NWMR: Am I done?

fitmom82

I am constantly going back and forth if I'm done having babies or not.  I'm 32 and have a 2 1/2 and 4 1/2 year old.  I always wanted to be done with kids by the time I was 30, and I was, but I also always wanted 3-4 kids.  Now I see 30 isn't as old as I thought it was in my 20s, and I think if I really work on him, I talk DH into 3, although he was happy with 1.

Even though I always wanted a larger family, my family is perfect the way it is.  I have a boy and girl, they play together, I do alot with them without DH and can manage the 2 of them pretty easily.  We have enough money, but not much extra, they do classes and we do day trips, but have only been on 1 big vacation since they've been born.  I'm really looking forward to doing more vacations, getting a nicer home, and DH is looking forward to getting a new car.  I like having 1 boy and 1 girl, although right now they're both very close to me, I see how in the future DH and I will each have a special bond doing boy/girl stuff with each of them.

However... I love the baby stage, I want to go back to pregnancy, baby wearing, bottle feedings, baby smiles and giggles ect.  I know this all goes away so quickly, so maybe it's not worth starting all over again for that 1 special year, but thinking years ahead, I want busy, noisy holidays with a big family and lots of grand kids.  

Is it worth resetting the clock, waiting another 5 years to be able to have extra money again, wonder for the next 3 years or so if every time i go out to eat if it will be worth it, or risking not being able to take 3 kids, who will have very different interests out much to have another 2 years of wonderful (I hope) pregnancy and the baby year?  I know in the end it's up to me and DH, just curious to see what others think of my reasoning.

jlaOK

I'm kind of in a similar position to you.  I'm 31 have a 4.5 yr-old boy and 1.5 yr-old girl.  I always wanted 3 but we are done at 2.  We are comfortable financially but would be a bit tight if we went for a 3rd.  I don't, however, like the baby part so it's a bit easier for me to be happy with 2.  I like to think towards the future about the things we'll be able to do with only having 2:  vacations, possible private school, maxed out retirement savings, kids college paid for, paying off house early.  Those goals make it easier to be happy with 2.  Plus, with not starting over on the baby part the family can enjoy the fun things you can do a lot easier with older kids.

2chatter

The big picture is what motivated me to have three.  Long term, I think it's great for them to have each other and for us to have big family gatherings.  I was an only and DH is one of three.  Thanksgiving was pretty quiet for me, often me and my parents.  This year we are hosting twenty people, and I much prefer that experience for my kids.  And their children will have cousins (hopefully) or at least awesome aunts/uncles. 

My parents are one of nine and one of seven respectively, so I had lots of people to visit and vacation with as a child.  For me, three was the right balance of insanity (it does get hard to do volleyball practice until 7:30 while nursing and DH is out of town...) and "family".  I was willing to take the financial hit.

MickeyM04

I actually have this debate with myself a lot.  We have 2, 2 years and 2 days apart, a boy and a girl.

Reasons why I want 3:

1. Big noisy family gatherings/it always being like your own little party wherever you go.

2. Lots of grandkids, assuming DH lets me live that long.  HA!  I jest.

3. I like being pregnant, and having a baby (not the newborn phase, but like months 4-12), and it makes me sad to think of never doing it again and just being done.

Reasons why I want to stop at 2 (in no particular order):

1. I don't like the newborn stage and I swore with DD I would never do it again.

2. I feel like I never have enough time or attention for either kid and I can't imagine adding one more.  ("DS, I can't play with you right now, DD is nursing."  Or leaving DD in the jumperoo and basically ignoring her for 20 minutes because DS wants to snuggle and watch a movie.)  So now each kid gets 1/3 of my attention?  When DH is there, we each get a kid and one gets ignored?  What happens when all 3 are sick at the same time??

3. MONEY.  We simply DO NOT have enough money for a third.  Whether it's DC or a nanny, we do not have the extra money for childcare.  Our house is too small and we don't have enough money to upgrade.  We can barely put any money away for college now, let alone for three.  

4. We are so blessed...I had two easy pregnancies, two easy deliveries, and two perfect kids.  Do I really want to be like, Hey Universe!  TRY ME.  

