To think lots of people have a second child just because it's 'the done thing' ?

[DairyMilkMaid]

DS has just turned 3, which means the question of whether or not to have another baby has been coming up a lot more recently. DH and I are leaning more towards being one and done (for lots of reasons) but we're still not 100% certain.

I met up with a friend this morning and she asked if we thought we'd have any more DCs. I said I wasn't sure and asked her how she knew she was ready for her second. She sort of shrugged and said 'I wasn't, but it's just what you do isn't it?'. When I asked what she meant, she basically said that it never even occurred occurred her to stop at one, and she never felt the urge to have a second, she just....did.

I was a bit surprised, but thinking about it, I've seen this attitude a few times. Another friend of mine really struggled with PPD and her relationship nearly broke down, but she went on to have a second. Her whole pregnancy she was depressed and was dreading the baby being born, and though she loves her DD2 dearly, she quite often says life would have been easier if she'd stopped at one. She never wanted a second either, she just didn't want her DD to be an only child.

You see threads on here sometimes where women had a horrendous experience of pregnancy, childbirth and motherhood, but are reluctantly going for a second, and I can't help but wonder why. It's like for some people it's not even an option to just have one child.

@calminggreen as someone with previous fertility issues, you might want to have a think about how nasty your post would be for someone with secondary infertility to read.
You're basically saying that you consider a one child family so awful and 'less than', that you'd cast judgement on someone who opted for this family structure out of choice.

You make a good point. There is an element of social norms and it's good to question this, but I don't think its cause for criticism either. A lot of what we do we do because it's the social norm, the extent to which these society rules dictate our decisions and behaviour is probably underestimated. So in that sense your friends response wasn't entirely unreasonable.

Looking back, its interesting to remember the language used when i started ttc. DH and I never mentioned trying for a baby, it was always 'starting a family'. When pg or when DS was born he was introduced as our 'first'. It never in a million years occurred to me to have one baby. I had never known an only child and the idea sounded bizarre, there are cultural reasons for this as I was raised Irish Catholic. I heard of only children and always presumed there was a tragic reason they were only, never thought it was a choice. Like most young women I was worried about infertility and massively relieved to be pg. I did not factor in secondary infertility until i experienced it. It was absolutely heartbreaking and I couldn't process the idea of having an only child, it felt deeply wrong and incomplete. Luckily for me, modern science came to the rescue and I got pg through IVF, after many wasted years ttc and failed rounds. All the while trying to accept my fate. I am now aware that it's often a choice for some and I'm glad in many ways people are comfortable doing this, during those ttc years i was happy to hear of only children because it meant DS wasn't so unusual. I suspect i would not have suffered so much if the society norm had been different.

Correct, the shortfall in unaffordable humans will mean we are adequately resourced. Your current vision means parents with the most limited means have children the state can’t really afford. Each child/adult costs about 60k in services, fewer of those should mean we can funnel resources to the correct place. Assuming we all live longer, we are likely to see the pension age to continue to be deferred, many do not currently live to claim their pension. That’s before we discuss climate change and the planet’s temperature in 30-50 years: science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

This is why I loathe these threads - there’s always someone who turns up to trot out this unpleasant, ignorant, thoughtless opinion.

I don't think you can make people want what they don't want nor should you... however I believe absolutely that different social policies could promote more chidren for middle earners. For every couple that say they want only one, there is a couple that say they would love another and can't afford it. In fact I've heard that very often. Also people who terminate against their instinct because they can't afford the child. Financial incentives for those that want more children would help. No one has to be manipulated or under pressure, just supported in doing what they already want.

Thousands you could have spent on the child you had, but I guess your wants and needs trumped theirs.

See, I too can be as offensive about your decision as you are about mine.

Why didn't you want 'that' for her?

Selfish for whom? Siblings aren't a cast iron guarantee of anything. Mine have been as useful as a chocolate teapot since I've been older.

The most important thing for a child is to have strong, stable relationships with their parents. And what about parents that can't afford thousands on IVF or have secondary infertility? What's your views on them?

I also had a second so my first wasn’t an only. I didn’t have any burning desire. As it turned out now twenty years later, it was the right decision. Watching the two of them grow and change and share experiences and develop their own relationship over the years has been by far the single best part of parenting.

Why didn't you want 'that' for her?

Because it’s the worst possible fate that can befall a child, don’t you know?

What a bonkers thing to say! I'm glad there are less and less people about these days that share your bizarre opinion.

