be capable of meeting the energy needs of each and every child? I really dont see how it's humanly possible unless there is a *very* involved network of extended family and friends. In our society, that kind of support network is pretty much unheard of.""

I do agree that it does seem quite impossible to meet the needs of 9 children and i imagine it must have been quite a struggle for you and your parents. And although i LOVED the celestine prophecy and all its wonderful inspiration, that doesnt mean its "gospel" so to speak. Maybe i just have a lot of energy, or I'm just glutton for punishment, but i really think i could meet the needs of 4 children. I adore my 3 kids and do my best to give them every part of me every day. Some times its frustrating, sometimes i want to pull my hair out, but mostly i feel so blessed for the opportunity to be with them. Thank you all for your wonderful comments, and your gripes







Im thankful that i got to hear the down side and from a siblings point of view. Those are things i'll definantly keep in mind and hopefully dont make the same mistakes with my own. Blessings to all your families...big and small.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I've been offline a couple of days and I just wanted to say thanks to all of you for keeping this discussion so polite and civil and, best of all, informative!!









MDC mamas rock!


----------



## TranscendentalMom (Jun 28, 2002)

I have a little bit of a problem with how some of people's points have been dismissed as well.

It is a fact that there is less attention to go around the more kids there are. I don't even see how this is debatable. Yes, parenting style can affect this somewhat but it doesn't change the reality that children absorb a lot of attention and no matter how AP you are for every new one there is less for the older ones.

I also find it interesting that no one else has followed up on the comment about overpopulation.

We have one child and are contemplating one more...and the decision absolutely comes down to how it will affect my son. I feel a huge repsonsibility that we give him the proper amount of attention and that we have enough resources to have a comfortable life. I want to have another baby but as of right now my number one obligation is to the child I've already created.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by TranscendentalMom_
*I also find it interesting that no one else has followed up on the comment about overpopulation.*
Probably because there was a huge thread on this recently, which Islandmama gave a link to above.


----------



## Kanga Mom (Jun 9, 2002)

Some of ours are adopted, some aren't. When I was pregnant with our seventh child, one of the older children said that she hoped this wasn't going to be our last baby because she wanted a really *large* family. I told her most people thought we were a large family. She said she didn't think so.

They've been asked before, in quite negative tones, "Don't you hate being part of a large family? Don't you think you never get time alone? Don't you find your siblings annoying? Bet you can't wait to get away..."

Having looked over this thread, they said that none of the negatives really describe their experience. They say the biggest negative they have is the reactions and assumptions of other people.

In fact, our eldest two are 20 and 18, and they are still here, by choice, while they creatively pursue their longterm educational goals (college for one, a horsetraining career for the other). They don't have to be here. We had a couple 'friends' and acquaintances who were just sure they must really hate being part of a large family, who offered to let my girls live with them for free when we moved recently, so they wouldn't have to. They _chose_ not to.

We have always managed on one income, and until recently, we always had more than one bathroom. Dh just had retired, and had a major car accident while moving here, permanently disabling his left arm. So our plans are altered a bit, and we are temporarily living in a much smaller house than we planned, with only one bath. We do make arrangements for everybody to have their own private space and time, even though they can't have their own bedrooms.

I think that if this is what you want to do, you should go ahead and do it, ignoring the naysayers who want to tell others what's best for _your_ family.

There are things we do, on purpose, to make it work. We have a quiet time every day to keep the noise down and give people their own space and rest. Everybody picks a room to be alone in, and selects something quiet to do- younger children do things like paper dolls, coloring, puzzles, playing with the dollhouse, or nappping. The older children usually choose crafts or writing letters or reading.

We mostly brush our teeth in the kitchen or the laundry room, so that we do offer as much bathroom privacy as possible. Before somebody gets in the shower, we ask if anybody has to use the bathroom- that way the mad dashes to the toilet while somebody is showering are cut way, way, way down. They are, in fact, all but eliminated. The reason they aren't eliminated completely is mainly when somebody gets in the shower before everybody's up. When I wake up, I gotta go.=)
It's really been very easy to learn to do that simple thing- just ask, before you get in the shower, for everybody who needs to go, to use the toilet first, before you get in the shower. Not rocket science at all.