#2 is the big reason why we probably won't try for another one.  I feel like even really really really destitute people can make it work, so money, while a big part of it, would never be the deal breaker for me.  More importantly, I am the mom who wants to do everything for everyone all the time.  I felt guilty taking DS to DC while I was on maternity leave.  When DS is sick and I stay home with him, I feel guilty taking DD to DC since she's healthy and I want to try to keep them separated and DS needs my attention.  I feel guilty missing DS's bedtime routine because DD is nursing.  I cannot imagine adding a third child in, how I would feel to be missing TWO bedtime routines because the baby is nursing, or sending TWO kids to school while I'm home with the one sick kid.  That's just me though.  

mcgeeva

If my husband and I were on the same page as wanting a third that would be answer number 1 for us. But if we couldn't afford the daycare for a third without having to give up that one family trip every other year, then it wouldn't happen. For us it all boils down to money and what we would be willing to give up without our other two children having to sacrifice anything. I know for us right now it's out of the question when you add fertility treatments into the mix as well as childcare. I couldn't possibly make enough money to have any time left to spend with my kids at the end of the day to have a third. We know if we are going to consider 3 we have to wait until our oldest is in elementary school. And even then because I do not have a flexible job we will still have to pay for before and after child care. Good luck!! I love the baby stage as well!

litzo27

@MickeyM04 - I could have written that post almost word for word, except for 4 vs. 3. I'm almost sure that I'm done and the main reason is that I struggle with finding time each week for some quality one-on-one interaction with each kid. And like you said "wanting to do everyone for everything". Also the concept of juggling extra-curricular activities of 3 when they get older is enough to make my head hurt. But DD is 10 months right now and every time I think about not getting a chance to do this baby thing again I'm in tears. I'm 34 now so I decided to shelve the issue and proceeds on the assumption that we are done with 3 but save all baby stuff and revisit one last time at 36-38.

SunAndRain

The biggest factor in my acceptance that we are one and done is my energy level, or rather a lack thereof.  But I am older than you (40) and notice a world of difference between my energy now and even 5 years ago. 

DD is 2.5 and I have just enough energy to enjoy the heck out of her. And I still have time to recover from those sleepless nights, when needed.  And we have enough money to cover baby sitters when ever we want and vacations when ever we choose (within reason, of course).  But both DH and I work stressful jobs so that takes a toll on us emotionally as well.

I would give up many of the material items we can afford now to simply have the energy to manage two children.  But the fact is that my body doesn't recover as fast as it used to; since we got started late in life that is just the way it is.  Had I been in your shoes with 2 kids 8 years ago I'd have a third in a heartbeat.  DD is my greatest joy.  I can't imagine how wonderful it would be to multiply that by 3.  But I know that, for me at this stage of my life, having another would nearly break me (if not my marriage) because I'm pretty much at the limit of what I can handle on a regular basis.

Best of luck in your decision.

rubber_chicken

We're in the middle of this decision right now, but for us its about going from one to two.  We babysat my niece and nephew on Saturday night, and it was so traumatizing that I think we're both set on being one and done!  I have no idea how anyone with multiple kids does it!!

shakinros

It sounds like you've got a pretty sweet deal right now!

We only have 1 at the moment and will probably go for #2 but aren't sure enough yet to TTC. Money is a huge factor for me. The difference between my 20s, coming from a background where my parents had enough money to help me out in college and get me started on my own, and DH's 20s, when he had no money, no help, dead end jobs, couldn't get a loan for college, no food sometimes... well, We both want to make sure our kids don't have to struggle like he did. 2 seems totally feasible in our budget, 3 doesn't.

potbellypig

I was pretty sure we were done at two until I drank too much wine one night and convinced DH to let us "see what happens". Deep down, I want 3 or 4 because of the "Christmas factor" other pps have mentioned. I like the idea of a big, chaotic home with lots going on. It doesn't bother me that my kids won't get 100% of my attention, as I don't think they'll need it with more siblings. Finances aren't a huge factor for us as long as I keep working, we already have a large enough house for 3-4 kids as long as 2 of them share a room (which I think will be fun for them). The only thing we need is a new vehicle. We won't be able to afford yearly vacations or to give our kids tons of stuff, but I prefer it that way anyhow. I'm from a family of 3 and DH is from a family of 4, and the fourth person adds lots of fun dynamics to the mix.

