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 5 6 ··· 13 14

Original poster

To think having a baby doesn't have to be expensive

337 replies

annabanana84 · 31/10/2013 11:12

I have just had my coil out as I thought dp and I would like to start ttc. As soon as I got home from having it out, dp started saying we should use condoms until this time next year as babies are very expensive and we don't have money for one. We both work and have a nice lifestyle but do have to watch the pennies. I am 30 and really, really x1000000 broody. I am pissed off at dp, because although babies do cost some money, we will have 9 months to buy all the baby things, even longer if we struggle to Conceive straight away. We will be getting most of the baby things second hand or off freecycle anyway to keep it cheap as possible. I hate the way dp let me get excited and now wants wait - a year! I don't want to get old and not have children :o( I think babies need love more than money and material things anyway!

OP posts:

adiia · 31/10/2013 11:45

As others said,childcare is the most expense(sp!).but the comments about a older child not wanting second hand,or wanting the last iphone etc...well,they when they will work they'll buy those things.I can't see why someone would struggle 'cos their teen wants a ipad.also many people feel that with more kids they need a bigger house,car etc.all bull* in my opinion,kids don't need their own room,latest gadget etc.children are very spoiled here.this is what makes them expensive imo

BurberryFucker · 31/10/2013 11:49

well that is true they don't actually need the latest phone, dance/drama/swimming lessons etc., and they don't need tumbletots etc., which are just money spinners and not all that.....

DontmindifIdo · 31/10/2013 11:49

as others have said, babies are cheap. Childcare if you need to work is not. Losing a whole salary if you don't work is not cheap. And while babies are cheap, older children are not.

BurberryFucker · 31/10/2013 11:50

but adiaa you try and get a 15 year old boy under intense pressure from his peers to wear secondhand clothes.....

Tailtwister · 31/10/2013 11:51

Yep, loss or earnings/childcare is the biggest cost in the early years. If you give up a career there's also the cost of all the future years too if you take into account loss of earnings if you're unable to get back into a job or have to go back at a lower level.

Now we have one child in school the mounting costs have become apparent. Just kitting him out in the required uniform is extortionate and then there's the clubs/activities. That's just the beginning as far as I can see. Once they start any serious sports there's all the kit for that too, plus school trips etc. Don't even get me started on how much university will be if they choose to go...

YesterdayI · 31/10/2013 11:52

Babies can be really cheap but, as everyone else has said, childcare and older children are not.

Mumsyblouse · 31/10/2013 11:57

You own your own home and it has enough bedrooms for at least one child?
You can easily afford your rent/mortgage on one income?
Your expenses can easily be met from one income?
(the last two questions in case your baby is ill or you become ill or simply cannot bring yourself to return to work after maternity leave)

According to this criteria, I shouldn't have had two children! We rent and rely on two incomes. But our day to day living is very comfortable and we have professional interesting careers as well. 99% of the world would never meet these criteria, should we all just not have children?!

scattermummy · 31/10/2013 12:00

Ive had to but 5 pairs of shoes for 4 Dc this week cost £300.
Dinner money for 4 is £44 per week
music lessons £ 30 per week.
equipment and subs for athletics club and fencing club
The list is endless. We are not rich, we earn a bit more than average but the kids cost a bomb.
I would not change it though. Obviously 4 is a bit extreme, but we hand down clothes ,share a computer act and we manage.

YouStoleMyHat · 31/10/2013 12:02

I totally agree Mumsyblouse! Most people will never meet those criteria. I think if you try to think too much about how much having children really costs, no one would ever do it. Unfortunately we have a limited window to have children, so as long as you feel comfortable that you'll work it out, you probably will. It's what people have always done. Good luck TTC.

BackforGood · 31/10/2013 12:08

Burberry - mine does (well, he's 17 now). How would anyone (but him and you) know they were second hand ?

Scholes34 · 31/10/2013 12:12

If you add up how much it costs to bring up children, you'd never start a family. It's not an additional expense on top of your current outgoings, but what your family budget becomes. We don't do holidays abroad, don't eat out regularly, but still manage to be satisfied and happy with our lives. With children you start to take enjoyment from different areas of life. Birthdays and christmasses can cover major items of expenditure. Gifts of money over the years have been saved - the gift of £20 when DD was 4 has gone towards a laptop when she was 14.

Now the DCs are that bit older, they bring home almost £200 a month between them in paper rounds. DD (16) has just discovered the delights of charity shops and is about to introduce DS (15) to them.

Nothing's going to change if you wait a year before ttc.

NaiveWoman · 31/10/2013 12:15

When children are still babies, the biggest coat is childcare and/or loss of earnings.
You can make it expensive. You can also make it quite cheap if you want.
The issue is when they get older, go to school but have some after school activities, go the b'day parties etc and it just gets worse as they get older.