We don't eat out much, but we don't miss it.

Movies are expensive, so we mostly rent a video, have popcorn and soda and call it a popcorn party.
We have family game nights.
We read books aloud together and have poetry recitations.
We have silly dress up tea parties, all of us, including Dad getting into it.
We have our own kickball team, and we play with friends.
We sing together.

We buy a family pass to a different place each year, and we use that several times through out the year. We have done the Art Museum, the Children's Museum, the Zoo, a local Aquarium, etc.
We are able to attend concerts by watching the papers and finding local college productions, same with plays.

We were able to provide piano lessons for four of the children (a fifth is profoundly disabled, the other two were two young) for several years. We worked out riding lessons for two who were interested by exchanging stall shoveling for lessons.
We found nice ladies to teach the ones who were interested things like crochet and sewing.
Those who were interested have also been able to help out with some carpentry projects.
For one who wanted more drawing instruction, we bought a video program and that's worked very well for her.

We cook from scratch, including baking our own bread, we bake once a week, making a large batch of bread- six loaves and a couple pans of rolls from the same recipe.
We don't eat packaged cereal. We eat oatmeal, home made granola, our own eggs when we had chickens, and fruit.

Sometimes we have candlelit dinners at home with a cloth tablecloth and good china. Sometimes we eat on the living room floor on a tablecloth.

We do generate a lot of laundry, but we also learned that clothes do not need to be changed every day; that aprons were meant to be worn; that it's a good idea to set aside one outfit for really dirty work and play and just wear it all the tiem for _that_ activity.

We also bought a front loading washer- makes it possible to do huge loads with very little water use.

WE buy our clothes from thrift shops. My teens do not care about being cool, about fitting in with the crowd, about having what's in. I think that's because we homeschool. They set their own standards based on what they like, not based on what others think.
If your children are in public school, I do think it will be different, and should be to some degree.

We do have to drive a larger vehicle. Ugh.

I think it would be very hard if they were in public school- too many different things to keep track of.

In fact, we have some very good friends who have 8 children, and they are coming to visit us in three weeks, in our 1200 square foot, one bathroom house. My kids are all looking forward to it, I can hear a couple of them now chanting "three weeks, three weeks, our friends are ocming in three weeks, and I can hardly wait..."

Kanga


----------



## Lucysmama (Apr 29, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by TranscendentalMom_
*

It is a fact that there is less attention to go around the more kids there are. I don't even see how this is debatable.*
While I do agree with you that parental involvement is of utmost importance, see my post for examples of how the family takes care of each other. Even the smallest children can care for others... of course, it's no "substitute" for Mommy or Daddy, but nurturing comes from many places...and children thrive on it, even if it is from a sibling sometimes.

For example, have you ever looked after an elderly friend or neighbor? It's not your profoud *responsiblity*, but you are helping to nurture someone you love and care about. In my experience, the same is true in families with a lot of kids. (We have 7 in my family.) People take care of each other. Children grow up learning that it isn't just moms and dad who take care of children, and lavish attention on them. It's everyone taking care of each other....It's not a 7 year old's *responsiblity* to read to her 3 year old little brother, but she loves him and nurtures him just the same.

This is what I think is beautiful about family love. And the more people there are, the more love there is. That's more nurturing and caring, not less.


----------



## Kanga Mom (Jun 9, 2002)

As for invalidating feelings- Your feelings are _your_ feelings. You own them. You create them, just as I create mine. I can not invalidate them, as I have no authority and no ownership toward them. Feelings come up, you choose to nurture them, to alter them, to recognize them as valid or invalid yourself- that's the job of a mature person. Especially because we are total strangers, neither of us can truly invalidate the feelings of the other.

A lot of the complaints I have read about are _valid_ complaints- they are bad. I know how they hurt because they were also _my_ childhood complaints; not enough time from parents, too much responsibility for younger siblings, no outside lessons when I wanted them, too much noise, not enough 'cool' stuff. I had only two siblings, and they are 3 and 6 years younger than me.

That's why I think these are parenting issues rather than family size issues.

Regarding the time spent with the children-
I do not agree that special, quality time spent with any child suddenly is reduced in value because another child is added, and not even when another four or five children are added. Love is mulitiplied, not divided in a happy family.

