How many children would you have if money wasn't an option?

[Lsquiggles]

I have a 5 month old DD and recently had a discussion with my partner about how if money wasn't an issue we'd probably want 3 or 4 children but due to the expense and the fact we have a 3 bed house we will most likely settle on 2 children, 3 at a push.

Would you want a large family if money/living capacity etc wasn't an issue?

Sorry confusing title! I meant if money wasn't an issue

We would have had 4 if we had had a bigger house/more money. We stopped at 2.

Still the 2 we have. We can afford more but money isn't the driver for us, it's the fact that I don't want to split my attention between more children and neither does DH.

When we're out, each child 'gets' one parent, DH can wrangle one child while I'm dealing with the other etc.

Having more children would change that, it would mean less attention for our current children although they would be loved just as much. I personally don't agree with larger families (looking at you, Radford family) because you cannot possibly give the same amount of time and attention to each child when you have (for example) 6+ children, there are joy enough hours in the day. Though I appreciate that this is MY opinion and don't expect others to agree.

In short - no, I wouldn't have more children just because I could afford it.

2, but I'd have the second one sooner. Can't afford 2 in childcare at once but would like to have them closer in age.

If money was no issue I'd still only have the 2 we have.

I couldn't give any more the attention they deserve.

Still 2. I feel too old and tired and I can’t give more than 2 my attention

DH and I would both love 3 or 4. Am currently pregnant with number 2 but have had 2 losses between baby 1 and this one, DS will be 4.5 when 2 is born and I'll be 35, so feel like waiting another 3 years (to ensure we can afford childcare etc) will mean DS will be too old and so will DH and I really.

If you mean millions, I'd have 5

The one I have. Money isn't the deciding factor.

If money was no object I’d still just have the one. I’d spend all my money taking dd around the world to see everything ever.

10, I currently have 8 as that’s all we can comfortably afford.

I have three but I'd have one more if I won some money ( a lot)

Two. As others have said, I'd feel spread too thinly if I had more. Also I like sleep, and money can't buy you that.

I’d love a 4th but can’t afford to without drastically changing our lifestyle. We pay for the dc’s school and we couldn’t afford nursery on top of that. I’d love another though

I have 2 and wouldn’t want any more even if money was no object. There’s a lot more to parenting than money.

2 is a good number, plenty of time and attention for both D.C.

We have 3 and I would have had 1 more if money and my body allowed it.

I would have 2 (and I do have 2). My reasons for not having more are not to do with money.

Money wasn't the deciding factor but I'd have loved 3 but fertility issues were deciding factor.

5, I would love to have another but have a gap now of a few years so would love another one now and another soon after for company. And a house extension and new car and be able to give up work, making myself laugh here

1 or 2. Neither of us agree with large families. We both also want to be able pursue our interests. Which would be far harder, with less time / money with a number of children

Nope! I have two and that’s plenty for me. It’s never been an issue of money. It’s the strain on me physically and the tough first few years and the impact on our careers of having young children. I’ve taken two maternity leaves and I wouldn’t want to take another. We would also just be so stretched with extra school events to go to and parents evenings and running to even more activities. Youngest is 2 now and we’re looking forward to doing activities that aren’t suitable for babies and having an evening out or a night away again in the next year. I definitely wouldn’t want to restart that clock again for all the money in the world. I quite happy with the time and attention we can devote to two, and that was all we ever planned to have.

The 2 we have. Money isn't stopping us having a 3rd. My physical health and mental well being are.

Two. My girls are grown up now and I love having my own life to live, plus still having plenty of time/money/emotional resources to support them as needed.

I've got twins so about 10% of me wants another just to experience having a singleton. Not monetary reasons but more time. I'm not cut out to be a sham and juggling three and work / family / giving them enough time each seems too hard!

I have two and in practical terms I’m done.

If money was no object, I’d have four. That’s on the basis that I’d be able to work part time, term time only, and be able to afford to outsource cleaning and laundry, have a bigger home, and not have to spend any time or energy fretting about the bills or trying to save money on the food shop etc. Time, not money, is my main constraint and the reason I’ve stopped at two - but enough money would buy me the necessary extra time I think.