Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Where to put all these kids?! Wwyd?

667 replies

MissMooley · 25/03/2023 21:00

Wasn't sure where to post this to get the most advice.
Basically I'm in a 3 bed house. Me, dds 14 & 19, and ds 11&8.
Currently, dd 14 & 19 have their own rooms, and the boys share. I have a bed in the living room.
It's worked for us nicely, but now I'm due twins in 10 weeks 😂🙈
I have no idea where they're going lol
My options so far are:

1- Scrap having a living room and just make it a full bedroom for me and the twins.

2- make the living room a full bedroom, and move the sofa etc into the outshed, but not sure how that will go in winter, it gets pretty cold and I don't have the money to fully convert it (also a council house, so would need permission I assume?)

That's it. I don't like the idea of having no living room but there's literally no space to have the cots and all the baby stuff in there with my bed and the sofa etc too.

I've considered the girls sharing, but eldest has asd and several mh disorders so can't see that working for her.

Just feel a bit stuck and hoping someone has a magic solution I haven't thought of!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
BlackBarbies · 26/03/2023 18:44

threeplusmum · 25/03/2023 23:42

If you can't afford to house 6 kids without everyone being on top of each other and miserable then I'd suggest stop getting pregnant and expecting social housing to give you a leg up. I am stopping at 3... because I can't possibly house any more. Wish people would stop being so selfish.

Where did the OP say that she wants to be moved or wants the council to give her a ‘leg up?’ All she’s asked for is practical suggestions. Nowhere is she complaining about her circumstances and the fact that the council won’t move her.

You’re seriously bad vibes

NoTouch · 26/03/2023 18:48

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 18:14

In an ideal world everyone would consider these things before having children, and once they do, consider the potential impact further children would have on the ones the do have.

However, its too late for the what ifs and the should haves for the OP, unfortunately, she doesnt have the ability to change her past decisions. So now she needs to find the best way, within her personal situation and circumstances, to support all of her children, financially, physically, and emotionally. I dont think berating someone for choices that cant be changed will help them do that.

@ashamedmum007 yes, in theory. Yet it's reasonable to ask why people keep prioritising their wants over their children's needs. I think the reactions on the thread are primarily huge frustration at this: the fact that so many people continually do this and the complete lack or remorse or even understanding about the impact of these selfish choices. Making out that it's a funny matter with "lol" and smiley faces. The impact om their children, and on other taxpayers for that matter is not a joke.

It's all very well saying "oh it's too late now" but it always is, isn't it, by the time the person has made those decisions that are detrimental to their children? And then people are called "evil" as they have been here if they question it. But when were they meant to question it? How could they do so beforehand? So that argument effectively means that disadvantaging children in such a way, putting your right to "choices" over their wellbeing, can never be challenged or questioned at all. Because you must be evil to even suggest it was a bad plan, of course you should just pay more even if you couldn't fund a family that size yourself because you pay so much tax to fund others being subsidised. People should just pick up the NHS and education and welfare bill for entrenching disadvantages because yet another person has decided to ignore their children's wellbeing and their needs and what is in their best interests because the parents' freedom to choose trumps everything and everyone should just shut up even when they can see how damaging it will be, and that there were other options. But it can never be questioned at all because the retort is always "it's too late now, it's done". It's completely reasonable to question the fairness to the children of expanding families people cannot provide for adequately, for the children's sake, in the hope that fewer people might do so in future. It's not "evil" for people to challenge other adults to behave like adults and expect them to put their children's needs above their own. It's not evil for people to point out the proven fact that growing up in an overcrowded environment with little parental attention or money harms life chances. This is fact.

We all know that in some circumstances people do end up in dire straights due to unpredictable circumstances. But this isn't that. It does not absolve adults of the responsibility to try to improve things for their own children, not actively make them harder when there were choices, and then shrug their shoulders and say "oh, it's too late now so you're evil for saying this was a bad idea" when they actually could have avoided making things even harder for their children than they had to be. But it's too late now, you "evil" people for mentioning it, shut up? It's an excuse to shut down any questioning ever of adults being utterly selfish.

