Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be fed up when people have an opinion on how many children you have or want

471 replies

brummiegirl1 · 09/02/2013 20:58

I have 2 young boys aged 2 and 7 months and would like 4 children if i'm lucky enough as i was an only child and knew i wanted a big family. Before i went off on maternity leave with my youngest a woman at work said are you done now and i said i would like more children in the future and she said im mad.

Other people have also asked the same thing. Is it me? I wouldn't dream commenting on how many children someone wants or has as it's up to them, when im asked now i feel all defensive about it and don't want to tell them like im a naughty teenager not a 33 year old married woman!

OP posts:
haventmetyouyet · 10/02/2013 15:11

Another one here who has heard far too many criticisms of my own choices. I have been married a year, but DH and I have agreed not to have any dc together, which apparently is selfish. I have one child already and I am not interested in having any more, we enjoy our lifestyle with an older child and would hate to get tied down with a baby and have the extra expense. I'm tired of justifying it, I have got comments ranging from my child being spoilt/lonely, to me not fulfilling my DH by providing him with a child Shock.

It's just plain rude to make any comments about family plans except for a Congratulations where appropriate.

CheerfulYank · 10/02/2013 18:18

My aunt& uncle, SIL& BIL, and some close friends are childless and will remain so. I know several families who are having just one, by choice or circumstances. So can I have their "extra"? :o

That's the thing about the whole "but if everyone has six kids..." Not everyone does. Not everyone will. The trend is definitely toward smaller families. The Duggars, etc, are famous because they're rare.

Also, a woman could live and die in the same tiny African village and have ten kids, and not produce nearly the carbon footprint, of, say, Suri Cruise. (She's not technically an only child, but is being raised as one.) It's individual choice.

I do know a woman with five and at this point they're not costing me anything as far as I can see, tax-wise. She home schools them. And they run an organic farm.

kerala · 10/02/2013 18:43

Pretty clear to me that Tasmania is quite correct. Personally feel that having more than two is selfish - just look around us. Havenmet how rude those comments are. People that dont have children/limit their families are to be commended not criticised.

Trills · 10/02/2013 18:47

I think anyone is mad who chooses the number of children that they want more than one at a time.

You have zero - you can decide that you want "at least one"

You have some, you can decide to have "one more"

You might get two at once, but I think it's crazy to say "I want 3 more children then aI currently have" rather than "I will have one more, then see how it goes, then maybe another, and see how I feel then, then maybe another.. etc"

CheerfulYank · 10/02/2013 19:04

Right! I say I want 5, but DS has been relatively easy going. If DC2 is a nightmare I may be put off :)

Annunziata · 10/02/2013 19:38

Ariel- I was using your post as an example of the constant judging you get as a mother of a big family.

When I said I had never thought about 'the future,' I said that I never worried 'about what world your DC and their children will live in, if everyone had the same amount of children as you?' I didn't think about the environment. I seriously doubt that many people do. Besides, the argument that 'if everyone did it' doesn't really count because not everyone will. We're the minority.

Besides, all the newspapers keep banging on about how the birth rates are falling and we need to support the elderly population.

Annunziata · 10/02/2013 19:39

Oops, two besides. On phone.

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 10/02/2013 20:22

That's what people have been saying. Maybe people should be starting to think about the environment more.

CheerfulYank · 10/02/2013 20:28

I think they are, as well as finances, etc. Which is why most people seem to be having one or two.

CheerfulYank · 10/02/2013 20:30

Plus many people are waiting til they're older to have children, so by necessity are having smaller families.

Saski · 10/02/2013 20:31

Yes, the environment should be considered.

I'm always confused by the whole "we have 4/5/6 kids (vs the "replacement" 2) but we have a low footprint". There's absolutely no way that you can offset exponential population growth/C02 footprint with personal/linear CO2 footprint reduction. Unless you reach an agreement with your kids that they will produce only 4 offspring amongst the x of them (and if you think this is ridiculous, I share your view) - it's impossible. I really wish some proponent of big families would address this mathematical reality.

5madthings · 10/02/2013 20:36

We have five. We also care about the environment.

