To spend less than £50 per child at Christmas?

[hibbledobble]

I read the thread where people were talking about spending as much as £1000 per child, and the average was in the 100s.

I can afford to spend a lot, but I don't see the need or the benefit in buying a lot. I plan on getting one large and one small present per child and maybe some chocolate. Things they will play with and cherish.

I don't buy into the consumerist culture surrounding Christmas, and I don't want to raise spoilt children.

Aibu?

The thing is it's not about Christmas and spending really. It's about the fact that children play better and more creatively with fewer toys. And more open ended toys. If you want your children to be creative, independent, patient and smart, then give them fewer material things and less technology. Period.

It doesn’t matter how much you spend, but if you are only planning on buying two presents, will they not reason that Santa (assuming they are still young enough to believe) has treated them unfavourably compared to their friends?

My dc are allowed to ask Father Christmas for one thing each. We have 5dc and over the years these things have ranged from a pineapple to a PS4 and a magnifying glass to a coding robot. We do our very best to get what they ask for or very close to it.

Then, on top of that, I buy lots and lots of other presents. Lots. Much more than they need. Much more than anyone needs. Because I want to and can afford to. I love seeing a huge pile of presents under the tree. I love seeing their faces as they open them and look amazed at all the carefully chosen things I have got them. It makes me feel good.

I grew up in a poor household. I know what it feels like to not have enough of anything. To always be wanting and needing even quite basic things (Shoes, sanitary pads, tights for school, heating). The idea of having more of anything was a huge luxury.

To me, Christmas can be summed up at as 'more'. More time. More food. More drink. More sleep. More love. More fun. More room. More rest. More giving. More presents. More everything!

We spend all year having just enough and we are very grateful for it. But at Christmas, we delight in having more than what we need. And we give to others so that they too know the joy of having more than they need. We will give to friends and family and strangers.

So good for you if £50 is what you want to spend. I'm sure your children will appreciate the gifts and the thought behind them. But they won't appreciate them any more or less than mine will. I'm not raising spoilt children either.

Also, activities don't have to Ben expensive. You can take your kids out to the park and forest for fre any day, most sports classs are in fact fairly cheap unless it's a sport involving loads of equipment (and even that you can buy second hand) so that point Is not really valid.

Okay, so if I spend hundreds at Christmas but I spend it on concert tickets and plan to attend with my child, it becomes quality time and therefore non-spoiling and acceptable? Or if I give the gift of horse-riding lessons?

You're like someone who smugly says that they would never baptise their child to get them into a better school because that would be wrong, and your child will go to whatever local school is closest... and neglects to mention that you just happened to move next-door to an outstanding and highly sought after village primary. You do realise that even if someone manages to scrape up £300 to spend at Christmas that same amount won't go very far on learning an instrument through a year? It's like saying someone could afford to buy a house if they stopped eating avocado toast - they really couldn't but it makes the people with houses feel better.

And although my 15 and 25 year old are well past the "plastic crap" the only opinion that matters to me is my child, if his list is full of what some people call this then so what?

You're much more likely to spoil your kids by spending money on them throughout the year and having that be the norm than by giving them a pile of gifts at Christmas. Spend forty quid a week on whatever the fuck you want, but don't then seek public congratulations for being frugal earth mother. No one gives a fuck either way.

And I notice how these ones always have to get in that they could afford to spend hundreds or thousands, if they wanted to.

London what a load of judgemental crap. Funny enough I spent loads on my 25 year old DS growing up, he never got everything on his list but a selection plus loads surprises. And he's patient and kind. I guess you could call him creative to judging by his job, which incidentally has just allowed him to buy his own house so that covers the independent bit.

Spot on, WaxOn.

I don't believe in this. For me it is not about creating a mountain of wrapped presents but keeping my options open.

For example one year DD got an ipad, for various reasons we decided it was the best tablet and gift for her that year. The price is obviously much larger than 50 pounds. The next year her total presents were maybe 1/4 of the ipad.

in 1-2 years she will get her own laptop, I prefer this as gifts than just buying it because she needs one anyway.

I think the whole idea of presents now starts to bend backwards so much that the whole joy of choosing presents goes away. As long as you can afford the presents without going into debt, and I also priotise child over any other family member apart from DH, I don't make fixed rules I am just miserable about when I either break them or adhere to them but not getting what I want.

[b] It's about the fact that children play better and more creatively with fewer toys. [/b]

Not actually true. I've seen at least one child development expert comment that if they had the choice between 1 amazing and well-made toy and 10 cheaper ones that were all different they'd go with the ten. Different toys stimulate different parts of the brain; lego might be great for fine motor control and spacial awareness but less good for developing language.