Ultimately not enough people prioritise their children over themselves, and people being upset about this is reasonable and normal. People are empathetic and don't like to think of children growing up in disadvantaged situations when it is avoidable. It does impact the rest of society hugely as well as the sadness for those kids. The dismissiveness of the children's needs and right to a decent childhood on this thread has been shocking. Then to top it off people are called nasty for stating that this isn't a good thing, or funny, to put children in this situation. I think it would be nasty to condone it, frankly.

Agree with most of this 👏🏼

Making out that it's a funny matter with "lol" and smiley faces. The impact om their children, and on other taxpayers for that matter is not a joke......... But when were they meant to question it?

On these threads is where, op has already made irreversible decisions, but hopefully it will make other parents with the similar dilemma realise it is no joke and think through the impact of selfish choices on their existing children more carefully while they still have a choice.

ashamedmum007 · 26/03/2023 18:57

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 18:14

In an ideal world everyone would consider these things before having children, and once they do, consider the potential impact further children would have on the ones the do have.

However, its too late for the what ifs and the should haves for the OP, unfortunately, she doesnt have the ability to change her past decisions. So now she needs to find the best way, within her personal situation and circumstances, to support all of her children, financially, physically, and emotionally. I dont think berating someone for choices that cant be changed will help them do that.

@ashamedmum007 yes, in theory. Yet it's reasonable to ask why people keep prioritising their wants over their children's needs. I think the reactions on the thread are primarily huge frustration at this: the fact that so many people continually do this and the complete lack or remorse or even understanding about the impact of these selfish choices. Making out that it's a funny matter with "lol" and smiley faces. The impact om their children, and on other taxpayers for that matter is not a joke.

It's all very well saying "oh it's too late now" but it always is, isn't it, by the time the person has made those decisions that are detrimental to their children? And then people are called "evil" as they have been here if they question it. But when were they meant to question it? How could they do so beforehand? So that argument effectively means that disadvantaging children in such a way, putting your right to "choices" over their wellbeing, can never be challenged or questioned at all. Because you must be evil to even suggest it was a bad plan, of course you should just pay more even if you couldn't fund a family that size yourself because you pay so much tax to fund others being subsidised. People should just pick up the NHS and education and welfare bill for entrenching disadvantages because yet another person has decided to ignore their children's wellbeing and their needs and what is in their best interests because the parents' freedom to choose trumps everything and everyone should just shut up even when they can see how damaging it will be, and that there were other options. But it can never be questioned at all because the retort is always "it's too late now, it's done". It's completely reasonable to question the fairness to the children of expanding families people cannot provide for adequately, for the children's sake, in the hope that fewer people might do so in future. It's not "evil" for people to challenge other adults to behave like adults and expect them to put their children's needs above their own. It's not evil for people to point out the proven fact that growing up in an overcrowded environment with little parental attention or money harms life chances. This is fact.

We all know that in some circumstances people do end up in dire straights due to unpredictable circumstances. But this isn't that. It does not absolve adults of the responsibility to try to improve things for their own children, not actively make them harder when there were choices, and then shrug their shoulders and say "oh, it's too late now so you're evil for saying this was a bad idea" when they actually could have avoided making things even harder for their children than they had to be. But it's too late now, you "evil" people for mentioning it, shut up? It's an excuse to shut down any questioning ever of adults being utterly selfish.

Ultimately not enough people prioritise their children over themselves, and people being upset about this is reasonable and normal. People are empathetic and don't like to think of children growing up in disadvantaged situations when it is avoidable. It does impact the rest of society hugely as well as the sadness for those kids. The dismissiveness of the children's needs and right to a decent childhood on this thread has been shocking. Then to top it off people are called nasty for stating that this isn't a good thing, or funny, to put children in this situation. I think it would be nasty to condone it, frankly.

@FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds

I fully agree with your post, you make very valid points in a concise clear articulate manner about society as a whole. You will always get people with better foresight, making better choices, and rightly or wrongly, them picking up the bill of those who don't always do that. I also feel some people who have made that decision to only have 2 children, when they would have loved to be able to have more, are, again rightly, very angry at people who have chosen to have more without the consideration they had. Its an emotive topic for a lot of people.

On a generic "debate" style post about the amount of children people chose to have in relation to their income, ability to care for them, needs of other children, and societies role in the supporting of the decisions, i would 100% agree with every point you make.