We recycle loads and dont throw out much rubbish.
We have one car that we chose because if its fuel economy and we walk most places.
We dont fly and when we holuday we camp or this year we went to an eco lodge on a farm which has won awards for being 'green' and environmnentally friendly.
We have insulated our house with extra loft insulation and cavity wall insulation and we chose a low carbon boiler.
All the electrical goods ie fridge, washing machine, cooker etc are a rated.
We hand stuff down, dont buy all new stuff and we give to charity.

I filled in a carbon footprint yhing online and ours is quite low

We pay tax and support ourselves.

My two of our close family are not having any children and one us gaving only one, they joke that we have their quota.

If everyone had loads it wouldnt be good but most people dont. Most if my friends have two or one or occasionally three.

Yes i think about the future and i am leading by example and showing my children.things they can do to.help so.hopefuly they will grow up to be responsible adults who do their bit.

Having fewer children does not automaticaly make you mote caring and responsible towards the environment. I know plentu with onlu one or two kids but they have two cars and one is 4x4 and they fly numerous times a year and throw out more than we do etc.

Original poster
brummiegirl1 · 10/02/2013 20:38

So whats the answer then to stop people having big families? Sterilise after one? As even if you decide on a small family birth control can still fail

OP posts:
Saski · 10/02/2013 20:41

5madthings

I'm always confused by the whole "we have 4/5/6 kids (vs the "replacement" 2) but we have a low footprint". There's absolutely no way that you can offset exponential population growth/C02 footprint with personal/linear CO2 footprint reduction. Unless you reach an agreement with your kids that they will produce only 4 offspring amongst the x of them (and if you think this is ridiculous, I share your view) - it's impossible. I really wish some proponent of big families would address this mathematical reality.

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 10/02/2013 20:42

No. People need to decide on their own. No one has said people should have to have only one, or be sterilized after one. No one.

5madthings · 10/02/2013 20:49

But no one can say how many children their chikdren will have. Even if you only have two your children may have more.

I am one of two, i have five, my sister has one.

Dp is one of two and has five his sister has none and now in her late 40's wont be having any. so as part of an extended family the child total is no more than had we all had two each, infact its less 6 as opposed to 8.

I also donated eggs and my recipient had twins! But they arent mine.

Saski · 10/02/2013 20:52

Surely you can see that someone with 5 kids is quite likely to wind up with a lot more grandkids than someone with 2. It's just math.

CheerfulYank · 10/02/2013 21:04

My aunt has 6. Her eldest has said she'll have a few, the next is vehemently opposed to any, and one has Down syndrome and is unlikely to be able reproduce. The others are quite young, so who knows. They may well only end up with five or six between all of them. :)

CheerfulYank · 10/02/2013 21:06

I am one of two as well. I want 4 or 5, my brother will hopefully may never have any.

5madthings · 10/02/2013 21:11

Well ds1 doesnt want any kids at all!

Sorry but none of us can predict how many grandchildren we all have. Yes i am on balance of probabilities more likely to have more. But its not guaranteed. My gran had five children, two had two kids each, one had none and another died before even getting the chance. The other had three but they went on to only have one each.

CheerfulYank · 10/02/2013 21:20

Jim Bob Duggar is the youngest of only two, and look how that turned out :o

lovelyredwine · 10/02/2013 21:32

I'm in the same boat as coraltoes- only have one and will almost certainly stay that way. I get told weekly that I 'should' have more and it's not fair on dd to be an only.

I've decided that people aren't being malicious, they just want to pass on advice even if you don't need or want it!

Tasmania · 10/02/2013 23:05

Everyone seems to think that it doesn't matter how many kids they have as they can just use someone else's quota, and "this happens the world over", so it's as though there's some magical, natural equilibrium that keeps world population at bay.

Well considering the fact that we grew from a little over 2 billion people to a little over 7 billion in less than a century, I would say... that equilibrium is somewhat non-existent.

It took 123 years to grow the world's population from about 1 billion in the early 1800s to around 2 billion in 30's. It took another 33 years to get to 3 billion in 1960. But ever since then, we have added 1 billion people to the planet about every 12-14 years!!!

Obviously, modern medicine is working too well...

Sure, some of the growth is happening in Third World countries. I do really think this has to at some point be addressed the world over.

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 10/02/2013 23:16

Population growth is exponential, and if you look at that coupled with longer life expectancy, it's a time bomb.

MrsDeVere · 10/02/2013 23:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.