Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

To think that it's so much easier just having one child.

78 replies

dollywashers · 18/01/2012 17:20

I have two daughter's. My Mum has started picking one of them up from school one night a week (alternate weeks for each girl). It's just so much easier with one child. We have had such a lovely time together. Not that we have an awful time when we are all here but just think it's so much easier with one.

OP posts:

diabolo · 18/01/2012 18:09

I've only got one, he does miss out on the camaraderie and sibling fighting that it all part of growing up and as a result he is quite naive about stuff like that (he just can't understand why some of friends are deliberately horrid to each other, or try and get each other into trouble. It just wouldn't cross his mind to do that).

Yes - it does have some advantages, more time for his extra-curricular stuff, to advise regarding homework, but I know gets a bit lonely for him sometimes, especially when his friends aren't around.

LordOfTheFlies · 18/01/2012 19:11

I think children need a bit of time away from their sibling.
I've got a DS and DD.
When they were little my dad used to take DD out (she was a baby) and always felt that he was ignoring my DS. But it gave DS and I some time without his sister.
even now when my DS is 12yo and DD 9.6 yo, it's nice to have some time alone.

Though a few of DS friends are only children and he them. I do try to tell him he'd miss DD but he's not convinced

gigglepin · 18/01/2012 19:16

I suppose so, but i would have loved to have had 2.

goingtoofast · 18/01/2012 19:20

I have 3. Having just 2 for a day seems so much easier than having 3! At the monet they are all entertaining each other which makes it very easy for me!

aldiwhore · 18/01/2012 19:24

I loved having one, I love having two.

I miss the one on one time I had with my eldest, so we often have a morning together at the weekend (I get every afternoon with my youngest so not an issue) but I love watching my boys' relationship develop.

We spend quite a lot of time together as a family, which we're thankful for (although it means that DH isn't at work so a double edged sword) and play together a lot.

I can't imagine life without both now, although I do believe one on one time with each child is extremely important even if it means juggling time. I did feel sorry for my eldest when my youngest was a babe in arms, he really did miss out on the me time he'd had for 4 years, but now youngest is older its no problem at all.

Original poster

dollywashers · 18/01/2012 19:24

Iusetoomuchkitchenroll I think you have summed up how I feel perfectly.

It is lovely to have 1 because I usually have 2.

So sorry didn't mean to offend anone who has one child and would have liked more than one.

OP posts:

SucksToBeMe · 18/01/2012 19:27

Karma sorry to hear that It puts everything into perspective.

TidyDancer · 18/01/2012 19:33

Karma, I'm so sorry for your loss, but I don't believe the OP intended her post to come off that way. It must feel so horribly raw for you at the moment, so it's totally understandable that you read that kind of thing in what others say.

I have two DCs and yes, it would sometimes be easier if I only had one to organise, but it doesn't mean I don't love them both or value my DD (the youngest) any less.

40notTrendy · 18/01/2012 19:38

If you mean it's nice to have one around when you would have two then YANBU. If you mean it's easier to have just one child then YABVVU.

BusterBluth · 18/01/2012 19:55

Again, I'm sorry for your loss karma

FaithHopeAndKevin · 18/01/2012 19:58

It's the temporary one-less principle.

I do things with two or three that when I had only two or three I would have considered idiocy But still far, far easier than doing with my 4.

SecretMinceRinser · 18/01/2012 19:58

I was thinking just this the other day when dh took dd to the football and I just had ds all day. But it didn't feel easy when I just had 1. I often think if I could go back to having dd now knowing what I now know it would be a doddle.

paisleyII · 18/01/2012 20:08

iuseto - upsetting post to read when you have secondary infertility, smug or what

happydotcom · 18/01/2012 20:09

Karma I'm really sorry.

choceyes · 18/01/2012 20:09

YANBU. I totally get where you are coming from.

I have a 17 month old DD and a 3.2yr DS. They are still at the intensive parenting stage so it hard work with both of them around. Plus DS won't play with DD most of the time, he grabs toys off her making her cry, pushes her, sometimes hits her, so they need constant supervision when they together, which means it is difficult to get anything done. I can't give either of them quality time, as I am bogged down with chores, stopping DS from hurting DD etc.

But when I have just one of them with me, it is sooooo much easier. DS especially is a totally different child when he is alone. When he is with DD, he is attention seeking, naughty, destructive etc, but when she is not there he is calm, will play with toys by himself, read book etc. I love going to a cafe with him and having a meal together, then read a book and have a chat. Things I can't do when DD is around.
When I have DD alone, I can make her laugh, read books to her, let her walk at her own pace, without having DS dominating our schedule.

At the weekend, me and DH spend half a day alone with each child. It works really well.
I think when they are older, hopefully they will play together, so might be easier than having one.

choceyes · 18/01/2012 20:09

So sorry for your loss Karma.

MaureenMLove · 18/01/2012 20:14

Oh fgs paisleyII! If it's going to be upsetting don't open it! The title says what gonna be in it!

I don't think there's any need to make the OP feel any worse than she does! (Not that she needs to.) Of course, it is desparately sad that some people only have one child for reasons beyond their control, but this is not what this thread was about.

Totally understand what you mean OP.

IUseTooMuchKitchenRoll · 18/01/2012 20:15

That's a bit harsh paisley! It's not smug at all, it's just that gettingh one on one time with each of your children is nice when it happens, because it is different to having to share your attention between two of them.

I think you completely misunderstood what I actually wrote, I said it wouldn't feel the same if you only had one (for whatever reason) and that's what I meant.

I responded to the OP, what with it being her thread and all, and she doesn't seem to have secondary infertility. However I seem to be unable to conceive a third, if that make you feel any better.

paisleyII · 18/01/2012 20:18

maureen - read my POST, i was having a dig at iuseto and NOT the op, i used the word POST and not THREAD, it was her wording, i didn't find anything offensive about any of the others posts actually

IUseTooMuchKitchenRoll · 18/01/2012 20:20

Having a dig at me for what exactly?

paisleyII · 18/01/2012 20:22

Iuse - i wouldn't wish secondary infertility on ANYONE so don't throw your inability on having a third on me. i tried EVERYTHING for 8 years to have a second child and have as a result a HUGE chip on my shoulder and emotional problems because of it. i am sure it is WONDERFUL having more than one, i find it terribly painful when i read how wonderful it is and that it is better than having one, oh so very different. you are very lucky, you probably don't know it and yes, i know how terribly lucky i am to have one, people with secondary infertility know, believe me we know

Procrastinating · 18/01/2012 20:23

I have 3 and my DD is practically stuck to my leg all day when the other two are at school. It is easier for me at home with 3.

Out and about it is much easier with one, and I love taking them out individually. Agree with KitchenRoll on this though - taking one out is special because there are three of them most of the time.

kenhallroad · 18/01/2012 20:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MaureenMLove · 18/01/2012 20:24

IUseTooMuchKitchenRoll · 18/01/2012 20:26

Like I said Paisley, you misunderstood what I was saying. I was responding to the OP who clearly doesn't have secondary infertility, so my saying it was lovely having one at a time when you have two was clearly not intended to offend anyone who can't, nor is it saying that it's only lovely having one if you have two.

I am sorry you found my comment painful to read, and yes, I know I am lucky to have two.

Flip

1 2 3 4