To be jealous of people with 3 children

[LovingLife0]

I have a 3 and 2 year old and DP and I have recently decided that we won't be having a third child. We have been talking about it for the past year but have made our decision primarily on environmental reasons.

Since making this decision I have become OBSESSED with families with 3+ children. For example I can't stop thinking how Kim Kardashian has 4 children and how many her children will have and all the carbon footprint. I also follow a few 'eco' families on insta who have as many as six children. As you can see I'm irrationally obsessed!! I KNOW everyone is entitled to their own choice and it's none of my business but I guess I'm just jealous!

I suppose I'm looking for advice on how I can move on from our decision to stop at 2 while not being jealous of people who go on to have large families?

Weird that people still think that you can offset having four kids (for example) by recycling and not flying. It's conceivable that you could reduce consumption and a family of six could carry the same footprint of a family of four during the early years.

But.

All four children will go on and set up their own homes, reproduce, and generally consume.

But of course everyone on MN who has a big family simultaneously believes the world is not overpopulated, but takes extreme care in reducing their footprint (a conflicting set of ideals, to say the least). They have four children but are vegan, don't fly, their children get an orange for Christmas and so on.

To put a fine point on it, if someone thinks they can offset having four children by reducing their footprint in other ways, they are generally unable to grasp the difference between linear and geometric growth.

And a dog having the same footprint as a child. Please. Whomever said this should hang their head in shame.

I buy my dog a 7 kg bag of grub-based dog foot every 3 or so weeks, give or take. She also eats table scraps. She doesn't fly, obviously, doesn't drive, and her leisure activities are sleeping and taking walks.

Have another. They might grow up to be a leader on climate change and reduce the carbon impact of millions of people. Don't fly or eat meat and don't use a car.

They might grow up to be a leader on climate change and reduce the carbon impact of millions of people.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Great_Beethoven_fallacy

Can't you just say "never say never" and forget about it for a bit?

I was in a similar boat in that we were talking about contraception after our second was born and came to the conclusion a vasectomy would be best. But then I felt a bit stressed about it - we don't want any more but our youngest is only 1 so it all seemed a bit final.

Anyway now we have put the vasectomy on the back burner and are using alternative contraception that is reversible.

Do I think we'll have a third? Absolutely not. But I don't have to worry about it any more because it's not a foregone conclusion.

Worrying about Kim Kardashian's grandchildren is a bit obsessive and I think you need to mentally switch lanes for a while.

I feel the same, I am obsessed with families with three children. For me our issues are about the short term pain of lack of sleep etc. But I spend an worrying amount of time thinking about it and it's horrible. I wish I didn't want another one as my head says no but my heart says yes, overwhelmingly so.

I am worried about the environment however we do have a low carbon footprint, both work from home full time, walk our two to nursery, we aren't going on a holiday that requires a plane this year, have meatfree day etc.

All my siblings have two kids and one doesn't have any at all and isn't able to. So I feel like my having a third takes my DB's allowance...

For me I think we will go for a third as I feel I will be full of regret if don't.

We made the same decision not to have more dc when ours were a similar age (they’re 6 & 5 now).

Yes I sometimes still have pangs / think another baby would be lovely but when I analyse it rationally there are always more reasons not to, and the environmental one is the really insurmountable one.

It has got easier as the dc have got older. At 1& 2 you’re still in nappies, sleepless nights, total dependency mode. Life is completely different once that passes, and to go back to it feels much bigger than it did at the time. Plus, some of my friends have gone on to have a third and their lives look SO much harder than ours does!

Thank you for making the decision you have for the sake of our planet & our dcs.

Apart from the fact I cannot understand how in a million years someone would be jealous of a large family I think anyone with more than 2 children is utterly selfish, obviously doesn't care about the planet and the future for those children and is, basically, rather stupid

Oh and just to say I was one of 3 and HATED it. I vowed if I had children I would never ever have 3. Me and DH chose not to have any because of overpopulation

I am worried about the environment however we do have a low carbon footprint, both work from home full time, walk our two to nursery, we aren't going on a holiday that requires a plane this year, have meatfree day etc

If you only have one meat free day then you don’t have a low carbon footprint. Giving up meat makes more of a difference than giving up your car. Switch to only having meat on one day and you can truly claim a low carbon footprint! And you will save loads of money.

OP, We have 4 DC, but the biggest shift was going from 2 to 3. I would say the main reason for this is that the permutations for the “dynamics” between your DC will double (at least)!

There is a big difference to the “vibe” and family dynamic of having a group of DC, as opposed to a pair.

For instance, a pair of DC may hit it off and be very close going into adult life. But it’s also quite easy to not be that close if they are just very different or just not that way inclined. So they can be quite indifferent to each other if it suits them.

Howver, the third one can often be the agent that kind of binds them all together (for better or worse) - simply because nobody likes to be the outsider in a group. This is human nature. Nobody wants to feel sidelined by the other two, so there is a whole new dynamic of rivalry to contend with.

