We're becoming a nation of only children: do you agree? And have a butcher's at our guest blog, too

Circumstance

Dd is a surrogate baby.

leatheralley what an odd viewpoint. What is it based on?

leather

Children have close relationships with all sorts of people, they don't NEED siblings.
There's extended family, friends at school (who at some times in the childs life become more important than parents). I'm sure there are many others.
Teachers, pre school workers, nannies etc.

I think childcare costs for working mum's probably do play a part..... my sil says she can only afford childcare for one, and originally planned on having another when her dc1 went to school (he's 3) but has since realised that there would be 2 to pay for in the hols, and also, now she is out of the baby stage is finding things much easier, and has no real desire to do the whole pg, newborn thing again.

I am a sahm (apart from being a part time student, and working 1 day a week) to 5 dc, and am 12 wks pg with a surprise number 6.

I think also, on the whole, people are more comfortable with saying they only want one nowadays. People seem to look down far more on large families these days than small ones!

There is too much generalisation ( i.e not all singles will be lonely little napoleons, and not all large families live off benefits/rely on a massive income - we cut our cloth and make sacrifices instead!)

I think it might even become more common with the lack of jobs, difficulty in getting on the property ladder etc. If the average age of a first time buyer is mid 30's, and you don't have your first baby until 40ish, you are going to be hard pushed to pop out 4 (or more!)

What are you basing that on leatheralley?

We will probably stick at one - though as she's only 7 mo I reserve the right to change my mind! DH was a very happy only child, and I hated having a brother, so there isn't the urge to provide DD with a sibling. But also, much as I love DD, most of pregnancy and a large part of the last 7 months have been so miserable that I don't think I could face it again (tendency to depression).

Leather, have you got links to any studies on that point?

Having your only close relationship with a parent (usually the mother) is very unhealthy for both mother and child. The problems don't show up until the only child tries to establish close relationships with other people - especially spouses.

would love another , but was a late starter. DS 2.5 was born when i was 40.
DP doesn't want anymore as DS has been hard work, and also has 2 older DC's who live abroad, so he has enough children as far as he in concerned.

I just would like a sibling for DS to play with, although that is not guaranteed.
I am one of 3 and not close to either (perhaps more due to our dysfunctional childhood...!)

Part of me still hopes I can pop one more out if i manage to change DP's mind...!

It's a silly article based on bad reading of statistics.

don't know any 1 child families. all my friends have 2 or 3, many have 5.

I only know one family with just one child...everyone I know seems to be going for a third at the moment!

Have four, two of each , mad busy wrecked tired most of the time. But the good thing is they all play together. Neighbours/school friends with only children, always trying to organise playdates for bored kids..not an issue here although we do have playdates from time to time. Only problem is when they try to kill each other..which is quite a lot

My DC is the only, only child in the class!

I never knew. Is that bad?

I would be surprised if this was the case. In my area, quite middle class, the usual family unit is 2 - 3 children. There were only 2 children in my dd's class that were only children...snowballjr and a friend up the road. I had wanted more, but dd's friend's mum never did. Personally, if my womb had been less rubbish, I'd have happily had a handful or more. Love being a mum and had enough resources to be a mum to many. If I could take DH into fostering or adopting, I'd do that like a shot, but he just won't get on board :(

I'm an only and I have an only, but most of my friends have 2. I had a rough pregnancy and a bad birth and I just couldn't face it again.

My parents are dead and DH's are quite a distance away so no family help.

Edam, the statistics make a story - especially if there is a credible attempt to look below the numbers and see what might be behind a trend.

However, I think it's fair enough to slag off the writing in a feature if it makes repeated references to 'mothers' instead of 'parents', repeatedly uses language which accepts a negative stereotype of only children and restricts itself to speculation rather than actual fact finding.

I imagine where you are geographically may make a big difference.

We live in London and have 1 DD. Property prices are huge even for a postage stamp - to move to a bigger flat we would need to double our budget and that's before looking at stamp duty, estate agents etc.

Basically you only have a decent sized place to live if you are a council tenant or a lottery winner round here.

I'm in my 40's, had terrible HG and then was lucky to survive DD's birth so DH is very against our having another. DH works very long hours and we don't have any family nearby so all the childcare falls to me.

We both come from large families and the idea of an only is a bit frightening to me.

However, with just one we can offer her everything. Private education, university paid up front and help with getting on the housing ladder etc. With 2 it would be a very different story as we couldn't afford any of that for 2 children.

Of all our friends I would say that onlies are about 50/50.

There are several onlys in my sons school classes.
They are 9 and 4 respectively.