[b]You can take your kids out to the park and forest for fre any day, most sports classs are in fact fairly cheap unless it's a sport involving loads of equipment [/b]

Yes, I can. I do. I have a house nice and close to parks and forest, and I can afford a car to get us there - and parking, £6 a day at our local big forest. I'm not reliant on public transport to get my kids to activities. I have an active and involved partner who will take my toddler so I'm not dragging a tired and distressed toddler around activities. I'm not a single parent working fulltime so we have time to get a lot of basic housework done during the week and can go do fun stuff at weekends.

I'm also aware that my kids are damn lucky that all this stuff is true however. Are you?

Mum to a xmas baby so a double hit on presents and she is a teen so not cheap ones either - upgrading her phone to iPhone for her birthday not costing as on contract but clothes she wants (needs) and some nice make up and jewellery have cost £300 not a huge pile of stuff either, laptop for Xmas - sharing my work one no longer practical with GCSEs and toiletry smelly bits and stocking will be about £350 then £200 on food so I will spend £1000 on Xmas but I’ve budgeted for it and it’s just the 2 of us and we have lovely times at Xmas I don’t care what other people think I work hard for my money and if I want to spoil my daughter I will.

Pigeon, I could NOT afford to spend loads if I wanted to. Finishing a years maternity leave and money is tight. Could probably spend a bit more if I wanted but not comfortably. But even if we had more money I wouldn't spend more. I think it's wasteful. Contrary to someone else who grew up fairly poor, and said they love spending loads at Christmas - I get that, I really do and I don't judge that or condemn it. But I feel that even though we had less than others we were happier, because we learned how to be more creative and less dependent on material things. I value do the things I got so much more than my friends who had more. I did ent them back then but in hindsight I don't. The thing is, if you turn up expectations at an early age it's hard to scale back later on. And more things don't equal happiness. Try to see what will happen if you remove half of your kids toys or even two thirds. They'll start building dens out of cushions, they turn your shoes into barbie doll cars and make a doll house out of a card board box. They will become much more imaginative. You don't know what you're not missing.

And isn't it strange that some of the most judgemental and smug people about how little they spend on their own children have loads of other people in their children's lives buying for them.

*not not ; )

I believe that’s true London but £ or in my case € spent doesn’t mean piles of plastic tat as is so often suggested on MN! The fact is good quality items do cost money. As do the popular yet shite toys of course but my issue is the “I spend X and anyone who spends more than me is buying tat/destroying the environment/spoiling their child/doesn’t understand the true meaning of Christmas” or whatever other judgmental bollox these posters come out with.

My children will each have @ €250 spent on them. This will be about 8 gifts each which will include some toys but also a pile of books (books count as one gift to me), some fun clothes and some items for their rooms. The assumptions re spoilt children and piles of tat are just that, assumptions!

*laguna, my mum gets loads of toys for my kids. However, they are literally ALL second hand.

If you want your children to be creative, independent, patient and smart, then give them fewer material things and less technology. Period.

Funnily enough my older teenage DC got loads and loads at Christmas and Birthdays, they are very smart, patient, creative and independent. Plus for the last few years they have had mainly technology. DS1 is likely to make a career out of it.

coco what toys could kids possibly need? You never NEED toys. And what's wrong with the library ; )?

And again spending loads on your children does not mean they don't build dens ffs....whst a blinkered attitude that is, it's not one or the other. Long time since my eldest 2 did this though.

wax I don't doubt that : ) of course all is in moderation and you can become all those things even if you have loads of material things. But I'll risk saying I think you could make them even more so with less stuff around. Re. Technology used for creativity this is a specific issue in its own right and of uses for that fair do's, problem is most kids don't use technology for creativity but for watching silly YouTube videos and playing mind numbing games

But I feel that even though we had less than others we were happier

That's about the most damning judgement you could make about other people. That they're less happy than you, make their kids less happy than you make yours. Grim.

The thing is it's not about Christmas and spending really. It's about the fact that children play better and more creatively with fewer toys. And more open ended toys. If you want your children to be creative, independent, patient and smart, then give them fewer material things

What a pile of rubbish. So schools with excellent resources are bad for children? All those at Oxford had nothing but a shoe box to play with ...

laguna you're entirely right. And of course this gets harder the older they get. But if they can build dens why do they need all that stuff? I'd say my own kids could comfortably do with 1/3 of what they have

Op, do you believe people who spend more than you on their child at Xmas, don't have said child learning an instrument and sports. And don't also do lovely things together as a family at Xmas such as bake, watch movies, go ice skating, go to sew Santa, go to pantomimes. You do know those things aren't mutually exclusive.