I'm also quite surprised at the number of people who seem to think their kids would be lonely without a sibling, as it certainly wasn't my experience. I've always been very social and made friends easily on holidays/days out as a kid. In fact to offer a different side of it, a friend once told me she'd read a book about only children which claimed they're often more socially confident, as they don't have a ready made playmate so have to make friends. Totally appreciate that's not the case for everyone, and I know some people have shared their own experiences of being lonely as an only child.

I honestly believe it's more about parenting style/lifestyle/location etc than whether you have siblings or not.

I also think it's interesting people bringing up elderly parents. Again, appreciate I'm lucky, but I don't feel that I will be dealing with my Mum's care and eventual death alone because my DH will help me, as will my wonderful friends. I consider myself to have a brilliant support network, despite being an only child and coming from a very small family.

IMO it's unfair to burden children with looking after parents when they are elderly unless there's at least two children to offer supportso that the load is shared. I have four so they all can help support each other when DH and I become a burden. It will hopefully lighten the load.

One of the families nearby have 11 children and they are all lovely children. Eldest is 21, youngest is 4 weeks old. Very busy family but they will all be able to help look after their parents ons day...

This made me laugh to be honest - bit of an overreaction don't you think? Sorry you're having a bad day.

I definitely don't think I'm narcissistic (despite being a 'spoiled' only child), but I maybe didn't phrase my OP very well. Others have articulated what I was trying to say much better - the societal pressure couples feel to have more than one can push people into a decision they don't actually want. Our whole society is set up for families of 4, and I think it's still considered the 'norm'.

I intend never to be a burden to my child. I hope that she will always care about me, but I do not want her to have to care for me.

Many siblings can't agree anyway and it causes more stress for the one that does it all.

No, to me it wasn't really about me, I knew i did not want my child to be an only child, for various reasons.

Also i didn't really overthink it! We are biologically programmed to procreate and i was raised knowing your life changes as a result but that that is normal/to be expected. Not sure what there is to be "ready" for, i was a competent adult. I didn't feel like having a second child was a big deal.

I don't feel that I will be dealing with my Mum's care and eventual death alone because my DH will help me, as will my wonderful friends

For most people, their spouse and friends have their own elderly parents to support. I have wonderful friends whom I love but I won't be helping them care for their elderly parents.

Most tone deaf post ever on MN
...🤪

DH is likely to die before me so I am f*cked then using that logic....

I hope this is the case for you Op, but in my own (& pretty much everyone I know’s) experience, when the chips are down, it’s actually only family that you can guarantee will be there to help/ support. Friends are amazing (& I have some brilliant ones) but they have their own lives / families/ responsibilities & so can’t truly be relied upon.

[Caveat obviously is that some people have shitty families but in my experience, that’s the exception, not the norm.]

I think for a lot of people a ‘family’ means more than one child, probably subconsciously for a lot of us, based on our own childhoods and (you’re right, OP) on what society ‘tells us’ a family looks like.

If I analyse why I went on to have a second child (despite a hideous birth with DC1, a very rough postnatal period, PND, sleep deprivation due to DC1 being a crap sleeper etc), it was all tied up with this. I never even considered stopping at one. Having a family meant children…siblings..a little gang. I didn’t really stop to think about why.

It worked out well for us, as I had a much better birth with DC2 and she was an incredibly chilled, happy baby, so the whole experience was healing for me personally and it has been a pleasure and privilege watching my DCs relationship with each other over the years (mostly! We’re not the Waltons - there have been downs but the ‘ups’ far outweigh these).

I think more people seem to be feeling …I don’t know…empowered (?) (to use a hackneyed word!) to stop at one these days. I certainly know of more couples with only children now than I did when I had my firstborn 20+ years ago.

I’m currently ‘burdened’ with looking after an elderly aunt, who had no children.
I also have an elderly widowed mother. And siblings who do fuck all.

Siblings absolutely do not guarantee a shared load, and I’m old enough to have seen this play out multiple times among friends, colleagues and extended family.

I can only speak for myself but I was desperate for my second child. I wanted him more than I’ve ever wanted anything, ever - including my first child, which I know might sound odd.

I would have liked a third, but we couldn’t afford it.

Is it right that our services are on the brink of collapse because there are too few families who are net contributors? Isn’t it the issue more likely to be the ageing population with their complex health needs and vast pension bill?

I agree that it doesn't guarantee that siblings will help but the probability is more likely if you have siblings than none at all...nothing is ever certain in life as we all know.