Is it selfish to want a big family if you aren't rich?

[angelaartsstudent]

I agree re it being worth the sacrifice.

DH was earning nearly $90 000 a year and I was earning just over $55 000 at one point so we had a great child free life!

Alas, it is no more. Jobs change, situations change etc.

We now live in a tiny flat/unit with no money and less gadgets/toys/holidays/lavish items/fancy food and booze.....but we're probably happier. We spend more time at home together, going to parks and playgrounds and generally spend more time together than we did when we were well off!

[*Ang*]

Is it selfish to want a big family if you aren't rich?

Ok, deep breath, here goes my answer to the OP's question. I preclude it by saying that my intention is not to offend but this is my personal opinion.

Yes it is selfish to want a big family if you cannot afford them. No it is not necessary to be "rich" but I do believe it is necessary to have some sort of financial stability. If you know that you are unable to afford the basics and will struggle with an additional child I really and truley believe it is selfish to have another one just because "I want a large family" or "it is my right to have children".

I read on here and hear stories of families who cry broke and cannot afford something eg $20 because something has broken, or their child needs new shoes and they cannot afford them. The next thing you know they are pregnant with no xyz. Do people think that their financial situation will get better with each subsequent child?? Are they naive or plain stupid? I have no sympathy at all.

I am sorry if that opinion offends, but I come from a family where the basics were always provided for and some luxuries were, but not many. After seeing my mum and dad sometimes scrimping for some items and seeing the distress that financial hardship placed upon them, I have always vowed not to do the same to my children. Hence the reason why I believe if you cant afford them dont have them (children that is).

And yes money is not the be all and end all of life, and neither are lavish items. But lets all not put heads in the sand, love and affection are certainly the most valued things in our family but having the basics and a bit more certainly make life more comfortable, more easier and there are no arguements re financial problems like my parents had therefore mum and dad are happier and so are kids.

[angelaartsstudent]

I do agree that people need to really and truly THINK about their financial situation before getting knocked up again and again and again. I have known too many families who don't.

DH would NOT have asked for another baby if we couldn't afford it. As I said above...I don't have to go back to work if I don't want to, but I DO want to very very much (not for financial reasons...just becuase I am going braindead lol). There is no way I would ever have a second child if I HAD to go back to work within 4 weeks of the baby being born and work 2 jobs to make ends meet.

I do not think it is selfish to *want* a large family, but it is when you clearly have absolutley NO way in the world of affording it. It's not fair to the kids.

[onthefly]

Ang, I agree, you do need to be financially responsible. But that doesn't mean you need to be rich. There are lots of things we spend money on (with or without kids) that are not really necessary.
Family is definitely more important to me than material possessions, and I also don't think a private education is necessary. Although we're not earning big bucks, we can forgo all the unecessary things and support a bigger family.

[KimB]

I'm having #6 and we certainly aren't rich. DF is a teacher and while his salary is adequate we don't have luxury items. I'm a SAHM but I will have 3 children 4 and under when Frogglette is born. For holidays we go camping and the kids love the adventure. We still have some take away meals but not all the time but we can afford to pay our mortgage, buy food and pay the bills with some left over. DF always wanted a big family and that is what he got

[Pretty Butterfly]

Sweets, you defiantly DONT have to be rich, I can attest to that!!!

But I agree with most here, you DO need a stable income. Centrelink wont cut it.

We are very lucky now, we both work from home!! So we get to get by with only average money, and be home with our little ones. We love it.

Our kids do go to a Catholic school, but its not too pricey up here, and it gets paid in installments. So easy to do.

They do get hand me downs, but end of season clearouts are awesome too!!

I would never change it. They dont need all these toys and crap, they always have someone to play with!
And everyone wants to be at our house.. its bigger, and already has a party of people in it, so fun times!!
Holidays are awesome, and cabins are so so cheap.
Having a big family can be done easily, you just need to be smart about it.

It can be done babe, good luck with your larger than average family, it ROCKS!!!!!!


If you have any specific questions sweets, ask away!!! xoxoxo

[Trillian]

What constitutes a 'big' family now though? For some it will be 3 kids, for others it is 4, 5, 6 or even more. I don't considered our 4 child family large at all. If we had 5 kids I would think it would be large. I think the key to this is deciding what is important to you and what your priorities are - if it is having a large family with loads of noise and people as opposed to having less children and an overseas holiday each year, then that's entirely fine either way. However, I do think that if you are having children that the financial decision to have more should be based on how you can financially support with WITHOUT FTB. We don't even factor our FTB into our budget and DH earns enough that we can survive quite nicely without it, but if we added another child to the family then we would start to feel a little financial strain. I say this because you cannot predict what will happen with this in the future. What if the Govt becomes completely broke, and I mean really broke and they have to start cutting back the money? If your entire existence is supported by what you get from c'link, then I really think that maybe having more children isn't the best idea until there is more financial stability ITMS.

[*Ali*]

I don't think you have to be rich- It is character building for children to learn about neccessities and wants, nobody 'needs' the latest everything, labelled clothes, lavish holidays etc, it is nice for children to learn about saving for things we want.
However, having said that I do agree with Ang- you have to be able to afford the basics, if you can't make ends meet to pay your rent, buy food and pay the bills, then you probably can't afford to have another child- because all the love in the world is not going to pay for your electricity or buy food for your children.
Sadly I have worked with some of the kids that Angelaartsstudent is refferring too, whose parents have more children for the baby bonus- who get paid their centrelink, go and buy their alcohol and cigarettes, buy the family take away and then the kids go without food for the rest of the week- those really are the people who shouldn't be having more kids.

So like everyone says, it's about balance, if you are covering you basics and you are prepared to sacrafice material possessions- then sure why not have a large family, it is an each to their own kinda situation. For me, I don't want to be rich, but I am happy with 3 kids and knowing that we have enough money to do the things we want to do.