To wonder if only having enough time left for one child means that we shouldn't have any?

[JessieMcJessie]

Something I'm wrestling with at the moment. I am already 40, very newly married and DH and I haven't really made up our minds yet about children. Last time we discussed it he casually threw in "of course, we'll only ever be able to have one". Even though in my head I only feel about 30, he's probably right. It got us thinking- he has 2 siblings, I have a brother and we both have very close bonds with them. For me in particular my brother has been a huge support during some awful times including the death of both our parents- he walked me down the aisle last month. It's phenomenally important to me that another person felt the same loss and shares the same memories.

But maybe that's just a bonus, and I'd have managed OK if I had never known any different.

Given that DH and I are a bit on the fence about DC full stop, is there any force in the argument that it's maybe not a good thing to deliberately have an only child?

Instant? No.

When you start out, you simply don't know what is going to happen. You may have one, you may have twins (or more) you may have one child who has additional needs, you may have none. It is an adventure but you don't know what you are going to get. I don't think proceeding on the basis you are going to have two, who are going to get on well and be an emotional support to each other, is a realistic way to proceed, only partly because of age.

I had my son 6 weeks before my 40th and my daughter 6 weeks after my 43rd. I presumed we would only have 1 but really wanted to try for another when my son turned 1. Took 2 and a half years to persuade my husband to try again. Finally got him to agree and fell pregnant the first month of trying. We were really lucky. Took a lot longer to get pregnant with my son and suffered a loss before him. You don't know what will happen. I did want another but I had an only for 3 and a half years and loved it! Good luck whatever you decide.

So then, chickenfajitas why can't you understand our thinking about not yet having decided whether or not we want children?

Oh, Lonny, I don't agree. We had our only child when I was about to turn 40, having been on the fence for much of very long, happy relationship. There were other issues, like us both being fiercely careerist, and moving around three continents, but none of that had changed when we decided to try to have a child. And - while I think we would have continued to be happy without a child - it has been wonderful. Our son is a daily astonishment, and parenthood has changed us both.

I don't think that the lack of a burning desire for a child is any indication as to how good a parent you will be. In fact, if you are trying to conceive your first child comparatively late, I think the recognition that you could be differently happy without a child is probably healthy.

I have friends who had their first child in their early 40s, unfortunately for them, they could not have another despite wanting too (infertility). However, they feel blessed with what they have and have lovely families. Of course, their dcs would love a sibling, but I have 4 dcs and at the moment dc1 and 2 would love to be onlys! The grass is always greener!

The biggest issue you need to address is whether you want children, and if you do, hurry up!

I know several woman who had DC1 in their early 30s, then were unable to have more DCs. I know several woman who had 2 DCs in their early 40s, although granted, you'd basically have to do that pretty much back to back.

If you want a child, have a child, there are no garentees in this, you could already have left it too late, you might have twins, you might have one then be one of those horror stories of woman who turn up at their 6 week check pregnant again (a woman in my NCT group's colleague - if you can follow that - did just that, pregnant at the 6 week check, and then it was twins!).

Whatever you do, you have run out of 'thinking time'. If you want a baby, get off the computer and go shag your DH!

Thanks Lonny.

I think it is natural to feel regret that have an only child wouldn't have been your initial desire, and that being older makes it more likely (though not definite) that you would have just the one. I personally think it would be very extreme to not ttc (if you want to) for that reason. No-one ever actually knows that they will have a second, at any age. Many things can intervene - physical problems, widowhood etc!
There are also no guarantees of siblings being supportive to each other.

More important is do you want to be parents - to one or however many - at all. Hope, if you decide to go ahead and try, that things go well.

There is no "correct number" of children.
Are you sure that you're actually both on the fence about kids? I mean, are you sure that he's not more "on the fence"? IYSWIM.
If he was more obviously keen do you think that would make you happy?
You don't have to have children. But if you want to ttc it would be a shame IMHO to not do it because you coudnt have more than one.
Would you like more than one?

Ah, sorry, I actually meant "thanks TalcumPowder" . Though Lonny I would agree with you if someone genuinely wasn't sure about kids but TTC anyway. When we decide, we'll be sure.

Fwiw i Had my PFB when I was 39 and my second at 41.

If the decision is simply between not wanting an only child (assuming you are lucky and conceive fairly soon - not being mean just being statistically pessimistic ...) No child has to be 'only'' as they're many many children desperate for a loving family..maybe a foster or adopted child would suit your family set up ?

I had my only DS at age 21. I specifically wanted to have one child as I was happier with what I could provide for one in terms of time and money, and also have time for myself. It's worked out well and he is happy and achieving well. I have done much more with my life than friends who have opted to have several dc. I have siblings but I've never really turned to them for comfort, I do hang out with them but would have been pretty happy as an only I think. But I do think that if you're not absolutely sure about having dc then you need to think carefully whether to have them at all. Many of my friends don't have children and they have very happy, fulfilled lives.

Entirely concur with Thenapoleonofcrime

I have a brother and a sister and I can honestly say that I hate both of them. Siblings don't always get along. Dd is an only child and has a lovely life.

You are quite old, so when your child is 20, you will be at least 60, 70 when the are thirty and perhaps having children themselves. Unless you are very fit and in good health, your child will perhaps be sandwiched between the needs of young children and care needing elderly parents. That is not a burden I would want without a sibling, but I dispose not a reason not to have a child. Just a reason for you to DB things and ensure you are as fit and healthy as you can be.

I feel old at 42, with a 12 and a 9 year old.

There are benefits to being an only child and to having siblings.
Either way, I've just re read your op and I don't believe you're on the fence. I think you just need to drag your dh off it because the clocks ticking.
Good luck.

thisisnuts we really are already thinking very very carefully- some might say over- thinking . But I think what you are really saying is that if we have to think about it this much we already know the answer should be "no".

DB should be PLAN

Several of the children in ds' class are only children, same with dd. I can think of about 20 in total - we are in a fairly hippy/arty/affluent area. They are primarily delightful happy children with a lots of friends, and none seem vaguely scarred by their lack of siblings. A few are arrogant little sods, but no more so proportionally than the number of arrogant little sods I can think of who have siblings. These are kids ranging from 5-9yrs. I imagine some of their parents chose to have only one, and others did so by default. Their parents seem to have great fun only having one, getting more child-free time (easier to palm off one sprog overnight than several) and holidays and fancy cars are more feasible and affordable too!

There are no shoulds and shouldn't surely? Having children is a selfish choice not for the greater good, and it is a choice one that if you want to do, you should be able to.

I would say that there is no guarantee you wouldn't be able to have 2.

And I am the only person in my family to have more than one child. It's fine. You are close to your brother, my sister is selfish and I never see her, so really she is no support to me in adulthood.

I don't think you should let that you might not have time to have two out you off if you would like a family. I know a lot of happy only children.

Thenapoleonoftime, that's it really. There's right or wrong way to do things. Life will work out, the way it does.
I'm in the same boat as OP. Will be 39 getting hitched. We are both totally on the fence about kids. When it comes up, we talk mostly of one or none. I don't know what's going to happen, but hopefully we'll figure it out when the time comes.
However, I know that if I really wanted kids, I'd be doing something about right now... It's one of the hardest things to get my head around, tbh. I never saw this day when I was younger.

Or alternatively Quintessentially we could live horrendously unhealthy lives so as to ensure we do as my own parents kindly did and kick the bucket before 65 thus never needing old age care ....[black humour emoticon]