When we are together and the younger child does something silly or says something cute, that experience is enhanced by sharing it with somebody- and my older children get a bigger kick out of their younger sib's antics than I do.
When one of the children is sad because a pet has died, they share that mourning with their siblings. This helps, it doesn't hinder.

When our family is reading a book aloud together and one child asks a question, all of us are enriched by hearing the answer and by the family discussion that ensues.
When we are working together on a project, the family togetherness, the unity, the sense of accomlplishment, the pride, the joy of that task are enhanced, not diminished, because more than two of us worked on it.

I do not think I could manage as well if my children went to public or private school. I would feel too fragmented. Homeschooling works very well for us. Because of that, I bet I spend more time with each of my seven children than most parents whose two kids are in public school, just because we have more time at our disposal to spread around. It's a simple math problem, really. If my kids are home 24 and 7, versus at school 40 hours or more per week, then obviously, I've got all those extra hours to work with, plus I have the time normally spent wildly rushing to get school clothes and lunches ready.

There are things we do to ensure that each child gets some alone time with Mom and Dad each day, because we do think that's important, too- but we don't count time with several children and one parent as negligible, or substandard, either. It's _also_ a great and good thing, and sometimes it's even a better thing.
I do not agree that children's needs in a large family cannot possibly be met as well as in a small family. That may be because we have different ideas about what needs are.
I think there are advantages to being an only child or one of two siblings that I can't duplicate for my seven. But I also think there are advantages to being part of a large family that a smaller family will not be able to duplicate.
There are some disadvantages to both, too- neither is going to be without drawbacks.

While on the subject, the one thing I really think is worse with a large family is the flu. Ugh. We work very hard at keeping healthy because of this, so maybe it's an advantage in a twisted sort of way. But the flu with a family of nine is completely nasty. The only advantage might be the war stories you all get to tell later. HA!

------------------------

REgarding overpopulation- I have discussed this before. I didn't this time because I'm not sure I can do it nicely. In fact, I don't think I did, so I'm editing this as best I can.

It's hard because I do, forgive me, grow a bit tired of total strangers asking me to defend my parenting and reproductive choices. I've had people ask me in the grocery store what I think about overpopulation.

I would like to ask a question of my own. Can somebody please explain to me why anybody who thinks that overpopulation is a problem would birth even a single child? Can somebody tell me why it isn't hypocritical to birth a child while believing that overpopulation is a serious problem? I often ponder these things.

See, if I believed in overpopulation, I would stand by my beliefs and I would not birth a child. I would adopt. If I believed in overpopulation, I would recognize that it was a violation of that belief to have any child at all that I added to the world's population.

And here is what I have said before on this topic:

I believe humans are a natural part of the earth with just as much right to be here and reproduce as any other organism.
Unlike other organisms, human beings also *create* resources and develop creative ways of managing resources. Yes, we mess up. But we try to fix it.

I also believe that a good many of the ideas about overpopulation are simply myths, based on the errors of Dr. Paul Erhlich, author of Population Bomb (who got his ideas from Thomas Malthus, a British economist in the 1700's ).
Erhlich, like Malthus before him, has been wrong about just about everything, but for some reason this doesn't seem as good for front page news as his gloomy mis-predictions about scarcity of resources and overpopulation.

Julian Simon, an American Economist, thought Erhlich was wrong. He didn't get much attention, and most of what he got was negative. So he made Ehrlich a bet. He suggested that Ehrlich choose *any* five commodities he wished, and Simon would buy him 1,000 dollars of shares in those chosen five. If Erhlich was right, in ten years the commodities would have risen in price because if he was accurately depicting and predicting conditions, the commodities would be scarce, having been used up by the overpopulated world. In that case, Simon would be wrong and as the loser of the bet he would buy back those commodities at the higher price.

If, on the other hand, prices had fallen in Ehrlich's hand picked commodities, this would indicate they were not more scarce, as Ehrlich predicted, and that Simon was right. In that case, Ehrlich would pay Simon the difference.

Professor Ehrlich apparently agreed that this was a fair test, because he certainly jumped at it, claiming he was going to "accept the offer before other greedy people jumped in." Professor Ehrlich hand-picked five commodities which he believed would become scarcer and scarcer as population continued to explode. He confidantly expected to win that bet.

