is 3 almost always a mistake?

[sulalovesbing]

Crap title sorry.

I know 3 families whose third child was a surprise. I know of one who had 2 girls and wanted to try for a boy. Someone also asked me, not the first time either, whether I'd try for a third to get a boy.

I figure that if people want a large family they would opt for four kids rather than an odd number?

Thoughts?

[sillyoldfool]

Nope, some actually want three (like us!)

[ThroughThickAndThin01]

Too simplistic.

Some people want 2 children. Some people want 3 children. Some people want 4 children.

It isn't 'one size fits all'

[musicinspring1]

I wanted three children.

[soundsystem]

I would quite like 4 children but it just isn't practical (house/finances, etc). It would be doable, but I'd rather have 3 and not have to scrimp than have 4 and always struggle.

DH comes over with a look of sheer panic if I mention 4, but thinks 3 is a good number.

My DM, though, is adamant that 3 isn't a good idea as it's an odd number and "there's one in the middle".

[BackforGood]

No
Are you always this rude ?

[AWhistlingWoman]

I have three. All my kids were planned and I don't consider any of them individually, or my family as a whole, a mistake!

[Friolero]

No, three is not almost always a mistake. What a strange question! Even if the third child is a surprise, this does not equal a "mistake" - that's a horrible way to talk about a child.

Why do you think an even number of children is better?

[Byrdie]

So children need to be in even numbers? Do you think they will then pair off nicely and no one gets left out??! Am trying to understand the angle you're coming from.

[ProbablyMe]

Odd question. Particularly asking it on a board for larger families! I'm expecting my 5th. Not a mistake.

[SueGeneris]

No. (I also have 3 planned). I think you've worded it badly but I think I know what you mean. DH is a middle boy between two girls and worries about the 'middle child' thing (we have boy girl boy) but I think three works well. Often children - especially when they have two siblings to annoy them - want to play on their own. So with three there's generally an opportunity to play with someone, or to do your own thing.

I'd love four but actually think three may be my limit in terms of dividing attention sufficiently.

More generally as pp have said, there's no one size fits all. There are positives and negatives with all types of familt.

[SueGeneris]

*family

[WhenTheDragonsCame]

I don't think my DD3 was a mistake and I definitely don't want a fourth (too old and single!). It isn't always easy but I don't think it is much harder than if I had stayed at two. I would still be having to deal with teenager DD1 but without DD3's cuddles.

[Couchpotato3]

3 still fit in an ordinary family car. Ideal for those who want more than 2 but don't want to take the leap to 4

[Aworldofmyown]

I wanted three. People are usually surprised to hear that -
A. I already had a girl and boy. B. My third was not an 'accident'.

Bit odd really.

[FeckOfffCup]

No. Why 'almost always a mistake'? What an odd choice of words.

I am one of 3 and would like 3 myself. Don't care about odd numbers.

[AlleyCatandRastaMouse]

No 1 was a welcome accident but 2 and 3 were planned. Why would you assume person only want an even number? Possibly the most bizarre assumption ever.

[AlleyCatandRastaMouse]

Person = people

[GooseberryRoolz]

Oh OP you walked into that didn't you?

It really will help if you expand a bit on your meaning before you get lynched

[Northernlurker]

Bloody hell OP! Do you want to try for a polite question next time?

I have three. None of them were a 'mistake'.

I don't think it's particularly large as families go either and the odd number thing is quite frankly absurd. Get a grip.

[SophieofShepherdsBush]

3 is the perfect number if children. I wanted 3, I'm very lucky to have my 3. It's a cool number. Kind of alternative feeling!

[MeMySonAndl]

We are three. Our childhood can be determined as
-The years when A&B excluded C

• The years when B&C excluded A
  
• The years when C&A excluded B
  

It may be not so bad if you have boys and girls but only girls was a bit too intense. We really never got along together at the same time, ever.

My ex had a girlfriend who was also one of a trio of girls, they were in a completely different league, l particularly remember about one ending up in a hospital in hysterics after another one shredded the other's gown just before her school prom.

So my advice:
1, 2, 4, 5, 25 ok
3 NEVER

[MeMySonAndl]

Ah, and no, number 3 was not a mistake, not at all.

[babyblabber]

All but one of my group of 8 friends has/wants 3 kids. I think 3 is way more normal than two (which seems almost lonely to me, too quiet) but each to their own. Maybe just coz of my group but I actually assume the opposite to you, that those with two must have stopped their for a reason (health, money, work etc). Although to be honest I don't spend much time thinking about other people's families.