Onlies Mamas: ever feel there's something wrong with you? - Page 3

[betsyj]

Originally Posted by JoanCrawford

I agree that families come in all sizes, but I think it's a shame to deprive a child of a brother or sister. It's a bond that is impossible to replicate otherwise, and in my eyes, actually improves the child's behavior when they enter the teenage years.

Most kids I grew up with had brothers and sisters and I did not notice any behavior improvement in the teenage years. In fact they seemed to feed off each other behavior wise. What a weird statement.

And the bond a single child has with their Mom and Dad is impossible to replicate in a family with multiple children.

There are pros and cons to each families decision on how many children to have.

To suggest that those of us who choose to have one child are "depriving" our child is simplistic and insulting.

[earthgirl]

Originally Posted by JoanCrawford

I agree that families come in all sizes, but I think it's a shame to deprive a child of a brother or sister. It's a bond that is impossible to replicate otherwise, and in my eyes, actually improves the child's behavior when they enter the teenage years.

I'm sorry, but I find this comment to be a ridiculous one. My DH has a brother and they are not close at all, never have been. And they are only three years apart. So much for the sibling bond,huh? I was an only and I don't feel like I was deprived of anything. And I was quite the goody-goody in my teenage years. I really hate that these type of comments are just made as if there's any truth to them. I could say it's wrong to have more than one child b/c it deprives the first child of the parents' attention. I don't really believe that, but one could make the argument.

[gcgirl]

Originally Posted by JoanCrawford

I agree that families come in all sizes, but I think it's a shame to deprive a child of a brother or sister. It's a bond that is impossible to replicate otherwise, and in my eyes, actually improves the child's behavior when they enter the teenage years.

This is the opposite of the argument that it's a shame to have an only child because you can't possibly give enough to more than one. And it's just as offensive, IMO.

Don't we all know families who come in all sizes? Do people seriously think there's one RIGHT way to do this? I think I'm done with this thread now. I probably shouldn't visit any other child spacing threads in the future, now that I think about it.

[velochic]

Originally Posted by JoanCrawford

I agree that families come in all sizes, but I think it's a shame to deprive a child of a brother or sister. It's a bond that is impossible to replicate otherwise, and in my eyes, actually improves the child's behavior when they enter the teenage years.

And sometimes you have siblings and wish all of your life that you were an only child... especially when you're an adult and you've been caring for your elderly mother without a thread of help from any of them for over 5 years. Make that 10 years. She's only lived with us for 5. I took care of her for 5 years before that as well.

Kids don't need siblings. They need functional families with loving parents. If one child is what a family wants and it makes the family loving, then that's the right number.

[starling&diesel]

Originally Posted by JoanCrawford

I agree that families come in all sizes, but I think it's a shame to deprive a child of a brother or sister. It's a bond that is impossible to replicate otherwise, and in my eyes, actually improves the child's behavior when they enter the teenage years.

Bolding mine.

I'm not sure why you've dropped in to add your two cents worth, when the thread is not looking for your advice whatsoever.

About the bolded ... that is categorically UNTRUE. I have three brothers and can speak from experience. My chosen 'sister' is a far truer sibling than any of my brothers. I'm sorry that you've never been blessed with true, chosen family. It's a shame that you have been deprived.