At the end of the ten year period, Ehrlich quietly mailed Simon the money. He was wrong and Simon was right. Simon offered another bet, raising the ante and still allowing Ehrlich to choose any resources he preferred. Although Ehrlich was still getting publicity for his doomsday predictions, and continuted making them, and waswilling enough to have you believe them- he was strangely unwilling to put his money where his mouth is. He did not accept the bet, although Simon never withdrew his offer.

REading Ehrlich's book is also a look into his motivations. He got his ideas about the world being overpopulated on a visit to India- and he very much gives an 'us' versus 'them' feel in his account. He didn't like being so crowded by the Indians. He predicted a lot of very bad things that were going to happen in India because of all those surplus people.

Again, in just about every instance he has ever predicted anything, he was wrong.

According to the Food and Agriculture, the Third World now consumes 27 percent more calories per person per day than it did in 1963, I believe when Ehrlich first published his gloom and doom scenario. India is now exporting food, and deaths from famine, starvation, and malnutrition are fewer than ever before.

Where famine, starvation and malnutrition do exist, it is _entirely_ due to oppressive governments and wars. I find that appalling, far more appalling than families than more than the politically correct number of children.

I strongly suggest reading:
http://www.sepp.org/controv/ehrlich.html

http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publicati...1995/exploding/

http://www.trufax.org/reports/pop.html

Even though I do not believe in overpopulation, I do believe in protecting the environment- our family practices a simple, non materialistic, no consumeristic lifestyle. We compost, we reuse, we do things like buy fifty pounds of grain in a paper bag which is reused for wrapping paper, packing secondhand books to mail, and mulch in the garden, rather than cardboard boxes of cereal with colored ink and wax paper inside, and when my children grow up, then what?

Then you have those multiple children spreading their frugal, non materialistic habits, non consumerism mindset (unless it's Lord of the Rings consumerism) into other families, influencing the behavior of others. You alter the population base as you create a larger base of potential customers who simply will not buy products based on what's cool, will not pay extra for packaging, will not buy into fads, buy all used clothes and probably will dress their babies in the used clothing that I bought at yard sales for them (several of my babies wore outfits my mother orginally made or purchased for me), and insist on responsible business practices, refusing to participate in the gimme culture of more new stuff and self-improvement through purchased gimmicks and accessories (unless, sigh, it's Lord of the Rings gimmicks).

I believe deeply in freedom and personal responsibility. I believe that my family size and anybody else's is an intensely personal decision.

Unfortunately, the logical conclusion to a belief in human over-population is coercion. I know there are many good, good zero population growth people who are appalled at the thought of forced sterilization- but that is, unfortunately, precisely where the myths of overpopulation will lead us. It's happened before. It's happening now in some countries.

The subject of overpopulation makes me itchy for another reason, which I touched on above. I am sure you have no idea how often those of us with larger families get subjected to incredibly rude, personal, obnoxious remarks from total strangers, family members, mere acquaintances, and clerks at the grocery store. I am sure you don't know because I am sure you wouldn't be one of these people. 
I've actually had my children ask me, based on these encounters, why people don't like children.

Many people who question my family size own newer cars and more of them than we do. Many people who question my family size buy lots more new stuff with all its packaging and glitz than we do. While I believe that human habitat is just as legitimate a habitat as a beaver dam, we have gone without a car for months at a time. And while most of the time we have had a car, it really has been _a_ car. We have had two vehicles for only about seven years (and not consecutive years, either) out of 21 years of marriage.

Even when we have had two vehicles, we have walked as a family when it was possible. it's kind of funny- a car is somehow a given, but children are not. We would walk one mile to church, and everybody assumed our car was broken. People stared at us, and many kind souls would offer rides and look at us oddly when we said we were walking because we wanted to.

Nobody has *ever* questioned us on why we have two vehicles, and few people would challenge us for driving one mile to church- when most of the world rides a bike or walks- but total strangers do feel perfectly comfortable walking up to me and making rude remarks about family size ( in front of my children, too).
There is something remarkably inconsistant in this and it frequently puzzles my poor linear mind.