EDIT: pushed send too soon

rubber_chicken

This is going to make me sound like the worst person in the world...

But as someone from a HUGE family who was middle class poor and never had new clothes or took vacations but had that "Christmas Chaos" all the time...I grew up wishing my parents believed in birth control. 

I love my siblings, I don't want anyone to think I don't love them.  But none of us are particularly close as adults.  We all grew up and moved to different states, and don't really stay in contact besides facebook. After a cramped childhood, we all just want SPACE.

Sorry to be such a Debbie Downer, I just thought it was important to note the other side.  You're not just making this lifelong decision for yourselves, but for your kids as well. 

potbellypig

rubber_chicken said:

This is going to make me sound like the worst person in the world...

But as someone from a HUGE family who was middle class poor and never had new clothes or took vacations but had that "Christmas Chaos" all the time...I grew up wishing my parents believed in birth control. 

I love my siblings, I don't want anyone to think I don't love them.  But none of us are particularly close as adults.  We all grew up and moved to different states, and don't really stay in contact besides facebook. After a cramped childhood, we all just want SPACE.

Sorry to be such a Debbie Downer, I just thought it was important to note the other side.  You're not just making this lifelong decision for yourselves, but for your kids as well. 

Curious about how many kids in your family?

And regarding the bolded - this could easier be applied to the only child who wishes they had a sibling. The grass is always greener on the other side, unfortunately.

rubber_chicken

Oh the grass is definitely always greener.  I'm not trying to knock anyones decision-making.  How you build your family, and what values go into that decision, is intensely personal.  Although I did grimace when I read another poster say "It doesn't bother me that my kids won't get all of my attention" -- it might not bother her, but that doesn't mean it won't bother her kids.  Most of the neuroses my siblings and I have as adults can be traced back to fighting over our parents very divided attention. 

And there are other ways to have a full house than to have a baby -- I knew only kids whose houses were always full because everyone always ended up there after school.  Or kids who spent all their time with their cousins etc.

potbellypig

rubber_chicken said:

Oh the grass is definitely always greener.  I'm not trying to knock anyones decision-making.  How you build your family, and what values go into that decision, is intensely personal.  Although I did grimace when I read another poster say "It doesn't bother me that my kids won't get all of my attention" -- it might not bother her, but that doesn't mean it won't bother her kids.  Most of the neuroses my siblings and I have as adults can be traced back to fighting over our parents very divided attention. 

And there are other ways to have a full house than to have a baby -- I knew only kids whose houses were always full because everyone always ended up there after school.  Or kids who spent all their time with their cousins etc.

My two kids don't get all of our attention even now. DH and I have chores, hobbies, friends etc. that require our kids (well, the 3 y/o at least, and DS when he grows up) to learn to be self-sufficient and to entertain herself at times. I think that's a valuable skill. I'm not implying that parents of 1-2 kids give their children attention at all times or that they lack in self-sufficiency (based on my experience I don't think that's the case). This is a completely personal opinion, but I don't think it's healthy for kids to have "100%" of their parents' attention. Kids need a little space to make their own choices and explore. You want a healthy relationship with your child that involves a certain degree of 1-1 time, so that you can explore their feelings, set appropriate boundaries,make them feel special, etc. I think there's a phenomenon in this day and age that makes parents feel like they're cheating their kid/s out of some special experience if they aren't 100% present at all times, which makes a lot of people stop at 2. I also think that there's a huge difference between having 3-4 (what would have been considered "normal" in the 80's) kids and having 5+ (which would have been a "larger" family even then). I can definitely see how having lets say 8 kids would leave them feeling like they missed out. Three or four? I have a harder time believing that they would feel like they had a bothered childhood due to lack of attention, this is based on personal experience (1 of 3) and DH's experience (1 of 4)

Also, totally morbid, but what if one of your two kids dies? Then your kid with a sibling no longer has someone with whom to share experiences. What if one of your two kids moves far away? You have one person to visit/take care of you when you're older. Obviously you could have a large family and all of your  kids COULD move away or pass away, but the more kids you have, the more likely you are to have someone to take care of you/visit you etc as you get older and the more likely your kids are to have siblings living near them as they get older. Also morbid, but - parents die. Eventually parents die and kids are left with only their friends, in-laws, extended family and siblings.

