Sharing a room is a 'sign of poverty'?

[DesTeeny]

A close friend has said that sharing a room as children is a sign of poverty.

AIBU to think this just isn't true?

Context: We have the opportunity to be mortgage free in a 3 bed house through inheritance, our two DC (3 & 1 both girls) will share a room and we will keep a spare room.

Spare room is for family/friends visiting as we have no nearby relatives so we have people to stay often but will be used as a 'break out' room for DC if they need space. We will set it up with a desk for homework, and a day bed to read and relax on, but it is quite a small box room so it seemed sensible to have DC share a very large room (15*13ft) rather than one DC have a huge room and one have a tiny one.

The room is big enough for a day bed so for example my Mum will be able to stay, or our nieces and nephews on a day bed and a pull out, but other than a desk and a day bed there's no room for anything else.

The alternative was that we use the inheritance to take out a mortgage on a 4+ bed house, but we don't see the point as the house we have is a large 3 bed and will suit our needs entirely (from our perspective).

However, close friend has said that sharing a room is a "sign of poverty" and can't believe we're even considering it when we could have a larger house with a mortgage.

We’re in a 4 bed with two DC and currently arguing with my husband that I want the spare room to be a play room for the children. I don’t understand why on earth we’d have a guest room for occasional visitors when we could use the room for the benefit of people that actually live here.
I don’t agree with your friends comments about room sharing being a sign of poverty (unless it was 5 kids crammed into a tiny room) but I don’t think children should have to share if they don’t need to. Children get so little ownership over anything in their lives, I think it’s important they have their own space if possible.

Or save and move at that point? If your house suits your current requirements and you can be mortgage free that sounds fantastic. You will have spare money for travel/days out that will enrich their lives far more than having their own room at this age

We did that when me and DSis became teens and we loved it. We had shared a big room with 2 windows and then our parents built a partition down the middle so we had a box room each with some clever storage built in. We absolutely loved our little rooms, it was like our own mini sanctuary each :) Once we moved out, the partition was removed and the room was returned to a big room that guests now stay in.

There'll be a lot of impoverished folk in London in that case, with their DC sharing a room yet raking in two six figure salaries... We will be doing the same u til our DD are older. I genuinely think it'll be nice while they're young.

We also shared despite having an extra room. It was simply for playing and our books etc as we were both terrible sleepers. We did have separate rooms as teenage girls though.

She sounds a bit envious of you being mortgage free tbh. As am I! Jealous, I mean - certainly not mortgage free! 😀

There isn't unfortunately or we could split it into two. The house is a funny shape and the large back bedroom has only got one (quite small) window, it's quite a dark room, and we couldn't add in another window.

Sharing a room is completely normal and not is sign to poverty. When I was a child and indeed until I left home , we did what a pp said and I shared with DSis when we had visitors , which was often. We liked it and I never felt resentful.
My son and daughter shared until they were about 9 and 10. They were company for each other. They didn't need to.

Well, you tell her and her stuck up views that you’re not gonna be poor when your mortgage free think of that extra money you can go and have holidays or put into savings or whatever

Nonsense. Nothing wrong at all with little kids sharing - plenty of them prefer it and I think it does them good. Kids have shared rooms since the dawn of time. Nothing but snobbery. You've got options for when they're older, wouldn't give it a moments thought while they're toddlers.

Ignore your friend and plan your family housing as you see fit.

Same-sex siblings sharing rooms is not a sign of poverty at all, nor is b-g sibling sharing while the kids are young. I would think it a bit odd if you were making teens of opposite sex share a room instead of using a box room or buying a bigger home, but that's not the situation here.

More disruptive to her children to keep moving them though if she has frequent visitors. They are only little.

Official guidelines as to overcrowding expect young children to share of either sex and then same sex up to 16. And I think they also allow for someone to be sleeping in the living room - which is obviously not ideal.

Yes I agree with this. Also, if there’s no choice but to share it implies the house probably isn’t big enough for its occupants. While of course it doesn’t mean you’re living in poverty, I’d probably (rightly or wrongly) assume you couldn’t afford a bigger house.