I think it is important to evaluate your efforts to live out your beliefs. The emphasis there is on evaluating *our* own efforts rather than raising eyebrows at somebody else's- because we don't know what else they are doing.

If you met me in person, I would not, for example, tell you that any of our children are adopted. That information is private and it's up to my children who they want to know that. It isn't obvious from looking at us that all of our clothes come from thrift shops and yard sales- only socks and undies are purchased new. It's not obvious from our house furnishings that every single thing was purchased used (some things are real obvious, some less so).
And it's certainly not obvious to the casual observer that I picked up our last set of cloth diapers used at a yard sale, and now that the boy is toilet trained, I recycle them as pads for me.<g>

What is obvious is that I have a large family, and people often choose to jump on that, without knowing anything else. My large family is totally consistent with my beliefs about population, the envirornment, the value of family, everything I believe in and hold most dearly, in fact, is compatible with my family size.

IN summary, the answer to 'what about overpopulation?' for me is, "I did the math, and I don't believe it."

Blessings, and I do hope I've edited out anything that was 'touchy.' It wasn't my intention, believe me, to be offensive.

Kanga


----------



## Rollermommy (Jul 1, 2002)

I am so touched and inspired by your posts that i could almost cry. Can i come live next door to you


----------



## EFmom (Mar 16, 2002)

I grew up in a family of six children and my dh came from a family of five. In a word, it sucked, for all the reasons others have stated. Two parents simply cannot provide adequate attention to that many children. I love my parents and I know they did the best they could, but I do not get warm fuzzies thinking about my childhood. I had a SAHM, but I got far, far, far less of her attention than my kids get and I work out of the home. My father was so busy earning a living that I don't feel like I ever had much of a relationship with him.

ITA with Elphaba that the people who are fixed on having big families are very quick to discount anything said against the practice.

There is nothing "cultural" about hating having grown up in such a zoo. I come from a predominently Irish Catholic area, and every single one of my friends also came from enormous families. It was the norm. That doesn't mean it didn't suck, it was just common.

As for overpopulation, it just astounds me that people can pretend that it is not a serious issue.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Thank you Kanga, and others, who posted so eloquently on life with a large family.

I'd like to remind everyone here to please keep your tone respectful of the many types of families that constitute the members of MDC. If you don't want to be slammed for being less-than-environmentally friendly in your choice of diapers, cars, house size, and shopping habits, then please don't pick on members with large families. I'd rather this thread didn't degenerate into a flame war.

There are many, many ways that we each contribute to the overpopulation problem (and the subsequent lack of resources). This was hashed out pretty nicely in the thread "Family Size and the Ecological Footprint", which has recently been bumped, and to which a link has been posted in this thread.


----------



## normajean (Oct 21, 2003)

Thanks for your thoughts Kanga mom. You brought up some very interesting points that I hadn't considered!


----------



## Peppermint (Feb 12, 2003)

I agree, again, that those who want to discuss overpopulation, can see the other thread









I was thinking about the people who grew up in large families, who were/are not happy with how things were growing up, who have posted on this thread, and how they feel ignored. I am sorry that they don't feel they are being taken seriously.

I chock it up to human nature, we get our mids set on something, and if we are "glass half full" people, we figure that we can make it work despite the bad things we have heard (and we minimize them). It reminds me of the threads where people have discussed only having one child, and how so many people tell them that their child will be lonely, will long for a sibling, etc. When people who grew up without sibs say it sucked and they longed for a sibling, they are glossed over, only to listen to those who loved being an only child. ( It is human to only hear what we want to, and that includes me







) How they think it is rude when people feel free to comment on their choice to only have one child.

I think that people (strangers in particular) should stop worrying so much about other people's families, and focus on more important things. I do not think anyone has the right to comment on an individual family's size.

I do think it is good to take all the positives and negatives into consideration, and to remember when asked (like in a thread like this) you opinion, that your opinion is just that, there are no absolutes. I have heard a few people say that large families cannot possibly meet the needs of all the children, that is an opinion (to be considered no doubt about it) but it is not a written fact.


----------



## crazy_eights (Nov 22, 2001)

Thanks Piglet for stating that so calmly and rationally.

