To go from four to five kids?

[Eaglesfortea]

We have SD12, SD10, SS7 and DD1. We have SC every other weekend, one night in the week and in the holidays, can’t have them more due to their mum moving to the other side of the city, which is 45m drive in peak time. As they’re getting older, they’re finding more reasons to stay at their mum’s, which I think is normal as it’s closer to schools and their friends (plus later curfew and more gaming time and the like).

Pros:

• I want DD to have a sibling to grow up with. I’m an only child with no cousins, DP’s only brother lives abroad and cousins aren’t close so no cousins nearby and we moved to this city to follow SC’s mum so we don’t have close friends nearby either
• could afford it, we have all the baby stuff already, I get a generous maternity leave and we wouldn’t need to change car
• we have enough room, though baby would need to share with DD until they’re at school when I’ll go back to full time work and we’d do an attic conversion to give them a room each
• I just don’t feel done yet

Cons:

• time and money will be more stretched between the children
• I’m 39 so possibly more risky
• DP isn’t keen as he says he’s been changing nappies for over a decade!
• environmental impact?

YABU - don’t do it
YANBU - go for it

Age is irrelevant. Children are for life.

Yes but they don’t need the same at all stages . Or so you think the care a baby needs is the same a 15 year old ? Age is far from irrelevant . It’s a fully very important , and lots of studies are made with the impact on age differences

That’s not the point though. Each child you have takes away resources from the children you’ve already got, regardless of age. It doesn’t matter how much money or room in your house you have, it’s time distribution that’s the unavoidable problem.

I understand your feelings about wanting a full time sibling for DD , but I still think it is mainly you who wants/needs this- you could compromise your whole life by pushing your partner too far, and overburdening your finances if they change.

Plenty of people grow up happily in large families. Not everyone priorities 'resources' and money over family. My DH is irish and his parents were both one of 9. He is one of 4. He has the most incredible family circle. He has 60 first cousins all over Ireland England and the rest of the world.
His parents grew up very close to their siblings and they still meet regularly now. I asked his dad once if he missed out on parental attention and he just laughed, totally alien concept to him. They are a strong unit, especially his dad who has 6 brothers that are all still alive.
My DH is on a WhatsApp with his 3 siblings and they are in contact most days.
I'm sure if someone asked if he would rather have siblings or a few extra violin lessons as a kid, or a bigger house deposit he would laugh, it's no contest. None of them were given deposits but were helped where needed. They are successful and independent.
I'm not saying all large families are like this, but the idea that more children than 4 is selfish just isn't true.

Clearly you are choosing to be obtuse . I honestly can’t grãos people like you who are unable to see themselves with more children so think everyone else is the same . I have more time now for a 4th than I had when I had my first , life is not that simple , everything influences the ability you have towards your children , finances , work , your own patience , your children’s ages , your partner etc . Denying this just shows your bigotry against big families

And how many children does your husband have @Squirrelmirrel2? Maybe not everyone prioritise resources but population data shows us that family sizes shrank drastically as soon as people were given the choice to limit them.

My friend was the eldest of 8 - another big Irish family. She has 2 children and every one of her siblings has had either no children or 1. They didn't have an unhappy childhood but not a single one of them seeks to replicate it.

You may have more time for your forth @freakingscared but no's 1-3 get less of your time precisely because you have a forth. Which isn't great of you've never had more time than you have now.

But that’s the same if you go from one to two. In fact, the first child experiencing half their resources being reallocated is the one whose existence changes the most. Yet we don’t berate people for having two.

No because I doubt a 22 year old and a 10 year old needs as much as my time . You are never the same parent to your children

Your child was in fact the 4th so that’s already factored in. It’s easy to divide time and resources by 2, by 5 not so much.

I think you should do it. You clearly want to. And you have full visibility about what parenting involves.

yes but 2 of her children are only part time step children. And they are much older. so it’s not really the case that she’ll have 5 children herself.

But her DH will still have 5 children, regardless of her having only 2.

He has four children, he’s always wanted a family of that size. Most of his relatives in Ireland also have three or four children, some more, so for him this isn’t unusual, it’s normal within his family background.

It's great that people now have the choice to limit their family size, and for many people choice is driven by a lot of practical factors, not just desire.
But the fact many choose to have fewer children doesn't take away from the fact that you can have a perfectly lovely upbringing in a large family, and be loved and thrive with the many benefits it can bring. It shouldn't automatically be considered a selfish choice!

Splitting your time and resources between 2 children is very different from splitting it between 5. Come on now! I think you’re getting stuck on the fact that you’ll only have 2 children and not that your DH will have to split himself 5 ways.

Why should the dad’s view not be taken into consideration? He is not keen to have another.

Childfree women don't typically plan to have 2 kids though...you're either childfree and don't want kids or you're not. If you loved the bloke enough surely you'd stay and just be childfree OR you'd leave and find someone else to have kids with if it was that important to you?

If you don’t want kids, I can’t understand why you’d choose step kids.

If you want kids I don't understand why you'd pick a guy who has three already!