or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Your views on affording more children.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Your views on affording more children. - Page 4

post #61 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisac77 View Post
I have a deep and abiding problem with the mentality that depriving people of whatever is the only way to make decent/happy/unselfish/insert-your-own-adjective-here adults. That can't possibly be true.
I agree. Intentional deprivation probably builds more resentment than character.

When parents are genuinely committed to facilitating their children's pursuit of the things that make them (the children) happy, I think those children are more likely to grow up with a desire to help others. They know they're loved, and their needs are not forgotten, and this frees them to care about someone else's needs.

When parents express the attitude that, "There are only so many pieces of pie and these crumbs are what you get," children are more likely to learn to grab what they can when they can.

But I in no way believe that being born into a big family means you get "crumbs," any more than being born into a small family does. It's all about the mindset of the parents.

If you see love and good things as pieces of a pie that, "Now you see it, now you don't" (there's only so much to go around and when it's gone, it's gone) -- well, one child is probably too many for you.

But if you believe the old saying that, "The gift of life just keeps on giving," you can have any number of children and no one's going to get stuck with "crumbs."

I only have 2 children. I'm 43 and maybe there'll be another -- but I can't count on that, so I'm certainly not knocking people with 1 or 2 kids. We're a small family and very happy. You can have a full, rich life with 1 child and you can have a full, rich life with many children.

I think the people who are truly happy with their choices, don't feel a need to knock the choices of others. If I'm happy living a simple, non-materialistic life with little in the way of extras or possessions, I certainly won't feel a need to label someone else's lifestyle choices and prized possessions as "junk."

And if I'm happy having fewer children and being able to spend more money on each individual child -- well, you get the picture, I sure won't be pointing the finger and saying, "That other couple has more kids than they can afford."

So lets all just be happy and give each other the same respect we'd like to have ourselves!
post #62 of 192
My daughter has lots of nice things, but I've never heard anyone call her spoiled. She's a very sweet girl, and I'm not just saying that because I'm biased.

Giving your child things doesn't make them spoiled any more than not giving children things makes them deprived. It isn't about stuff.
post #63 of 192
i say i can't afford more kids not due to stuff so much as the expenses as they get older. its hard paying for theater and dance for ds, who is nine, alone and now dd is at the age where she wants to stuff like that. plus i woh and another baby means another 3 months out of the workforce.
post #64 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar View Post
That is one way to do things and it is an okay way if it works for you. We are solidly middle class and we do some of this. I will say though I'd be happy to have the money NOT to need to barter. We have found people who are generous and have offered to help with barter arrangments and with free mentorships and I accept that help graciously but I am aware there is an element of charity to it and it is only extended because the child is unusual. I would prefer to simply pay for everything if we could because I appreciate the time and talent of teachers and I believe they deserve to be compensated.

I don't agree that there is always a way to barter for the exact thing the kid wants. If your child is a talented violinist and needs a full size instrument and there isn't someone who wants to give it to you or trade for it, you will need to pay or they won't get it. If there is only one violin teacher in town and they aren't interested in barter then you are stuck.



Obviously no one is suggesting this. It doesn't take hours every week for lessons to be very expensive. In many areas an hour of music instruction is $40. So a single hour of music lessons a year is a couple of thousand dollars, two lessons a week and that's four thousand dollars a year.

It is fine to say that music lessons aren't something our family considers important or considers a priority. But, I don't accept your giant leap that if someone else prioritizes this and their child takes a couple of lessons a week that means they "don't know anything about their kids".
I said nothing about a couple hours a week. I said, every moment of every day.. and I literally meant that. My daughter is one of those children who is over scheduled because its how her father runs her life. I disagree with that way of parenting. I didn't disagree on an hour of piano lessons.

However, I still maintain that I do believe there is a way to everything. Maybe there is only one violin teacher, but there are other ways to begin learning that don't involve formal classes. There is craigslist and a million other places to begin looking for a used violin. I don't think the answer is as simple as "My daughter wants to learn violin, therefore I must get her a teacher for lessons and a new violin."

So perhaps the way you choose to do it is expensive, but that doesn't mean there are not less expensive ways to go about enriching your child. KWIM? And what I see a lot of people saying is that in order for my child to be enriched and learn these extra things, it costs a lot of money that I don't have. And what I'm saying is.. I don't believe that to be true. I believe you can do a lot on a little, its all in how you view things.

And yes, in case anyone doesn't know by now.. LOL I come from a very poor family. We couldn't afford clothes at Sears or Ames, let alone the mall. Every single article of clothing came from a secondhand store. Every toy and every book, same thing. Even christmas presents. And there was never any moments of shame, or feeling deprived at all. I grew up happy and loved. And that is how I've chosen to raise my children.

If we fell into millions of dollars tomorrow, it wouldn't change how I spend it. I would still buy very little, and find ways to do things for less.