However, i feel on specific threads, started by a woman who is what 28/30 weeks pregnant already, that conversation, doesn't need to be had. Her lols and emojis may be a front because she knows her choices have landed her, and her children in a position that isn't the best. Her defensive responses to people saying this i agree, are not the best, but maybe she knows all of this and her deflections are because she already feels everything people are telling her to feel?

I cant imagine the responses she would have gotten if shed posted her situation, followed by "so im putting the twins up for adoption" "would i be unreasonable to kick out my vulnerable 19 year old" "should i send two of my children to live with their father/grandparents"

She was looking for practical advice.

I just dont agree with attacking (for want of a better word) someones choices when they now cant be changed, when instead, we as a community, could try and offer advice, support, and guidance to someone whos (albeit poor) choices will now impact 4 other children/young people.

I know, its a fantastical approach to have on a site such as MN, however it the approach i would rather take.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

Maireas · 26/03/2023 18:59

@NoTouch and @FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds - I couldn't agree more, I keep thinking, those poor kids. If this is a genuine thread it's going to be a very tough few years ahead for that family.

Comedycook · 26/03/2023 19:12

I think it's very hard for some people to understand why other people make choices which make their life harder...but there are people, often from certain socio economic groups or backgrounds, who make decisions which appear to more privileged people to be utter madness.

I know a single mum with four kids, different fathers, living in social housing who everytime she got pregnant was absolutely gutted and miserable, genuinely. I offered her my congratulations once and she looked at me like I was mad. Any chance she has to offload her kids to her mum, she takes it. She doesn't enjoy motherhood. After every child, she said it would be the last. Benefits are capped now so you can't even argue that she does it for the money. I find it bizarre to say the least. It's like watching a lamb to the slaughter. Sadly I think there are many people who don't realise they have choices in life. It's very sad.

Fwiw, I'm not even saying this is what's happening with the op...just talking in more general terms.

Anycolouryoulike · 26/03/2023 19:16

The OP asked for practical advice not sanctimonious lectures. Still it wouldn't be MN without dog whistle references to 'life choices' and 'taxpayers' Not to mention the age old 'I feel sorry for her children'

And as for the 'lols' would you prefer the OP to be depressed and asking the righteous of MN to forgive her for not being like them?

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 19:24

On a generic "debate" style post about the amount of children people chose to have in relation to their income, ability to care for them, needs of other children, and societies role in the supporting of the decisions, i would 100% agree with every point you make.

Fair point, and as I said I'm autistic myself, so perhaps this isn't the place to have this conversation and my intention is not to make the OP feel bad. I do think though, that it is only in such discussions that people generally get any opportunity to raise the issue an state the absolutely proven fact that this is not in children's best interests.

However, i feel on specific threads, started by a woman who is what 28/30 weeks pregnant already, that conversation, doesn't need to be had. Her lols and emojis may be a front because she knows her choices have landed her, and her children in a position that isn't the best. Her defensive responses to people saying this i agree, are not the best, but maybe she knows all of this and her deflections are because she already feels everything people are telling her to feel?

I don't think anybody was telling her how to feel. They were challenging the things she has chosen to do, as an adult, who has responsibility for the children in her care. I take your point she may well feel defensive. I will even apologise in that I'm sure my posts must have made her feel worse, if she's read them, which wasn't my intention. However, I'm so upset about grown adults making decisions that make their children's lives worse, over and over again, across society, that even so I think it's a price worth paying (to upset an adult, even a heavily pregnant one) if it changes even one adult's behaviour to NOT continue doing this to children unnecessarily. Sometimes things happen where suddenly a family needs huge support or is in trouble. To actively choose to disadvantage your children is something else entirely. To then be outraged - and the many posters also outraged on OP's behalf - that anybody mentioned this blindingly obvious failure to prioritise the children's needs, is wrong and upsetting and no, posters are not "evil" for pointing it out. They are right. And sorry, but the OP is an adult and while it may upset her to hear the truth - shown by decades of research here and elsewhere - her decisions will hugely negatively impact her children. These were decisions and she's an adult and has choices that they do not. So I think they deserve people to speak up for them even at the risk of being called "evil" for doing so, or upsetting her, because no amount of DIY advice about cheap room partitions is going to make the situation ok.

