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

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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:
juule · 11/02/2013 20:36

tasmania "You don't want to know how many people are out there who just "pop out" kids without thinking of the costs / effort of raising them"

And why would people like the ones you describe consider a child tax if the they don't consider anything else? And how would they pay it if they were dependent on benefits to raise them ( as you later comment)?

So who would your child tax be aimed at to deter them from having children.

The rich could pay it and have as many children as before.
The thoughtless as you describe them couldn't afford the tax anyway so the tax would make little difference there, if any.
So that leaves the middle group having to cut down on offspring or suffer for it.
So I'm not sure how much of a difference your child tax would make. And not particularly fair either.

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 11/02/2013 20:39

I know you're not! I said you weren't! I'm not either.

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 11/02/2013 20:40

I meant that no one on this thread was advocating a one or two child law, as decreed by the State.

Annunziata · 11/02/2013 21:01

But how are these taxes working for mums of triplets or more, and for those of us who have adopted?

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 11/02/2013 21:03

Tasmania, your question....

Annunziata · 11/02/2013 22:09

And when would these taxes start? As soon as you registered with a midwife and started to cost the NHS?

redbobblehat · 11/02/2013 22:16

i hate this question as my ds died.
still have my dd, but boy this question hurts

i don't think people should ask such nosy questions really

brummiegirl1 · 11/02/2013 22:20

I agree with you redbobblehat that people should not ask, they don't know your circumstances. Sorry to hear about your DS.

OP posts:
redbobblehat · 11/02/2013 22:29

thanks brummie girl.

Tasmania · 12/02/2013 00:43

Annunziata: to be fair - probably just once the child is born. No need to worry those who have tragic things happen to them during the pregnancy. That... you can't really prevent (unlike getting pregnant in the first place). Though I'm sure that in other countries where there's no NHS, you have to pay no matter what anyway...

With regards to triplets, etc. - if it's the first pregnancy, then there should be no tax (again, difficult to plan for that). However, if you decide to to have another child after your triplets, you will be charged the same rate as for a fourth consecutive child.

Really, what should happen though is a proper analysis of the population - which part of the population (income) has the most children, and the least. Most likely, what you will see is that those in the lower stratum of society is more likely to have a lot of children (they tend to start early), the middle / professional ones are less likely to have many as they have kids later, the upper bit - not so sure... probably somewhere in the middle??? I haven't met too many very rich people though who chose to have a lot of kids (and if they did, their DC will no longer be "rich" a few generations down the line).

When it comes to immigration, countries (e.g. U.S. - even the UK) often "discriminate" by ethnicity / country, in order to "balance" the population out. Why not do it by income class, too? You have to dissuade the class that tends to have too many children, encourage the working parents that may find it difficult to juggle work with kids (universal child care?)... and as for the rich, let them pay huge taxes if they want to.

What you really don't want though is a large percentage of births coming from one part of the population only. You want balance - and if that does happen, it does beg the question... why? An 'unbalanced' birth rate shows that there's something wrong with society and its policies.

Weirdly enough, if you do go to Third World countries where people have a lot of children, when you talk to the wealthier professionals in their 20s/30s, they often agree with having only two kids (mainly for practicality/costs/giving their children the best opportunities in life). They don't understand why people who REALLY can't afford it, have more children than them. Of course, that part of the population uses the same excuse as some people on this thread, but in a literal manner: the children are literally their pension / those who care for them later. The pyramid scheme - people now funding their lives to the cost of the next generation. I'm pretty sure that - apart from a few outliers - you will get the same correlation between income class / birth rate here in the UK, too.

FellatioNels0n · 12/02/2013 04:13

I agree that there is something a bit wrong with a system that rewards people financially for having more than two or three children instead of penalising them, or at least making it financially neutral.

Adoption is entirely different I think. Those children already exist, and need homes.

You make some good points Tasmania. However I am inclined to think that there are quite a few wealthy couples who opt to have loads of children (5,6,7) as well. I think it tends to be the squeezed middle who not only pay for everything themselves with no subsidies, but who are not affluent enough to be able to draft in nannies, cleaners etc, or who like the idea of private school or foreign holidays etc, but could only ever manage it with two children.