Hm - I'm curious why those who are disapointed in their upbringing in large families seem to be opperating under the assumption that their reality is the only reality? That those of us who have made other choices are somehow "in denial"?

As I mentioned before, I grew up in a family with 5 kids, had a SAHM who later went back to school and work. I got lots of attention, we weren't deprived of vacations or after school activities and am very close with my siblings. In fact my sister just had her first baby and we were talking about the "warm fuzzies" of our childhood and how we hope to have similar experiences for our kids. The issues I *do* have with my childhood - and let's face it, everyone has some (mine mostly involve crazy extended family that would pop up unexpectedly in and out of our life) - have nothing to do with family size. So what can be extrapolated from *my* experience growing up in a lg. family? Nothing much, except that my parents made it work. Why is a family who didn't make it work for their kids a more valid example than one that did? Why when I say that kids in my "ethnic/religious" background by and large don't have a problem with their famiy size b/c that is what everyone around them has and that is what they expect, that is somehow "just discounting" others negative experiences? I'm curious who it is here who a priori has their mind made up....


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

I think the problem is this: the OP asked for negatives. That's all. She didn't ask for happy thoughts, she asked for "the hazards of having too many kids". And she received many replies listing said hazards. Some other people decided to chime in with positives and completely gloss over what the OP asked for, and that really irritated those of us who read her original request. The OP specifically asked for negatives, and it's very rude for people to chime in and say "oh, those things have nothing to do with your family size". It's not true, and it's not a fair assumption to make. Yes, my childhood might still have sucked if I had been one of two children, but a lot of things would have been improved upon.

Gaiamom started another thread to ask for positives, and I posted there too; as I said in my earlier post on this thread, I don't think that everything, even about my own childhood, was awful. I'm planning four children myself, so I couldn't have hated it that much. If you want to argue in favor, post on the other thread. And don't discount other people's opinions just because they're not in line with your own beliefs. It's not thoughtful and it doesn't make your assertions correct.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

I think this can be discussed while respecting everyone's opinions.

I am puzzled, however, by some perspectives. TrancendentalMom writes, "I have a little bit of a problem with how some of people's points have been dismissed as well." But opines,
"It is a fact that there is less attention to go around the more kids there are. I don't even see how this is debatable."

Suggesting that we are *inherently* depriving our children is somewhat hurtful.

If the point was articulated as a point of concern (a legitimate one) rather than a non-debatable given I think the tone of the thread would be improved.

I am the mother of eight children.

I have thought about many of the concerns and viewpoints raised by people who grew up in large families (I won't address the energy or bedwetting issues because my mind is still somewhat boggled) I have my older children babysit their younger siblings. I do, however *ask* them for the *favor* of babysitting. I respect their own schedules and would never *assume* or demand this favor. In return I don't ask them to do much in the way of chores around the house. I value their babysitting and show my appriciation.

My children have music lessons through school. They have always gone on trips. In fact, because we were poor in our earlier years, I am sensitive to the needs of other families in my children's schools and have offered to contribute to a fund for kids who might not be able to afford a trip. This fund was already established and the needs of children who might not be able to afford school trips was already being taken care of. Dittos for music lessons. My children have lessons through the schools. Initially it was difficult for us to afford the rentals. There is a program to help poor children get instruments (we never needed it but it was there)

I *always* attend teacher conferences and usually attend back to school night (we didn't for the older kids this year because it interfered with karate) My entire family (sans Julianna and dh) take karate together.

This is the only year I'll be able to brag in this way but I have one child in grad school, one in college, one in high school, one in middle school, two in elementary school, and one preschooler.

I have the energy to take care of my children and their needs are being met. There are occasions (like two weeks ago) when the needs of the children conflict with one another. Two weeks ago I had one child who had a "Medieval Madness" event in school and another needed to be picked up from football practice and another really wanted to go to karate. I took my son to school, dh picked up another son, took the daughter to karate, and got to the school for the second half of the event.

My children are generally well rounded and much more mature and *less* materialistic than the surrounding culture.

Yes, I worry about how we're going to afford college but, so far, things have worked out.

BTW: our house is *clean* (neither dh nor I can stand a dirty or cluttered home) our children are clean and well-dressed.