I cant imagine the responses she would have gotten if shed posted her situation, followed by "so im putting the twins up for adoption" "would i be unreasonable to kick out my vulnerable 19 year old" "should i send two of my children to live with their father/grandparents"

Well those situations are all massively different, and would all have received very different responses. But all of them would have been centred around "is this best for my children?", and therefore most likely responded to quite gently. I think what so many people have found so upsetting about this thread is that the OP's comments showed little evidence of that, at all.

She was looking for practical advice.

With what though? If you willingly create a situation where there is literally no possible practical advice to give that could possibly make the situation ok, then are people meant to ignore that fact and pretend a trip to B&Q will fix it all?

I just dont agree with attacking (for want of a better word) someones choices when they now cant be changed, when instead, we as a community, could try and offer advice, support, and guidance to someone whos (albeit poor) choices will now impact 4 other children/young people.

I think many people have. Many others are extremely frustrated to read that now six children, not four, will be in a situation where there is no practical advice that is likely to improve it much. It's very sad. I think the responses are motivated by huge sadness for the children, not malice. And frustration with adults who create such situations.

But I am sorry if my comments have upset the OP. If she has read them I assume they probably have. I don't want to upset her. But children are children and their needs and those of others like them whose parents also behave like this outweigh hers in my view, she is an adult. She has and has had choices. They don't. We all need to speak up and say that putting children in these situations isn't ok, even if we're called evil for doing so, then so be it.

Anycolouryoulike · 26/03/2023 19:27

I would imagine your comments have upset the OP but don't let that stop you from continuing to stick the boot in.

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 19:27

Anycolouryoulike · 26/03/2023 19:16

The OP asked for practical advice not sanctimonious lectures. Still it wouldn't be MN without dog whistle references to 'life choices' and 'taxpayers' Not to mention the age old 'I feel sorry for her children'

And as for the 'lols' would you prefer the OP to be depressed and asking the righteous of MN to forgive her for not being like them?

If you post on a public forum about a situation that will have a huge negative impact on children then you can expect to receive messages that express sadness about this and also dismay that the adult(s) in their life haven't done anything to avoid that if it was possible to do so.

If you think that's "dog whistling" or "santimonious" then you've clearly not been a child living with adults who did not consider your needs a priority.

Maireas · 26/03/2023 19:30

@FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds - this, absolutely.

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 19:31

Anycolouryoulike · 26/03/2023 19:27

I would imagine your comments have upset the OP but don't let that stop you from continuing to stick the boot in.

I'm sorry about that. Genuinely. I lack tact, I know this. So I'll take that on the chin. However, as I said I think children's needs outweigh an adult's feelings, and when people see or hear of children's needs being neglected in adult decision making they should absolutely say so every single time. Every time. Because children have no choices. So I stand by what I've said. But am sorry I've obviously been hurtful to OP in the process.

Antiquiteas · 26/03/2023 19:33

Really @flollopingalong? I’m surprised someone wouldn’t change enough details to prevent that happening. Especially if they’re a MN user and could have foreseen exactly how a thread like this would go..?

BrieAndChilli · 26/03/2023 19:35

Just because 60 years ago people used to live 10 people to a room doesn’t mean it isn’t far from ideal.
years ago 5 years olds used to work down the mines, lots of women died in childbirth, we didn’t wear seatbelts, some cars didn’t even have them!, we used to smoke indoors in public place, special needs children were carted off to special homes never to be seen again. In modern times none of the above is acceptable.
we are all entitled to say we don’t think the situation is very good for the children and suggest alternatives such as the boys living with thier dad - if he is a good parent and has some then he is just as good an option and maybe even better than living in overcrowding with thier mother.
mad a mother you have to put your children’s needs first and that means all your children not just the one that shouts the loudest.

Anycolouryoulike · 26/03/2023 19:40

Antiquiteas · 26/03/2023 19:33

Really @flollopingalong? I’m surprised someone wouldn’t change enough details to prevent that happening. Especially if they’re a MN user and could have foreseen exactly how a thread like this would go..?