We have one ds for financial reasons. We would have loved to have had more but dh lost his job and has only found short-term or part-time contracts ever since. I feel sad about it but we do work hard to make sure ds spends lots of time playing with other children, neighbours or school friends and family - he has a very close relationship with his cousin.

Btw, it is a tad tiresome when people slag off a news story just because it doesn't chime with their personal experience. The Telegraph is covering a perfectly reasonable story based on ONS statistics showing nearly half of all families are one-child affairs, the number has increased by almost 700,000 in 15 years to 3.7 million, and one-child families are likely to be in the majority within a decade. That's not 'shoddy journalism' by any standard, it's perfectly legitimate.

I find this quite surprising. I have one DD but we are very much in the minority among people in our circle/DD's school etc - the only other families I know with just one child have not had more because of marriage breakups or similar.

I do feel there's still a stigma attached to only children - people tell me how much easier life must be for us and strangers have been known to blatantly ask why we don't have any more without any thought that I might find that offensive. On the other hand my friend who has 5 children gets similar remarks about her family so maybe it's just not conforming to the usual 2.4 that bothers people .

Our reasons for having one are a mixture - MC followed by failing to conceive combined with my DH not really wanting another (partly because he's not really a natural parent but also, I think, because of money).

In some ways I wish we had been able to have more. I often feel as though we are not really a proper family and I do worry that DD will resent not having siblings although she seems very happy as she is.

I am paranoid about her being seen as a typical only child though, and go out of my way not to spoil her, but inevitably she does have advantages over kids from bigger families. I don't feel as though we have either much spare time or spare cash but I am able to do things with her 1 on 1 that I couldn't if we had more, and can get more or less what she needs in the way of toys/clothes/activities etc without it being too much of a struggle.

I think there are pros and cons to having one child - just like there are to having more - and don't see why it needs to be a discussion point really, it's just a different family set up like any other.

"Try to borrow a child I'm the holidays" as a NEGATIVE point? In our circle of families and friends arranging outings with a friend in tow is entirely normal and the children are v keen on it. Especially as in our case all DS's friends have two younger sisters. Their parents often 'try' to get me to take all the boys to an older/boy friendly activity so they can do likewise with the younger girls. Sometimes big families 'borrow' ds to gookeep his friend company, sometimes we all do things together, sometimes I have all the kids from a bigger family to offer childcare.

You make parents of on lies sound predatory and desperate, we find the arrangement is part of being a community.

I have an only child but I feel very much in the minority amongst my friends - most have 2 or 3, or have remained childless. It was by choice in my case, but not for financial reasons, more our own lifestyle reasons. My life has more in common with my child-free friends than my friends with larger families - we've continued to live in a city centre location, we travel a lot, I have a good social life and a lot of time for my own interests. DS is happy and sociable, and I'm glad that he's able to have opportunities that he wouldn't have if I'd had more children (not just because of finances but with amount of time I could give as a parent).

I'm lucky that I don't feel I've been criticised or judged for it though. I think my friends with more children have tended to be a bit as I'm not juggling as many things as them, and my friends without dc are just impressed that I even have one child as they often say that they've never been ready for the responsibility of having a family.

If it is the case that there are more single-child families than before maybe it's for the same reason that more people are choosing not to have children at all - people are actually thinking about what they want rather than doing the thing that is done.

Maybe societal pressure has eased up a bit, so people who want 2 children can have 2 children, people who want one child can have one child, people who want no children can have no children, rather than there being a pressure and expectation that all adults will find themselves an opposite-sex partner and have two children, and that anyone who doesn't is not normal.

Fair point Trills but the statistics over the 20th Century posted above don't show huge variation and the average completed family size is skewed more by the reduction of >4 kids rather than increasing onlies up to the sixties.

I don't have the article to hand but I read one once which made the very valid point that until some Psych professor wrote about the only child (I think possibly pre WW2, maybe just after it) there was no real 'obsession' with them. The guy kick started the whole schtick around the negative stereotypes (selfish, pushed by parents, lonely etc); even though studies since have shown that it's not true the twaddle he came up with has stuck in the general mindset. Incredibly frustrating as it's no more scientifically proven than the 'medical' bollocks of previous generations like women can't enjoy sex etc.

There have always been only children, secondary infertility isn't a modern phenomenon as far as I'm aware and my own family's experience was that 'circumstance' with fathers dying in wars etc has a lot to do with it. WW1 and WW2 also created families where they had to stop at 1 as plenty of woment either delayed having families or ran out of time (so to speak) to have subsequent children whilst their husbands were away fighting.

It's the whole 'this is a modern phenomena' (with the implication that it's a problem/there will be dire consequences) that is irritating.

I will try to dig out the article/reference for the stuff above, running out of time at the moment thought.