It's interesting that some people think sharing is great at their ages - I guess it's about how your kids sleep. Mine both had long phases of very early waking at this age and if they had been sharing, they would have disturbed each other a lot.

My friends live in a 2 bed with 4 kids. So in that case I’d say yes. Not in your case though.

We were in a 3 bed semi with one being a box room, 2 boys shared double room until age 8&6, we had to either move or extend at that point because they were physically bigger, on different sleep schedules etc. Box room was an office then baby’s room. We extended. But we couldn’t have stayed as we were. 2 teens in a 3 bed sounds bad enough, a teen in a box room sounds not ideal.

The kids relish having their own space to have exactly as they want, and can close the door when they want some peace!! Also another room for toys etc to go into, so downstairs is less cluttered too.

Yes that's a very good point. I think DH is set on this being our forever home, but if we outgrown it, moving would be an option of course. Hadn't really thought of that, as stupid as that sounds.

A 3 bed where I live costs at least half a million quid so yes my two share.

They have 2 parents working full time and live in a nice 2 bed flat worth £400k so I wouldn't say we're impoverished but I would say there is definitely a housing crisis.

What your friend said is so daft that it doesn't even require a response.

What is the layout of the house? Could you move a wall to make the two bedrooms of more equal size?

Probably not! In many older houses the small bedroom is the exact same width as the hall because there is a solid brick load bearing wall between hall and living room, which goes all the way up through the house!

A mortgage free 3 bed house and 2 kids isn't poverty, no.

Not at the age of your children. A good friend of mine had ridiculously rich parents. They had a 4 bed town house in Mayfair! They had 4 kids and she shared a room with her brother until the eldest sibling turned 18 and they bought her a flat outright, no mortgage, in Kensington, at which point the 3 kids still at home each got their own room. No poverty in sight! However, my friend was 11 when they stopped sharing. I can see it would be awkward for a teen boy and young girl or teen girl to share.

Living mortgage free is not a sign of poverty.
its a path to security.

sharing a room until 10 is totally usual, heck my kids wouldn’t want to be alone at night.
having your own space as a teenager is ideal, but not necessary.

being able to have exciting holidays and expensive hobbies instead of own room would be a great pay off.

There'll be a lot of impoverished folk in London in that case, with their DC sharing a room yet raking in two six figure salaries

I know London is expensive but two six figure salaries is still more than enough to allow a family enough rooms for their children not to share, unless they have 11 kids or want to live in Mayfair!

in addition, the 3 bed house is pretty much the norm throughout the U.K, so, according to OP’s friends’s logic, the majority of families with more than 2 children are living in poverty.

I think it depends where. We're in very Central London and while we could afford a bigger place (well, certainly the extra room), the quality really drops and also a lot of our outgoings go on savings and investments each month. We simply refused to pay through the nose for the extra room due to our priorities currently.

OP if that third room is the box type, what you are doing is better indeed. So many houses have this large built in wardrobes that can be ok as a nursery, but not really as a room per se.
You can set up a den with fairy lights and cuddly toys there or cinema room or crafts room for them when you have no visitors.
I would not mske it a study room because they areso small, they do feel oppressive. I would rather set a light airy space for them, cose to me, in case they have questions.

As kids get older they NEED personal space.

I teach in a secondary school and know so many teenagers that struggle due to a lack of personal space at home. Not good for their MH.

On this basis, I think it's good to make sure kids have their own rooms. Maybe not important when they're younger, but age 8+ they should be given personal space.

We had one child and were looking for a 3 bed house. We actually ended up buying a 4 bed, and then as fate would have it, baby number two was twins, so they all have a room each. If we'd bought the house with 3 bedrooms, then we would have had to move again or extend to have another bedroom.

It's not necessarily a sign of poverty, but I wouldn't plan to have more kids than I have bedrooms as I just wouldn't want them to share.

Perhaps some kids genuinely love sharing, but most teenagers I deal with that share really hate it.

If we need a guest room, then when my parents stay they have our room, and we have the sofa bed or an air bed in one of the kids rooms.