The very large families tend to occur among the very wealthy (who can afford to be self-indulgent) or the totally benefit dependent, for whom it is financially advantageous to have more children.

I know a family with five children who have sent them all to public school, boarding termly, at 30k a year each. Shock

On the other hand, I imagine it's quite a breeze to parent 5 kids if you don't actually live with them. Grin

FellatioNels0n · 12/02/2013 04:24

I hadn't read the thread when I waded in, but now I have I would just like to say I totally agree with what cantspel said here:

40/50 years ago it was not normal to have lots of kids. The average family size was 2.93 which was the peak in 1964 (the year of my own birth) and has been dropping year on year until 2001 when it hit 1.63 and then it started rising again and in 2009 we were at 1.96. It is still growing.

MN is full of threads about lack of housing and the rising cost of what is available, no jobs, struggling to make ends meet and cost of food. This will only get worse with a higher birth rate and add in to the mix the freedom of movement within the eu and people living longer. How is the country going to substain everyone.

You cant just say build more housing as we already have problems with flooding due to building in places where were shouldn't and we need land to grow food and for trees to grow so the planet can breath or we will end up like Hong Kong with it being the norm for families to live in one room.

If you want to go back to victorian england with it being the norm for large families then we better start dying earlier and go back to infant mortality rates of 3 in every 10 children not living past childhood or we are going to over populate even worse than we do now.

Saski · 12/02/2013 10:27

^^Big families are becoming more popular among some pockets of the wealthy/super-wealthy. I noticed it myself, thought it might be anecdotal, but then stumbled upon an article about it.

jester68 · 12/02/2013 10:37

I have it the other way. We have 2 daughters and I constantly get asked whether we are going to have anymore to "try for a boy".

Pisses me off as people can't seem to understand that I would not have more to try for a certain sex. We are very happy with our 2 girls.

But even days after my youngest was born (and after she had come out of hospital after nearly dying) people who knew that made some very stupid and upsetting comments.

Including in them was:

Oh what a shame, another girl.

You will just have to try again for your boy.

Your poor partner bet he is gutted.

You need a boy to carry on the family name.

Etc, etc.

I would never dream of commenting to how many children someone decided they want. It is none of my business.

And a friend has it another way. She is about to have her 4th child and gets annoyed with people thinking they have the right to comment about it.

So YANBU. People should mind their own business.

(DISCLAIMER: I have not 100% decided whether to have another child or not. But if we do it will be because we want a child not because we want a certain sex. We will be happy with whatever we have and equally will be happy if we decide to stop at our 2 girls)

Tasmania · 12/02/2013 13:35

FellatioNels0n / Cantspel

Completely right. I wonder where people get it from... that large families were ever the norm in the UK? My MIL was a single child, FIL was one of two... you really need to go all the way back to the Victorian era to find huge families commonplace anywhere?! Or did people just watch TV one too many times, where big families exist as they generally create dynamic entertainment?

JesusInTheCabbageVan · 12/02/2013 13:38

Or this:

"How old is he?"
"13 months."
"Awww. Time for another one then?"

Yep, as soon as they start doing fanjo and lower back transplants on the NHS, I'll get right on it. Hmm

FellatioNels0n · 12/02/2013 14:35

Taking my maternal GPs as an example, who were lower middle class people, I think my Grandmother's mother had nine babies but only 5 or 6 survived to adulthood. My Grandfather's mother had 4 but only three survived. That was normal then. BC was still very hit and miss and hard to obtain. I'm talking around 1900-1925.

My grandparents on the other hand, had only two children and most of their siblings had 3 children or fewer. The same with my paternal GPs. I think this was partly because of WW2, and all the associated lack of opportunity and lack of stability for the five years or so before and after it.

My mother's generation were lucky enough to have the pill, and many women discovered careers outside the home so the birth rate stayed reasonably low in comparison to previous generations.

Very large families (I'm talking 5+) were largely confined to Roman Catholics and/or the lowest socio-economic groups. (and it's hardly surprising they were among the lowest with so many children to feed and clothe, so it was a self-fulfilling prophesy perhaps.) But most people had the typical 2.5 children.

The 'average' family size dipped lower still throughout the 80's and 90's due to the new phenomenon of large numbers of single mums with just one child. They had always existed, obviously, but not in such proliferation.