However I would really ask if the issue isn't that your DH is looking at how much you can save now, doesn't see a lot of leeway and therefore thinks it will get unmanageable if you keep the same lifestyle.
Except that you won't.
You will find that you are not going to go out that often, won't be going to the cinema as much etc... All if which will lower your spending a too, forcing you to make some savings anyway.

cathers · 31/10/2013 12:16

I wish financially they could stay babies!! You are right that babies are relatively cheap- I had maternity pay, hand me downs, breast fed, free admission for baby on days out and travel. I was relatively rolling in it!

However forward 5 years, yes, I don't pay for nursery but if I wanted pre & post school childcare it would be £60 week per child, clothing - there are no / less hand me downs as it gets worn out first, clubs come to over £10 a child a week, uniform, school £15 per child per week for lunches, holidays cost 3 times more than going non term time. It really is endless...
I can only guess but I reckon 'cost' per child is about £150 per week.

adiia · 31/10/2013 12:18

If not second hand then cheap clothes(asda etc).if they don't agree what are they going to do?either get a weekend job and pay for the latest peer pressure item,or suck it up.besides,should we really teach our kids that not following their peers is really so bad?talking about a car.most cars will fit 3 carseats on the back,do we really need a 7 seater for 3 kids?and can kids not wear an extra jumper too if is not so cold,rather then put the heating on in september?sorry for the rant,I feel quite strongly about this subject!

MoldieOldNaiceHam · 31/10/2013 12:19

I have just had my coil out as I thought dp and I would like to start ttc.

Did you discuss this with him before having your coil removed?

FruitSaladIsNotPudding · 31/10/2013 12:20

As others have said, it's not the baby stuff that's expensive.

Someone has to care for the child - either one of you quits work/you both go part time, in which case you lose a salary, or you use childcare, which round here is about £1200 a month per child for a full time place. That is a LOT of money.

Scholes34 · 31/10/2013 12:22

I remember when I had my first, I was on maternity leave, still being paid in full, I was breastfeeding and my only expenditure for DD was on nappies. When my child benefit came through I was about £5 a week better off on the whole deal!

It's all been downhill financially since then, but the most wonderful fun and rewarding downhill slide I've been on.

givemeaclue · 31/10/2013 12:25

It isn't the baby equipment, it is the loss of salary whilst on maternity leave and the cost of childcare, can you afford 50 per day for nursery so you can return to work?

DontmindifIdo · 31/10/2013 12:39

OP - it might be worth checking out what you get from your company in terms of maternity pay. If it's just SMP, then it's 6 weeks at 90% pay then dropping to about £500 a month (not entirely sure what you end up with because mine's slightly squewed at the moment as I'm getting some tax rebated each month). That only lasts until 8 months, then after that you are entitled to unpaid leave until 1 year.

Even if you can afford the cost of childcare to return to work, it could well be your DH wants to save to ensure you have enough to cover that drop of earnings. I know a few woman who had to return to work at 6-8 months when they wanted to take a year off, but they just couldn't afford to have no money coming in. I know another couple who 3 years on have told me they've just cleared the credit card debts they ran up just living without her wage for that long.

If you intend to return full time and can afford your lifestyle with the childcare costs taken off (or will get free childcare from family), it makes sense to make sure you have enough to cushion you financially for mat leave.

Topseyt · 31/10/2013 13:04

I can only echo what everyone else has said. Marriedinwhite put a lot of it very well too.

I must say that it was the cost of childcare 15 years ago which made me stop work after the birth of my second baby and become an SAHM. It would have cost more than I could bring in at that time to go back to work. So for us that and the loss of my earnings was the major issue.

Babies are relatively cheap in themselves. They won't care whether or not they are dressed in charity shop clothes (as mine often were) or the latest designer gear. It is as they grow up that the expense really piles on.

CreamyCooler · 31/10/2013 13:06

As a mother to two teenagers and one grown up son, having a baby is definitely expensive. Food, housing, transport, education, recreation, childcare...it just goes on and on. I've found having a child gets more expensive as they get older.

motherinferior · 31/10/2013 13:10

Hmmm. I don't pay childcare costs usually these days but I still pay for babysitters/music lessons/school trips/clothes (despite handmedowns and charity shops)/shoes (omg the cost of shoes)/Stuff...

...and above all, I pay my share of the mortgage on a house. Before kids I lived in one-bedroomed flat. Now I live in a staggering monstrosity that is constantly falling down.

motherinferior · 31/10/2013 13:11

Oh, and don't start me on holidays. Train tickets. Instrument hire. Dance class.

oliveoctagon · 31/10/2013 13:11

Tax credits will pay your childcare unless you are well off. If you have too much money for that then just work round your dh no childcare. Other than thst I spent about 700 all in with nappies in first year.Its v cheap.

motherinferior · 31/10/2013 13:12

How on earth can you 'just work round your dh'? You mean do childcare all day and then a night shift? WHen do you sleep?

(And I'm freelance...)

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 13 14

Swipe left for the next trending thread