And yet I now hear this being called "intentional deprivation" ? I honestly don't think that not buying brand name clothes, 10 pairs of sneakers to match every outfit, or letting my children take more than one extra curricular activity at a time can be labeled as deprivation.
post #65 of 192
it irritates me when people fail to see the difference between "we can or cannot afford another child" and "we can't afford another child while maintaining our perfered lifestyle" the difference there is HUGE! it also bothers me when people fail to see this difference and feel tortured about not having more children when they simply cannot see that the things they need would be available and honestly decide weather maintaining a lifestyle or having more children is more important. i don't think coming down on any one side of that debate is better/morally right but i do think it's sad when people feel so trapped by imaginary needs that they're incapable of seeing all their real options and deciding from there.
post #66 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebarkingbird View Post
i do think it's sad when people feel so trapped by imaginary needs that they're incapable of seeing all their real options and deciding from there.
It's really sad to still see people so condescending towards ANYONE's parenting choices. Imaginary needs? Again, wow.

Choosing your - and your family's - lifestyle when choosing the number of kids is IMO NOT an 'imaginary need'. I call it being responsible and accountable to your own standards.
post #67 of 192
Quote:
it also bothers me when people fail to see this difference and feel tortured about not having more children when they simply cannot see that the things they need would be available and honestly decide weather maintaining a lifestyle or having more children is more important.
no judgment here. i just do see alot of people who have been sucked into alot of people who can't seem to feel good about their decision. that bugs me. people need food and water and something to keep the elements out. everything else is gravy. every parent decides how much they want to give their kids and really i could care less how much that is. really. none of my business. i have seen wonderful people come from homes where everyone had college paid for and private therapy and were on the equestrian team. i've also seen really cool people come from families w/ 10 kids where the girls made most of their own clothes. the choices people make isn't my beef. i just don't like to hear people sad that they can't afford something they identify as a need which is really a luxury. i won't have another baby before i finish my masters. getting an advanced degree isn't a need but it's important to me and i ought to have it. i'm not ashamed nor should anyone be for desiring a comfortable life for their family.

i totally support being accountable to ones own standards. i just don't like it when people confuse their own standards with basic human needs.
post #68 of 192
To the PP who said "babies are cheap" - they can be. But older children, they cost more! We just had baby #3. I formula supplement for low supply, that's pricey itself. We had to buy more cloth diapers, b/c my toddler isn't potty trained yet. My oldest needed pricier school supplies this year, my hospital birth co-pay is over $1000................

it adds up.
post #69 of 192
I have to agree with the PP who stated that there's as much, if not more, judgement going towards those who want to maintain a certain standard of living (for us, it's not about the latest "Stuff", more about what we are able to do, we love to travel, not just day trips) then to those who sacrifice and deprive themselves for the sake of having another child.

The materialistic crap comment is pretty rude, and I don't understand why it's okay for somebody to say that here, yet everybody gets all up in arms when somebody else posts that they are frustrated by people who complain they can't pay the bills, yet talk about TTC.
post #70 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebarkingbird View Post

i totally support being accountable to ones own standards. i just don't like it when people confuse their own standards with basic human needs.
Hmmm...I reread the thread...where was this done? I doubt many on here would equate paying a kid's college tuition with, say, 3 squares a day..
post #71 of 192
i wasn't addressing anyone here. the original question was about ones opinions on the concept of affording more kids. i was keeping it pretty theoretical. i actually have a IRL friend who is constantly sad that she can't have another baby until her car and house are completely paid off and she's invested money. i think it's a bit silly as she has literally cried over how much she wants another baby and i still wouldn't tell her she'd made a bad choice. it's not my business. i was under the impression we were talking about hypothetical people having hypothetical children who might hypothetically want to go to college.
post #72 of 192
what about a family living on ssi and disability, alarming credit card debt, taking advantage of food pantries and free lunch at school, trying to get food stamps, with three children and wanting more. can they afford more kids?
post #73 of 192
"A special person is being skipped over because people want to spend thousands sending their kids to some private school or going on expensive trips."

Using this logic -- do you expect everyone to have as many children as they can possibly give birth to? Each period is a missed "special person" based on this position.

And for the anti-contraceptive folks -- is abstinence not permitted? The arguments that are made always seem to ignore that option.
post #74 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nature View Post
However, I still maintain that I do believe there is a way to everything. Maybe there is only one violin teacher, but there are other ways to begin learning that don't involve formal classes. There is craigslist and a million other places to begin looking for a used violin. I don't think the answer is as simple as "My daughter wants to learn violin, therefore I must get her a teacher for lessons and a new violin."
Right, when your kid is in the first year it may do to find a high school student. For students with advanced abilities who have been playing for years, no that isn't going to cut it. Again, it is totally great if you enjoy begging and bartering to do so. I consider both of those a form of labor I don't particularly enjoy. I'd prefer to be able to offer my child lessons with a qualified professional teacher of their choice. I think it is silly to pretend in this culture that a lot of things don't require money to pay for them. That isn't to say it should be the thing you value most, but I don't see why we need to pretend that it has no value.