I think that the some wealthy/super wealthy people are having very large families now because:

a) they are lifestyle status symbol; part of that slightly alternative Boho zeitgeist and the obvious successor/antidote to the Yuppie era. It's what all the rich, cool people do now. They've given up a life of cocaine and champagne in Islington for a life of chicken keeping, vegetable growing, dragging numerous small children with matted hair around Latitude, moving to Norfolk or Gloucestershire, and er...cocaine.

b) if the women themselves have super-duper high powered careers they can afford to employ maternity nurses, live-in nannies, cleaners, private schools or boarding schools etc, and have all the shit taken care of for them, so they just get the fun bits of parenting. Whereas Mr and Mrs Average who do not have any of that stuff at their disposal understandably tire of the drudgery aspect of parenting after 3 kids.

And lastly the birth rate is on the rise again almost exclusively because of recent immigration. Most immigrants over the last ten years come from cultural/religious backgrounds where it is the norm to have large families.
Whereas among the UK population of third generation or more, the birth rate is at an all-time low.

fedupofnamechanging · 12/02/2013 14:43

I am one of four and have four dc. The first one was so bloody marvellous, I felt I owed it to the world to have some more Wink

None of my siblings have dc and my dh was an only child of an only child. I have had more than my 'quota', but others in my family have had less - guess it all evens itself out in the end. For every person who has 4+ dc, there will be others who have none or one.

We all make choices which impact on the future of the planet - having children is just one of them, therefore I think it is relevant to expect the naysayers to be leading exemplary lives (in environmental terms), if they are to pass comment on the number of children other people should have.

To go back to the point of the thread, I hate it when people ask if children were planned (esp if they ask in front of said children). I mean, that is so personal and absolutely fuck all to do with anybody other than the people present at conception. I do not get how anyone thinks it is in any way an acceptable question to ask. It even pissed me off when the hv/midwife asked - beyond their job remit imo.

juule · 12/02/2013 14:50

"guess it all evens itself out in the end"

Based on what you say then you would think so. But the population is rising so something somewhere isn't evening out.

CheerfulYank · 12/02/2013 14:52

Here in the US it appears that the only birth rates that are up are among older parents (40 plus, I think). All the others are down as a rule. Especially among the Hispanic community, which historically has had a lot of children (generally very close knit and Catholic). But as more Hispanic women go to college, they put it off, which limits their family size a bit. And our economy is wretched right now, and we don't have an NHS.

What is child benefit? Does everyone get it? Or is it for lower income families, like welfare here?

juule · 12/02/2013 14:56

I think it is reasonable to ask if it was planned. It gives the person asking an indication of how to respond. Not much point congratulating someone who feels her world has ended due to an accidental pregnancy.
A friend of mine once asked me whether congratulations or commiserations were in order when I gave the news of one of my pregnancies. Fair enough really.
Same for the midwife. Don't they need to have an idea how you might be feeling towards the pregnancy and later the baby?

CheerfulYank · 12/02/2013 14:56

Pmsl at "dragging numerous small children with matted hair around". So true!

And I agree with the talk about "the squeezed middle". DH and I are neither rich enough to hire nannies nor poor enough to receive assistance. Any children we have we'll have to feed, clothe, and insure on our own. Well, there's public school.

Annunziata · 12/02/2013 15:01

It is never reasonable to ask a stranger if their children were planned! How rude.

And you do not get financially rewarded for having children. £20 a week per child, £13 for each subsequent child, isn't it? I was getting about £4000 a year in CB for my six (they're older now). That's not going to make much of a difference.

fedupofnamechanging · 12/02/2013 15:05

I don't think that whether a pg was planned or not gives much of an indication of how women feel towards their babies/pregnancies. Unplanned doesn't mean unhappy. Also plenty of people plan pregnancies but are then affected by feelings they didn't anticipate.

Might be better for hv/midwives to tailor their questions accordingly rather than relying on a blunt 'was it planned?'

juule · 12/02/2013 15:06

No I wouldn't think it reasonable to ask a stranger out of the blue.
But not too unreasonable if you are having a conversation and it comes up.

Swipe left for the next trending thread