We take vacations (long one in the summer and about two shore ones throughout the year) we are still very close to our adult children. They are constantly in and out of the house. We always have time to help our children with school projects. I don't, however, feel like I need to micromanage them and certain "projects" right now it's Haloween costumes, are their own problem.

They get jobs when they're teenagers, they pay for their own auto insurance (against the cultural grain of paying for the teen's insurance) and they *don't* get into accidents (shock-shock, they are *responsible*







) They buy their own cars, too.

I don't think having a large family is for everyone or even for many but I think I'm doing a good job of mothering my eight children. It takes a lot of hard work and commitment, I think you should pray and really examine what having a large family entails but, if you're inspired, understand it can be done well.

Debra Baker


----------



## Danesmama (Dec 15, 2001)

Slightly







T

I was out of town for the weekend, so therefore did not see how popular (and heartfelt) this thread had gotten. I had originally posted thoughts on overpopulation, which I understand is not under discussion anymore.

May I just say that I did not come from a large family, don't plan on having one and still worry about overpopulation. . . BUT I was so _touched_ by some of the posts from mothers of large families. I wish I ran my household half as well! It really opens up my eyes that you must respect all people's choices.

By saying this I am not belittling the people that had many siblings and did not feel nurtured - It is your life, your experience and your feelings, which are totally valid.


----------



## Kanga Mom (Jun 9, 2002)

Sorry- I thought better of sending this message, and I hit cancel _before_ the message finished sending- but it posted anyway. I just found that out.

So, I'm just deleting it. Apologies.









Kanga


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

I guess those with large families feel justified in having them, just as those of us who choose to have small families feel strongly about our reasons for doing so.

There isnt a right or wrong........seems this thread has gotten off topic from THE HAZARDS OF HAVING TOO MANY KIDS, of which many of us who came from had many hazards to list, to the justification of why some have so many and how in their families it is nothing like the negative responses that were posted.

ONE MORE HAZARD: coming from a family of 5....... I feel I was also raised by 3 older sibs who had alot of influences on me that I would have been better w/o. Having a negative experience being one of many with a mother who couldnt do it all has definetly influenced my decision of NOT having a large family....not only bc of the parenting style of my parents,but for the many reasons listed by me and other posters regarding the planet, finances and my own sanity, amoung others.

Im sure, if I tried, I could come up with at least one good thing about coming from a large family..........

hmmmmmmm

I know.......Ive got 4 other people who totally get it.......about our mother!LOL


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

I've stayed away from this thread for a bit, but thought i'd check back in.

I just wanted to say that in no way do I think large families are all bad, or that my reality is the only reality. I have great respect for some of the moms here at MDC who have large families. I don't know them IRL but it certainly seems like they are doing a great job at finding balance and meeting everyone's needs.

The fact that the OP even ASKED about the downside of big families shows what an aware parent she is, as are many of the moms here. That in itself bodes well for her children. Not all moms think about or care about the possible negatives of big families. My parents wanted a lot of children, but perhaps if they had taken some time to think about how much energy they really had, how much could they really give, how much resentment and bitterness was going to build up from the years of sacrifice as well as the enormous toll 10 pregnancies in 13 years took on my mother's health, they might have chosen to stop with a more manageable number of kids.

The number of children we have is going to affect our marriages, our health and our children's lives, that's not debatable. But whether it is detrimental, as in my family of origin, or enriching, like debra baker or mom2six's families, is up to us. If having one child has got a woman stressed out, and finances are tight, and she resents giving up her career, and pregnancy and nursing have adversely affected her body, then having a second shouldn't be something that family does right away, or possibly at all. That's an extreme example, of course. Likewise, there are women here who thrive on pregnancy hormones and nursing and the day to day care of young children. They have lots of energy and are self-aware enough to know when and where they might fall short and find ways to fill the gaps. And those are exactly the women who are right for the job of having a big family. I wish I was one of you.


----------



## OneCatholicMommy (Jan 21, 2002)

Kanga mom, can I move next door to you too? 

I am the oldest of eight. I can't think of any negatives right now.


----------



## Kanga Mom (Jun 9, 2002)

One Catholic, where we currently live, 'next door' is a mile up the road.=)

Drop ins are welcome, if they don't expect to see us up, dressed, and brighteyed before 11.

Kanga


----------