It takes a lot more headspace and emotional energy to meet the needs of 3 than 2. In fact, I would say the emotional load doubles.

The plus side is, it’s never boring! Nothing is ever dull and the DC occupy each other far better than if it’s just two. Your DC will always have each other and be able to share the stresses of life going forward as a team - eg. parents getting older. Their DC likely to have more cousins and there’s a sense of strength and identity that can come with that.

You obviously don’t feel “done” yet so I wouid say, as long as you can afford it, go for it. Life is too short for regrets.

Go on and have one, I have 3 and love it

It really won’t make much difference to the planet OP. The issue is how we treat the planet once here so if you drive a 4x4, eat meat every day, don’t recycle much (or at all), buy lots of unnecessary plastic tat etc you’re doing more damage than someone who doesn’t drive but has four children.

I have four DC and I become really defensive when people try to claim having more than two children is damaging the environment. I do an awful lot for the environment- reusable nappies, recycling literally everything, try not to use plastic, don’t drive unless necessary etc. I don’t think I’m damaging the planet more than a family with one child who don’t do any of the above.

The issue is people don’t die anymore, not until they’re really really old and on their last legs. We try our best now to keep everyone disease free and alive as long as possible. I know that’s a fantastic thing but it obviously has ramifications.

So ultimately I say if you really want a third then have one. You won’t be damaging the planet more than countries like China and even the USA.

I would agree with PP that the shift from 2 to 3 was the toughest. I think it was because I had to learn to manage three with only two arms! The 3 to 4 jump has honestly been a breeze.

I have 3, it's not that different from having 2. I appreciate that you're doing it for environmental reasons but the birth rate in the UK isn't growing fast enough to keep up with the aging population.

If you feel you need justification for it just think of someone who doesn't have kids. You can "borrow" my sister if you want she's never had kids and can't now. She has one going spare👶

I think you rationale is basically flawed though. Youve already creates a massive footprint by having two children, a third isn’t really going to make that much of a difference at this point. I think thatbultinately you aren’t gonvienced that you don’t want another child. We’ve decided not to have anymore. We can’t afford another, I don’t want to completely destroy my body, we’ve got past the baby years and don’t want to do it again etc. I feel zero desire for another child and zero jealousy. Maybe have more of a think about how having an extra child will impact you.

I have 3. Found going from 1-2 hardest. 3 is great. I'd say like someone else, never say never

Interestingly, I've never come across someone who decided to forgo a 3rd solely because of the climate. Well done you, OP.

Have the third OP. Reduce your carbon/environmental footprint enough to warrant it and encourage your kids to do the sane and that's your inner turmoil settled.

Also I feel the Kardashians footprint per child is the equivalent of 38474 avg children in their lifetime, given their flights and cars and spending. So 🤷 maybe we should just stop them for having more if we want to save the world.

I’m one of three and it’s a large part of why I’m adamant that we’ll stop at two. I found it a really hard dynamic growing up, the old ‘two’s company, three’s a crowd’ saying can be true even with siblings.

I have four DC and I become really defensive when people try to claim having more than two children is damaging the environment. I do an awful lot for the environment- reusable nappies, recycling literally everything, try not to use plastic, don’t drive unless necessary etc. I don’t think I’m damaging the planet more than a family with one child who don’t do any of the above.

I'm just re-posting what I wrote about this earlier.

Weird that people still think that you can offset having four kids (for example) by recycling and not flying. It's conceivable that you could reduce consumption and a family of six could carry the same footprint of a family of four during the early years.

But.

All four children will go on and set up their own homes, reproduce, and generally consume.

But of course everyone on MN who has a big family simultaneously believes the world is not overpopulated, but takes extreme care in reducing their footprint (a conflicting set of ideals, to say the least). They have four children but are vegan, don't fly, their children get an orange for Christmas and so on.

To put a fine point on it, if someone thinks they can offset having four children by reducing their footprint in other ways, they are generally unable to grasp the difference between linear and geometric growth.

Ideally I'd have had 4 children (I am one of 4 myself and it always seemed like the right number to me).

We stopped after 2 because of our ages (I was 36 when I had my first and my husband is 10 years older), because of financial considerations, and because my husband didn't want more.

I still like the idea of a big family, but 2 was definitely the right decision for us.

It's complete self-serving rubbish to think that you can make up the environmental damage of having a child by making sure you recycle and drive less. That child, in its lifetime, in the high carbon consumption west, will do massively more environmental damage than you could make up for. And what about its children and grandchildren? Plus you are no doubt recycling anyway.
In 30 years' time our children will be experiencing serious problems due to climate change. They will be under great ethical pressure not to have children. You already have 2. Leave it there. Think of the child, and of future generations.

Well it's at least a start surely? Better than doing nothing at all.