EDIT: their, they're, there...never cease to stump me

Beevol

I'm due with #2 soon, so this is still of on the horizon for me, but I am in the same boat of not sure if we want 2 or 3. 

For us, we will probably stop at two because of money. DC costs ~$15K per kid per year, 30K a year is a lot of money and that 5K pretax FSA for childcare doesn't actually help that much. We couldn't afford 45K a year, and I don't want to have Kid#1 that much older than Kid#3 because diapers and potty training and night wakings are just not how I want to live a decade of my life. So if we have a third, it will be once Kid#1 is in Kindergarten and we'll have a 5-6 year spread. Not too bad, but that's 8-9 years of diapers, barely saving, and not doing anything else with our money/time. 

It makes me kind of sad, but it's the more practical choice. A friend of ours who has three says that the biggest downside of three is that the world is set up for a family of four - things like getting a table for 5 at a restaurant, or needing a min-van because you just can't fit 3 booster/car seats across the back of anything else, etc. 

SunAndRain

I never understood the "what if one of your kids die" argument.  It goes both ways.  I could argue NOT to have more than one because then your only child never faces the risk of having to live through the death of a sibling.  Two kids means that the parents are twice as likely to lose a child.

But I can say that my biggest regret and stopping at one is that DD won't have a sibling when we pass.  But I have a sister and we are not close at all.  She has a lot of baggage and makes decisions that complicate her life more than I'll ever understand (e.g. 4 kids by 3 different fathers, which, by my observation, has created a lot of hurt).  We were raised with the same values.  So much of what happens in life is by chance.  I wouldn't try to hedge bets against the number of children we choose to have.

shakinros

potbellypig said:

Also, totally morbid, but what if one of your two kids dies? Then your kid with a sibling no longer has someone with whom to share experiences. What if one of your two kids moves far away? You have one person to visit/take care of you when you're older. Obviously you could have a large family and all of your  kids COULD move away or pass away, but the more kids you have, the more likely you are to have someone to take care of you/visit you etc as you get older and the more likely your kids are to have siblings living near them as they get older. Also morbid, but - parents die. Eventually parents die and kids are left with only their friends, in-laws, extended family and siblings.

The number of kids you have has absolutely nothing to do with the ultimate closeness of families. Some only children are really close to their parents and will take care of them. Some aren't and the parents will be alone in old age. Some large families are close, some aren't. Some families are super close emotionally but include a person with wanderlust (or in the military, or who needs to live near their spouses family, etc)

I'd say my brother and I are close but proximity has nothing to do with it. We haven't lived in the same time zone for 12+ years. We both just bought houses so I don't see that changing any time soon. My mom is 1 of 4. Two of her siblings live in the same town but they don't speak to each other.

I don't think it's in our power to determine what kind of adult relationships our kids have with their siblings (or lack thereof). It's their choice ultimately.

Also, the list of people you wrote as to who someone is left with when their parents die? That's an enormous number of people!

IrishTraveler

I could have written this. We're going back and forth about whether or not to have another baby. Part of me wants the big family Christmas, and part of me realizes this is a decision that needs to be made with some logic aside from the emotion. It is a huge financial decision that will have an impact on our lifestyle for many years to come.

 We love to travel, and it would be much easier to begin doing some major travel again with two versus three. The world is kind of set up for families of four instead of families of five. What we drive will probably have to change. I might have to quit working because of the cost of daycare. I'm approaching 35, and having already had two C-sections and a scary second pregnancy, do I want to do the baby phase again?

On the pro side, there is that big family Christmas, an extra sibling for my already-close kids, and it would fulfill my dream of a family with three kids. I was one of three, so in my head, it's the ideal family size, I guess. DH was one of two, and he's content with stopping at two but willing to consider a third if I really want it.

I don't know how to make this call. Either way, there's going to be some kind of sacrifice. Either I sacrifice lifestyle, one-on-one time with my kids, and a job I love, or I live with the potential regret of not having that last child. Whatever call I make, it feels a bit like the wrong one. This decision is kind of paralyzing me.

potbellypig

Food for thought: I have never heard anyone say/admit that they regretted having one more child.

Edited for clarity, then again to add that I edited it