Along the same lines I could get my child's braces at the dental school for 2/3 of the price. It is already hard enough to have braces and I prefer not to put him through that. And, yes, that is one of the reasons why we have fewer kids.
post #75 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar View Post
Right, when your kid is in the first year it may do to find a high school student. For students with advanced abilities who have been playing for years, no that isn't going to cut it. Again, it is totally great if you enjoy begging and bartering to do so. I consider both of those a form of labor I don't particularly enjoy. I'd prefer to be able to offer my child lessons with a qualified professional teacher of their choice. I think it is silly to pretend in this culture that a lot of things don't require money to pay for them. That isn't to say it should be the thing you value most, but I don't see why we need to pretend that it has no value.

Along the same lines I could get my child's braces at the dental school for 2/3 of the price. It is already hard enough to have braces and I prefer not to put him through that. And, yes, that is one of the reasons why we have fewer kids.
Such loaded words.. begging?

I don't believe its silly. I honestly do believe and have found that there is a way to get what you need, and even what you want if you look outside the box. Again, you've stated that you don't want to take the time to look. You'd rather just pay the money to do something. And I understand that. Heck, I have an ex husband that thinks exactly like that. I don't agree, but its not my money he's spending.

I do wonder what kind of message it sends to children though... that having lots of money is always better? to have fun and be enriched you need to BE rich? That only the best things are good enough for them? That people with less money are below them and in need of "charity." Or maybe just looked down on instead? It seems a horribly materialistic way to live to me. I honestly just can't imagine living that way.

In this world though, I realize that many people do and can't imagine living how I live.

Quote:
what about a family living on ssi and disability, alarming credit card debt, taking advantage of food pantries and free lunch at school, trying to get food stamps, with three children and wanting more. can they afford more kids?
I'm sure you'll find this is a whole argument in itself here on MDC. The poverty and low income mamas don't deserve kids thread most likely.

I don't have any credit card debt, but we are both on disability, food stamps, and do use the food pantry. We're also expecting our fourth baby in Feb and couldn't be happier.
post #76 of 192
As a kid I was supplied with bartered piano lessons. My lessons were irregular, my teachers were very nice, but incompetent, and changed so frequently that there was little or no consistant methodology. My parents can say with honesty that they supplied me with 5-6 years of piano lessons at no cost -- but I hated it, I was confused all the time, and I can't play. Watching my own children learn an instrument with a consistant qualified teacher who can articulate his approach and methodology has made me realize that I'd have been better off with no lessons at all.
post #77 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nature View Post
If we fell into millions of dollars tomorrow, it wouldn't change how I spend it. I would still buy very little, and find ways to do things for less.

And yet I now hear this being called "intentional deprivation" ? I honestly don't think that not buying brand name clothes, 10 pairs of sneakers to match every outfit, or letting my children take more than one extra curricular activity at a time can be labeled as deprivation.
I think I'm the only one who used the words "intentional deprivation." And no, I wasn't defining it as "intentional deprivation" to not buy brand name clothes, and so on and so on.

If you re-read my post, you'll see it was a response to the idea that withholding things from our kids will somehow make them better people.

As far as still living the way I now live if I had millions of dollars -- well, there's honestly lots I'd do differently if I had no financial limits. But it's not necessarily deprivation if you have millions, and still choose to live the way you live now, as long as your children are also making this choice, and are happy, nurtured, and loved.
post #78 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by missys__mom View Post
what about a family living on ssi and disability, alarming credit card debt, taking advantage of food pantries and free lunch at school, trying to get food stamps, with three children and wanting more. can they afford more kids?
If they think they can, they can. Criticizing them is no different, and just as intrusive, as criticizing couples who stop with 1 or 2 to maintain a higher standard of living. It's not up to you or me to make this decision for other people.
post #79 of 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by bczmama View Post
And for the anti-contraceptive folks -- is abstinence not permitted? The arguments that are made always seem to ignore that option.
Sure, if we choose to abstain, then it's certainly permitted. I think the reason that option "gets ignored," is that most people don't choose to take it. I've got no desire to give up sex, but thanks for reminding me it's an option if I ever feel the urge.
post #80 of 192
There are definitely some folks who really can't afford another child. Where they are barely making ends meet with the child(ren) they currently have and another could tip the scales.

But yes, there are those who could easily afford more children with lifestyle changes. Some folks do want to provide a certain amount for each child above and beyond what is needed and others want something for the whole family or themselves. Whether that is being able to spend on more frivolous items/activities, early retirement, lots of savings, etc. And I see nothing wrong with any of this, but there is a big difference between "Can't afford (without lifestyle changes)." and "Can't afford (period)."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Your views on affording more children.