These threads always go the same way on MN. I'm surprised the OP didn't know that or maybe she did...

flollopingalong · 26/03/2023 19:41

Antiquiteas · 26/03/2023 19:33

Really @flollopingalong? I’m surprised someone wouldn’t change enough details to prevent that happening. Especially if they’re a MN user and could have foreseen exactly how a thread like this would go..?

One hundred percent. From both the content of the post and the username. There's no doubt.

I suspect OP knows she'll be recognised but doesn't really care because she's quite a straightforward, genuine, 'take me as I am' person.

Antiquiteas · 26/03/2023 19:48

flollopingalong · 26/03/2023 19:41

One hundred percent. From both the content of the post and the username. There's no doubt.

I suspect OP knows she'll be recognised but doesn't really care because she's quite a straightforward, genuine, 'take me as I am' person.

Well, I hope she figures it all out. They’re all in for a pretty difficult time for a good long while.

It’s likely a thread that won’t die, just fill, so I’d warn her. But if she doesn’t care, then maybe that’s best.

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 19:54

GotABeatForYouMama · 26/03/2023 17:25

I think MNHQ should consider zapping this thread now. The OP will probably not come back, it's strayed so far away from the topic and it's turned into a nasty bunfight.

I don't think that's fair, and I don't think silencing and deleting such an important discussion would be right, either. That nobody should be able to say that children's welfare matters otherwise "zap!", end of discussion. But obviously that would be up to Mumsnet. People haven't been spiteful, people are showing concern for children's wellbeing and the fact that similar situations seem to be far too common. Many people posting have experienced childhoods with adults who view their needs as such a low priority, and have a right to say so and express that they don't think it is ok.

user40643 · 26/03/2023 19:56

threeplusmum · 25/03/2023 23:42

If you can't afford to house 6 kids without everyone being on top of each other and miserable then I'd suggest stop getting pregnant and expecting social housing to give you a leg up. I am stopping at 3... because I can't possibly house any more. Wish people would stop being so selfish.

This

Anycolouryoulike · 26/03/2023 19:59

It wasn't a general discussion on the rights and wrongs of having more children than bedrooms. It was a thread asking for practical advice. I do think it has turned nasty and I'd want it deleted if I was the OP.

Anycolouryoulike · 26/03/2023 20:00

user40643 · 26/03/2023 19:56

This

This is a perfect example of why this thread should go.

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 20:01

They’re all in for a pretty difficult time for a good long while.

This is the worry. I hope OP can make some changes to their circumstances to improve things. Like studying for more qualifications to build a career that will earn more and provide more for them all. Or moving to an area where they can afford to live in a suitable house without chucking an autistic 19 year old out or making her live in a shed or caravan like some people suggested. A thread asking for advice on that kind of stuff may have been more useful. But anyway I wish all of them the best and hope OP finds a way to improve their situation.

ferntwist · 26/03/2023 21:00

OP you’ve handled the snipers on here brilliantly. Congratulations on your new arrivals. All your kids sound very loved. Wishing you all the luck in the world

Hobnobswantshernameback · 26/03/2023 21:02

Blimey what a bonkers thread
And to add to the chaos someone who knows the op has found the thread
madness

GelPens1 · 26/03/2023 21:03

WhiteFire · 26/03/2023 14:33

The oldest daughter moving to live with Grandma is probably the best solution out of the pick of not great options. This will at least free up a bedroom for the twins and OP remains downstairs. No it is not ideal but will probably be a lot better for her than living in a house with her five siblings and no room for two of them.

@MissMooley this is the best option. 19yo Dd is an adult and would probably appreciate the quiet at her grandparents’ house. She will also be able to get a job and start saving.

14yo Dd could share a room with girl twin, and the 3 boys share the largest room. OP has the other. However, when the twins are babies, OP could share a room with the twins, 14yo Dd has a room of her own, 2 boys share. I would say this is the best solution and the overcrowding issue disappears when the 19yo Dd moves out.

FlyingWormsAndSubterraneanBirds · 26/03/2023 21:14

A by then 16 year old girl studying for GCSEs should share a bedroom with a two year old?! And 13 and 11 year old boys by them share with another 2 year old? Yeah, fantastic solution.

Bloody hell. What utter nonsense. How could anybody think that's ok? Aside from pushing a newly diagnosed 19 year old autistic girl with mental health issues to leave because there's no space for her anymore. What could go wrong?