If money was no object, how many kids would you have?

[Trueqe]

I have a friend who said to me the other day that there is a window for childbearing and in her opinion the goal is to have as many as we can whilst we can….money is no object for her as she is very rich.

I always end up feeling less maternal as I don’t agree with this at all. I have two kids and want to give them the best of me, having more than that, I just feel I’d be outnumbered and knackered and even if money were no object I really think I’d feel the same way.

Curious to see how other people feel?

YANBU - I’d stick with the number I’ve got if money was no object
YABU - Hell yeah, if I was loaded I’d have more, the more the better

Just one for me.

Money isn’t why I stopped so I’d still have two even if I was loaded.

Three, but since money is a factor I plan to have two

If I could have afforded to be a sahm, I would have had 3 fairly close together. But i work full time so had two with a 6 year age gap.

I might have had 4 instead of 3 if I had been loaded.

I would still just have the one as we would need ICSI to try and have more. While having the money to try that wouldn't be an issue in this scenario, the hormones required would severely affect my body and I made the decision not to put myself through that.

None, so the same as now but with a lot more money 😀

One as I have now

Money is not the issue here but time.
If I had started having kids mid 20s rather than mid 30s I'd probably have had 4

If money was no object, I'd have had 4 kids.

For me the limiting factor was the physiological impact... both my pregnancies were so difficult and my first birth took years to recover from, physically and emotionally.

If pregnancy and birth were easy, I'd have a whole 5-a-side team (or string quintet). I'd have loved to be the matriarch of a huge clan

I have 2....if money was absolutely no object, I'd have 4....I'd hire nannies to help me

Would've totally had 4 if I was rich, stayed at 2.

The two that I have. I have no wish for a third child.

None. All the money in the world would not make me want one.

I would have 2 as I have now, after the first I knew I wanted another (and we were lucky enough to be able to have a 2nd) but I knew I didn't want anymore after that and I don't think all the money in the world would change that feeling.

I’d have three. If money was no object I’d have a nanny to help! As it is, I have two and part of me would love a third but no. I’m stretched every which way as it is and I am also very blessed to have a boy and a girl which is always dreamed of.

I’d have a third child if money was no object. It’s the cost of childcare that is the issue for me.

I had no money worries and wanted 3 and had 3. We moved from a four bedroom house to a five bedroom house when
the youngest was a baby and bought a people carrier car when I was pregnant with my 3rd DC.

I have 3. If money wasn't an issue I would have another

I'd still have two. But I did go through a broody stage when my youngest was about 3, but what stopped me was that my then husband was a shit father. If I had more money and a better husband in my child bearing years, I probably would have had another one or two.

Why are you on "mumsnet"??

I’m somewhere in the middle. I’d love to have a third and stop there, but money has been so tight with our two that I don’t feel I can do it. So if money was no object, I would have 3 and stop there.

Rude. I don't believe the childfree are banned from Mumsnet.

Finances had no bearing on me stopping at two so that would stay the same for me.