We've decided that we're not having another child (stopping at 1), partially money related, we havent had to reign in the spending with one child, but would need to significantly with two. But mostly just dont want another. Dont fancy going through that first 12 months again, dont fancy doubling the morning fight to get them dressed before work etc etc.
By all means stick on 1 (we certainly thought at one point that we were going to though not entirely out of choice) but some of those reasons are a little spurious IMO.
First 12 months - we didn't find it so bad second time round - not because no 2 was better but because we knew exactly what it would be like and we knew it would get easier in time
Doubling the morning/etc fight - again, as they get older that gets easier as the older one actually helps and can look after themselves.
And then if you're going to reduce it to how hard it makes your life, having two means that they entertain eachother (or at least they hopefully will) so they're not after you for something when you're trying to finish another task.
Cost - well, school is the cheapest childcare you'll get (say our teacher friends 🙂 ) so that starts to get cheaper and IMO you manage with two as you did with 1 unless you're really hard up.
Just food for thought. 1 might be the right decision for you.
Cost - well, school is the cheapest childcare you'll get (say our teacher friends ) so that starts to get cheaper and IMO you manage with two as you did with 1 unless you're really hard up.
not if you've chosen to send them to private school..............cue next STW argument.
All of this was factored in to our decision to stick at one.
I'm presuming you get/got the same grief?
Ironically the only person who ever really brings it up is my sister-in-law who seems to have a chip on her shoulder as large as the tax haven she grew up on 😀
We don't live in central London, heck we don't even live in Surrey! Nurseries would almost certainly work out a bit cheaper but my wife works shifts and tends to leave the house around 5am most mornings. I do go into London a few days a week and when I do that (I cycle in) I leave a 6.15am and don't get back until almost 8pm.
Nurseries just can't accomodate those kind of hours.
Yes, private school 🙂
FWIW, I went to private school. I also have a sister. Given the choice of only one, as much as I loved my school, I'd much rather have my sister than be an only child and have gone to private school..
We're having one and one only, we decided that we only wanted one and yet i constantly have to defend it as a lot of people seem to think she will be lonely and maladjusted.
Well, she will be 😉
Nah, of course not and I hope that I didn't give that impression, just providing some food for thought to the specific situation mentioned.
We're having one and one only, we decided that we only wanted one and yet i constantly have to defend it as a lot of people seem to think she will be lonely and maladjusted.
So here's the best rebuttal I've heard bto that accusation:
How would NOT halving the amount of time and attention I am able to offer my child result in them being lonley and maladjusted?
Have so say if that's the best rebuttal, maybe I was wrong and actually having one is a bad thing 😉
Would have liked another, and were on the path, but then lost it in difficult circumstances which resulted in serious health implications for Mrs North. At the same time, I found out I'm at risk of developing something rather grim with a 50/50 chance of passing on.
Sadly, money never came into it.
Do we worry she's an only child? Sometimes, but then she's a highly sociable little being, so I'm pretty sure she'll get along fine in the world. And we're a tight knit family unit with a lot of family help on tap (just as well as we have demanding jobs).
If you both want another child, then - just like so many others said - JFDI*.
*Best ask Mrs H's permission first.
Have so say if that's the best rebuttal, maybe I was wrong and actually having one is a bad thing
Not sure I understand that (although whatever you meant I know you meant it in jest).
That said, having re-read my rebuttal I'm not sure I get that either!
binners - Member
The only person I know is ourkid
Is that a Northern Flower?
Bit like a chrysanthemum but in Pink like ? 😆
My kids are in their 20's now but we had au-pairs when they where small, if you get a good one with experience they can look after the kids all day once they are a bit older. I'm sure prices have gone up but we paid ours £50 a week plus they get food and lodging so you have to be prepared for that.
...and those awkward moments when you pass each other outside the bathroom in the morning and either one or both of you is just wearing a towel.
I'd say that for the vast majority of people a nanny is about as affordable, and practical as an enormous coke habit, and a yacht to snort it on.
While I can see your argument Binners, the simple fact for us was that 2 kids in nursery was more expensive than a Nanny. This means you have 2 choices assuming there isn't full time free grandparent type care. Pay for nanny (cheaper), nursery (more expensive) or one parent quits work. While the latter is certainly an option, and for those in lower paid jobs, becomes the only option, it's very, very difficult to put down a 'career' for 5 years then pick it up again after.
