To engage in poverty hording ?

[KazenoTaninoNaushika]

We're tidying up the baby's room: all the old baby clothes, every last sock, every toy DC has grown out of, every blanket, muslin, snuggly piece of crap all packed in vacuum bags lest another LO turns up in future. It's a financial thing....we are

Dd not dad.

We got rid of everything after dc2 as we lived in a tiny home, which took over a year to sell. For us, we needed the space. We've now upsized, so if we do change out minds and have a dc3 I'll be kicking myself! But I did need the space more. Most stuff was handed to mums at toddler groups or friends. I'd say my circumstance was the exception rather than the rule.

Yes to passing clothing and toys on to younger siblings. Or passing things to friends or good causes or selling.

No to hoarding items for grandchildren. A box of Lego or a special tea set would have been nice but we have been inundated with stuff. 1970's nylon outfits, various toys and equipment that went straight to the charity shop.

Thanks to you all for your lovely replies on this! You made me feel that I'm sensible, thrifty, and environmentally conscious on a night when I was feeling just plain poor and a bit of a scabby hoarder

@FeliciaJollygoodfellow I do feel i have to respond to your question, which came across as you asking whether or not this was a genuine worry of mine...and, yes, honestly on the night I wrote it, it really was! Being financially a bit fucked challenged , which at

I'm glad you are feeling a bit better about your hoarding. I do think that middle class people like me see it as a good thing probably because we are doing it out of choice. (My DC are in private schools and there are thriving 2nd uniform shops run by the PTA). I can understand that it feels different if it is done out of necessity. It is definitely more environmentally friendly to reuse the stuff.
We took our old baby clothes to DH's family in North Africa when we had finished with them. So they will do for another few children yet.

2nd hand

I find extended families who are really poor,do not do this.Because someone always has a baby/child who needs the things.So you dont have the luxury of just storing them for the future.

@brasty I'm the only one in my extended family who on is on this fucking horrendous lack of income. My siblings and their families are all significantly better off than my family, so I do have the "luxury" of storing them, and me and DP are also grateful to receive stuff from my sisters and brothers .

Er...I'm not sure what you mean by poverty hoarding, I don't think you have to be poor to want to hang on to your baby clothes and equipment in case you have another, it just makes good financial and practical sense.

I might draw the line at 'every last sock' though, but it depends on the condition of things I suppose.

Reusing and using secondhand kids stuff is quite middle class. Well it is where we are.

I never thought of this as hoarding! We kept everything from DS to use for a future child. Why on earth go through the hassle, expense and waste of buying everything again?

I think Getinthefuckingsea has it half right, not all right. I am on a low income, and was on an even lower income when I had DS (although I've always worked - just the sector I work in doesn't pay very well), and the merry-go-round of fourth-hand baby clothes that was doing the rounds was a godsend. It was sort of collectively-poverty-hoarded rather than personally-poverty-hoarded, if you see what I mean - it was all just passed on to the next baby anyone knew was coming, rather than stuffed in anyone's attic. (I live in a flat! No room.)

But - as DS has got older, and I pass on clothes, I have personally found it easier to pass on used stuff to someone who is at my level of income or even slightly better off, rather than substantially worse off, as there's less risk of offending anyone by expecting them to take your kid's cast-offs. I can't be seen as Lady Muck if they are richer than me! I have given used-but-good clothes to a scheme for people on rock-bottom incomes, but that was much more impersonal, so much easier.