How many kids would you have if finances weren’t a barrier?

[Expatfamily]

My whole life I wanted to be a mum. I’m the first one in my friendship circle to have a baby at 29. As soon as we bought a house and got married we started TTC which luckily we fell immediately. I’m broody now again but thinking that I should probably space out having our next as we’re only going to be able to afford having two.

I’d love to have at least four. If it didn’t take us so long to get on the property ladder/for me to get established in my career I would have been happy to start TTC at 24.

I’m extremely left wing, either voted Green or more recently Labour. Just with all the immigration threads these last few months with the constant ‘we need immigration to increase our birth rate’ has made me think ‘I can increase birth rate for you but I need more than the £20pw child benefit or at least DH having a tax break’. I’ve been angry at the Tories for years but also for this shit show that having to have two full time professional salaries to buy a three bed semi. I can’t have as many kids as I want because we just can’t afford them and that’s just life. But seeing so many threads that we need immigration to uphold our 2.1 replacement rate as native population just don’t want to have large families anymore has low-key started rub salt into a wound I never really had before.

I feel I’m surrounded by people my age who want kids but with the cost of houses/nursery/cost of living having one is barely in reach. Both me and DH are one of three, cannot imagine any of us being able to have three with the way things are.

I would have liked three.

I stopped at two because I had no family help or support and - at the time - couldn't imagine how I would cope (SAHM with a husband who worked long hours and travelled quite a bit with work) with another.

However, in the fullness of time (my kids are grown and flown) I have been SO relieved, a million times over, that we stopped at two because everything is SO expensive and a third would have just crippled us financially.

Financially, the baby and primary years were - for us - a walk in the park. It's the teenage years that were punishing. You're essentially buying food, clothes, shoes etc for adults. Year in, year out, for YEARS AND YEARS. And that's before you start with any sports, music, driving lessons etc etc. Both of mine had part-time jobs while they were at school and university but what they earn is peanuts and I thought it only fair for them to keep it for their own treats and trips (cinema, festivals, little holidays with friends etc).

My DDs are both with partners who are one of four and say (the partners, not my DDs) that they'd like four too. They'll make their own choices, obviously, but I've been really transparent with my DDs about how hard it is, financially, in the teenage years.

It's about so much more than money, unless we are talking celebrity rich. My husband earns a lot, I am a SAHM and we are buying a very large house but it's things like when we are all ill and not having the support that's made us stop at 1. Celebrities can afford so much help so they can have or pay someone to have as many children as they like but for the average couple things are very different. Some of my friends parents are super active in their kids lives, having them overnight and several times a week, my own family isn't like that and I understand their reasons, I don't feel like I have a right to free childcare, but I know my friends who have it would find having more children a lot easier.

I think 4 as well but spaced out so 2 close together, then a 5-7 gap, then 2 more together.

Sadly I live in a mid terrace 2.5 bed house so I think we'll have 2.

Like others on the thread, I’m stopping at 1 but could afford more (but would like to give more opportunities to one child).

The barrier is time and energy and balancing 2 full time jobs and no family help that is part of this decision.

Snap

3 or 4 vs the 2 I am sticking with

All the money in the world would not get me to be a parent.
Never wanted kids my choice what i earn is all mine im selfish.

Four. I have three.

none

Zero.

I have three DC, but if I was making the decision now (rather than 15 years ago) I'd choose two because of climate change, overpopulation etc.

Ideally I'd have liked to have four (I am one of four myself and I enjoyed having three siblings).

Finances and age meant that we stopped at two. (I was 38 when I had the second and my husband was 49).

We would have stuck at two, money doesn’t mean you can spread your attention or time further. I also couldn’t be arsed to get an ugly people carrier.

one was enough for me

I'd only ever have 2. There's more than enough people on the planet already.

Why have 2 if concerned re overpopulation?

Just 1

I'd have loved four, but stuck at three. I had postnatal depression after the third one and couldn't go through that again.

Probably 4; but would need a nanny as I would want to continue working even if I was a millionaire.

Wanted 3 or 4, had 1 and had difficulty conceiving again. I wished and prayed for a second for a few years and lucky lucky me I had twins. So 3 and 3.

It's so sad people who could be good parents and want more kids feel they can't have them. Something is really wrong, it can be influenced by social policy for sure. I'm in Ireland and we get universal children's benefit with no child limit (that I'm aware of) at 140 euro a month. Bonus for twins, they count as 1 1/2 children so I have 3 kids but I get paid for 4, 560 per month. It makes a massive difference and many people depend on it. We don't get a lot of things right here, but this is one I think is fantastic, especially when I read threads like this.

If money was no object then I'd be able to afford as many rounds of IVF as it took to have one baby.

Overpopulation is a huge problem and it is looking like there may not be a habitable planet for our kids or grandkids to live in. The stuff about low birthrates is purely economical and completely stupid imo - we are saying our country is full, housing crisis etc - we can’t possibly take in immigrants but then saying we need more kids to support an aging population, which is it? There are more and more countries becoming uninhabitable due to climate change and over time more and more people will become climate migrants, parts of Britain are even in danger of future flooding.

In the West population increase has been driven by immigration & people living longer. The UK population would be now shrinking if it wasn’t for do immigrants. We really need them, not a particularly popular solution at the moment. An ageing population isn’t just an economical issue, it’s cultural & societal too.

Unpopular opinion I know but if the people who want kids try and limit it to only having two per couple that will overall lower the population in time which is better for the planet and leaves more resources for the population. Honestly if we were deer there would be a cull - it’s not sustainable.

One child families make up the biggest share though? I don’t think anyone is advocating for a baby boom (it’s too late for that anyway) but there hasn’t been any planning.

it’s not sustainable to have the demographic switch we are facing, there are thousands of vacancies in health & social care & we will need many more workers. Euthanasia as you are proposing is not going to be popular with everyone.

Even if I was a gazillionaire I'd still have none.

The going through pregnancy thing, yeah that's my biggest barrier too

I’d probably have at least 3.

Financial concerns the main issue here - affording a big enough house in London probably not realistic, several years of massive nursery fees unbearable thought, helping with university and houses etc a bigger issue than I had previously though.

We have 3 - would have tried for 4 if not for money and really poor maternity services experience in last pg - would have possible have had more after that.

We've generally liked being parents - but now they are older glad we stopped at 3 mainly financial reasons again.

I believe the ONs figures show % of women who have no children at 45 has remains pretty stable over time - and it's family sizes that show decreases yet the media focus always on women not having any kids.

Mine all late teens - if we were starting now not sure we'd even have 3.