It's not right, it seems unfair, in fact, every time I hear it on the news about getting parents back into work, I start shouting at the radio, but it simply is.
Having family around to help out helps.
In my opinion its those who earn an average wage that have it the hardest.
Lower income or no income earners get government help. Richer folk can often cut back on luxuries whilst the average Joe has to live and find the cash.
We are lucky in the sense that mother in law is retiring to help out.
Having family around to help out helps.
This is the difficult part- the part we discussed. I was a late addition to the family so my mum is now quite old, same with my SO's parents now. Plus we aren't local.
But mostly just dont want another.
That's the only reason that matters.
My kids are in their 20's now but we had au-pairs when they where small, if you get a good one with experience they can look after the kids all day once they are a bit older. I'm sure prices have gone up but we paid ours £50 a week plus they get food and lodging so you have to be prepared for that.
What kind of experience fnarr, fnarr 😀
Good to see folk maintaining oh so important careers eh, do you employ someone to ride your bike, then give you a brief on the ride so you can relive the experience to your chums the following day.
Watch out cheeky boy been in one of these threads before and got expelled by the moderator, this is a self justification thread for many people that it's acceptable to place one or both parents long term career in front of looking after their children - there you go let's see how long it takes for this post to be removed?
No need to pass judgement on other people and their families when you know nothing about them. It's not nice.
this is a self justification thread for many people
Yeah it seems so... two at least. 🙄
How about we accept that different people have different approaches?
Not everyone has the option to give up work to look after the kids, and some folk may decide that their career is important to give their kids the things they want to, while others might decide that time is the only thing they need.
Ultimately folk are doing what they think is best for them and their kids, which is what matters.
Yes it is up to people to decide what's best for their kids, but I would suggest a 100% salary sacrifice to keep kids in day care/maintain career strikes me as an odd lifestyle choice. We had four kids eldest now 16 and we made the decision that my other half would be a full time Mum and that was probably the best decision we ever made in respect to quality of life for all of us, I have also been fortunate that my business also allowed me more free time than most employed people will ever have.
I am not unsympathetic to young families and modern life, we have friends who have placed their kids in day care from a few months old for up to 10 hours a day and as a sweeping generalisation they all seem to have turned out ok but I do wonder if I many cases it's an unwillingness to surrender the materiel parts of their lives
Hora - I wouldn't worry too much about your first child being an 'only' child.
My sister and most of my friends have only 1 and they all seem normal, friendly, well adjusted children to me. They have lots of friends and enjoy extra attention from family members
In my childhood it was rare for an only child in our school. Most families had at least 3, nowadays it's common and even normal.
Why do we feel the need to bestow the 'gift' of a sibling upon our offspring?
Just a natural drive to procreate I think.
We always wanted two but then we both have a sibling so it is what we grew up with.
Got 2, it was/is monstrously different to having one mark my words. Missus wants a 3rd now... 👿 finances will really only come into it at Uni time if you insist your kids go fully funded.. 🙄
After 2 nd one arrived we went down the road of a nanny 2 days a week. Eldest has started school and means only does after school 2 days and it just works. My wife tried condensing 4 days into 5 but just meant we rarely saw each other during the week and she found it really stressful too.
Friends had twins and they found a nanny to be cheaper than nursery and just more flexible which is what we find too. Also lovely to come home and kids have had a great fun time and food is ready for you too.
My wife wants a second, everybody else wants us to have a second, I don't. Really I never wanted the first, but now we have her I enjoy it, but I'm a shit dad, who is never in due to work, and when I am in, I'm knackered and not up for playing.
I do have the benefit of taking her to school everyday and seeing her at school , as I am the head, so there is that plus side.
I weighed up the second kid option seriously a few months back. We can afford it, easily, but when I start to look at what the costs are, and what we will do financially in the future it is too big a risk. It's the little things, if we want to see the family, it's an extra seat on the plane, if we want a holiday it's more.
I know it's being selfish, and I see that as good enough a reason not to have another as I am selfish.
The mrs is 41 I''m 36, clocks are ticking. I feel bad saying no sometimes, but I am the one who works, she will never make anywhere near what I can. and I know how little time I spend at home already.
Squirrel you sound pretty much like me.
Maybe we should have started sooner (mrsH is 42 next).
The only way we afforded one was living in a mates house virtually rent free for two years.
That was finite so moving back overseas was the only other option for us.
You and me though Hora, we can start now it's never too late, but I'm not receiving
I bloody hope I can make it work... T-5 weeks and counting