Having a sibling far out weights being privately educated?

[tryingtobemarypoppins2]

AIBU??

I chose to have 3 children and then spend money on lots of travel and days out. I sometimes think when my dh and I are long gone they will have each other.

I'm privately educated and an only child. My parents couldn't have sent two children to private school. I would hate to have siblings, I can think of nothing worse. I never, ever wanted them at any point of my life.

DD is an only and will remain an only. One of reasons for this decision is that we want to educate her privately and we can't afford to do that for two. Not that it really matters because I don't want more anyway.

Fluffy 123, that's a nice theory. My mother has 3 sisters, one of whom she didn't speak to for 15 years and poisoned the whole family against mum for no reason at all other than jealousy (she's now dead), 1 of whom lives in Milton Keynes and she sees every 5 years and the other who she was seeing regularly now won't return her calls.

My father is one of two and hasn't seen his brother for over 20 years as he lives in Scotland. They speak on the phone about 3 times a year and exchange Christmas cards. When my grandmother was in a nursing home for 3 years my uncle lived in Worcester and never came down once. My Dad had to deal with everything alone.

So IME having siblings is not a golden ticket to family unity

OhdearNigel I know that, I won't even get started on the dramas in both my parents family and my husbands fathers family. But I answered the post and gave one of the reasons for my decision to have more than one child.

I have a friend who is only having 1 so that her and her husband can maintain their current lifestyle (one income) and send child to boarding school. I don't get it at all but each to their own I guess.

Its a personal choice and you don't know the outcome of the decision until your child/children are grown.

I loathed my siblings until my mid-twenties (love them to bits now).

I know people who were only children who were very happy with that, and some that longed for a sibling. I've known privately educated people who have done very well, and some that haven't.

There's no right or wrong answer, you do what's right by your family, however big it happens to be and you always run the risk of getting it wrong!

its funny, I've contemplated this with my own DD, but from the POV that as older parents, a sibling happening naturally just wasn't on the cards & at this age even if it was, theres no way I could cope with the baby stage again :(

this leaves us in a better place to give her more attention & as a result she's a very bright well rounded child, we also can afford more exotic holidays with 1 DC, so she's well travelled & we've been told she would qualify for a Scholarship to private school, which we are considering.

but at some level, as 1 of 2, both me & DH would prefer it if she was too :( but we also happily accept that wasn't our lot & we are very lucky to have her, many aren't so lucky

but I do at times worry for her future & know she would LOVE a sibling, but I have come to the conclusion as I'm estranged from my own Brother, who TBH has been nothing but cause trouble for as long as I can remember & still does that siblings aren't always what they are cracked up to be

something she does say herself after visiting her friends with "annoying Brothers or sisters" lol

So making an actual decision - private ed or sibling - NO!!!! I wouldn't do it, I don't actually think any of us really can, decide to try maybe, but thats about it, nature will make her own decision for you

Im not understanding the question. Is it about money? If so then a child doesnt cost as much as private school surely?

1/3 of the class at DD's private school are onlies including DD.

Is a perk that i'd not thought about when choosing the school - DD isn't the odd one out, parents keen for play dates etc.

Not sure if anyone has deliberately gone for one to pay the fees - not what you chat about in the playground.

Two are children of single mums who split from DH when child was a baby, older parents, mother's working in professional careers - suspect easier to maintain with 1 child.

Looking at me people could assume it was a lifestyle choice - I tell very few people real reason DD is an only.

Reason is I almost died when DD was 9 months old and I have been told by 3 consultants not to get pg again. DD was also born with a significant disability which was not picked up on any scans. If I did survive a pregnancy then I know I couldn't work and deal with one possibly two disabled children, especially if I was left disabled and no guarantees second child will be healthy. Sound like something off a soap epera when I recount the whole tale.

If I had 3 children then DD wouldn't be in private school - we would have moved to catchment for a decent school. Private for one is cheaper than moving.

I don't really understand this as a premise for a debate. I can't imagine that there is a familt alive who really wanted a second child, put put off that desire as they thought that sending a child to a private school was so crucial.

Perhaps DD is doubly screwed as she is an only child (and likely to stay that way) and I wouldn't send her to private school if I won the euromillions.

I don't think having siblings is crucial for happiness (dear god the amount of people who hate their brothers and sisters) and I certainly don't think that private education is in any way desirable. So YABU on both counts.

I can understand it. We have 2 children and can probably afford to privately educate both. We wouldn't have a third as we couldn't give 3 those chances or afford to fund them all through university.

I know a lot of people who want 1 child for a variety of reasons. Cost is a big factor for most of them.

KalSkirata - if you privately educate one, you have to do it for the others and most of us normal people couldn't afford PE for 2 kids.

I think the impact on finances does have bearing on the decision to extend your family, but I don't think it is the education aspect of expenditure that is the main determinant. I think it is the housing costs that put people off having more than 2.

It certainly is for us.

Finances certainly should come into any decision to have more DC.

For some it will be housing, for others it will be education (going private or fees for tertiary ed) for some it will be child care costs, for others basic bills.

Also, many people work out how old they'll be when they can retire.
So a man at fifty may not want to keep working to support another child.

Finances are really the only reason we are stopping at 2.

Money makes life easier, we can afford to give our two every advantage they can have, if we have another, then the available resources are split a little further.

I grew up in a large poor family, that is not a choice I will make for my children if I have the power to decide otherwise.

I was an only child and it was great! I know a few other friends with no siblings and they have a great life with lots of friends and they didn't feel like they missed out at all.

I'd rather give one child the best start in life (whether that be private education I don't know...it depends on the school I guess) than have a 2nd or 3rd sibling and not being able to afford to do that. If it was just one sibling then, I'd have to try and save or find the money to send them both to private school if that's what I wanted (again..not saying just becasue it is a private school it will be better...I want mine to go to state grammers, but there aren't many in the area so might have to opt for private).

A very interesting debate. Not sure why Flabberghasted is getting so worked up, the words 'chip' and 'shoulder' come to mind. Anyway, I am sure there are people who have made the decision to have only one child but doubt it all hinges on having a private education. Undoubtedly, with one child you can afford to do more (holidays, material things, clubs, bigger house, less stress, more 1:1 attention bla bla bla). If you had asked me as a kid whether I would have traded my two brothers to be an only then the answer would definately have been yes. Ask me now and I wouldnt be without them.

Furthering the debate, I do have two siblings, one of whom was privately educated, myself and my younger brother were not. Do I feel aggrieved, not really but it does beg the question why my parents didnt do it for all of us.

In my family and extended family, and DH's family and extended family, siblings have caused nothing but stress. And as an only child I was the centre of attention and adored it, so I'm rather biased.

I totally agree that finances come into play when deciding to have more than one child - finances and career impact were my main decision to stick at one (alongside the fact I come from a family where all teh siblings hate one another, so do not have a good role model there). But to base it purely on the availability of money to pay for private education - I can't imagine that is true.

Absolutely agree with GetOrf - it would be sad if you as a parent would really love another child but decide against it because you can't afford private education.

I would have loved to have been an only child - alas. Two children isn't always better than one. And a private education isn't necessary better either. If I were you I'd spend your extra money on lots of nice holidays and early retirement, life is too short.

I'd love to know why the OP is asking the question.

My DSs HATE each other. I hope that will change. I know what they would choose right now though!

I would also be interested in the OP's reasonings.

Perhaps there will be in artcle in this week's Sunday Times about the middle-class angst and peril of having to reduce your family size in order to pay for the (essential) private schooling.