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

[turtleschell]

DH and I perceive the important things in life to be things like love, family, having a pure heart etc. We see material things and money to be the root of all evil, and we do everything we can not to get seduced by those kinds of things.
That said, I also want DD to have the opportunities I never did, eg plenty of extra curricular activities, holidays...
So if it was just the three of us, I could give DD everything, but I want many more children.
DH's family think I'm being naive, and that my children will feel neglected because we can't send them all to private schools and wear fancy shoes because there are so many kids.
I kind of think it's a stupid reason not to have more.
But I also see their point.
What do you think?
Did any of these factors influence the size of your family?

[littlelara]

I think you always find a way to get the things you deem important and to make it work.
I'm an only child and I did go to private school, but it was on scholarship. My mum scrimped and saved so I could go to camps because she thought it was important.
But from my point of view I can't ever imagine resenting NOT going to the school I did (love of learning comes from the home in my opinion) but I would have given anything for a warm home environment filled with love and siblings.
That said, we will be sticking with two, but not for financial reasons.
Would you regret not having more?

[MissM]

Ok, so here is my point of view:

I am selfish. It is that plain & simple.

I like to buy what I want when I want and not have to sacrifice what *I* want to buy, Of course being a parent there are sacrifices we all make, but having nice things is important to the both of us. We both like to spend, and we both like nice things. The world these days is so busy I dont know how people have large families (anymore than 2-3) We are so busy with one!

We also like to make sure we have enough money to buy DD and future children have nice things. (we only have one at the moment) DP and I both work full time, and honestly, I wouldnt have i any other way. DD does her extra curricular activities through school and we attend her performances. What would I do all day while the kids are at school? ITMS?

Anyways, I MIGHT have another 2 children, but we will see. I have to consider taking time off work, the expense of daycare @ 12mths old (possibly before 12 mths) and everyday living, as well as DD's extra curricular activities and her schooling expense.

DP and I think 3 is plenty (considering the age gap of DD already) and i refuse to drive a van

BTW - I hope no one is offended by my post - this is how *I* feel

[glenny_c]

Miss M- I don't think anyone will be offended- each to their own I say. People should do what is right for them.

Having said that- I am pretty much the complete opposite, I will happily continue having kids until the money runs out. I know that's easy for me to say when I haven't even had number one yet but DH and I are both very family oriented and have talked about how we want our family to look like from when we were early dating.

We are lucky in that DH earns a great wage so I can give up work, I am not interested in working while the kids are at home- I would feel very robbed (again- personal opinion). My sister and I both went to public school and we are both quite successful in our chosen careers, I don't feel like we were disadvantaged by not attended expensive private schools. I would love to have a tribe of kids, to me it doesn't matter if you can afford to buy the latest gadgets or toys for them, I feel that the love of family is going to mean more in the long run.

Turtlescell- I think you just have to do what you and your DH feel is right and important. There is no right or wrong answer, for some people one child (or none) is right for them and noone should feel pressured into having kids, or not having them, because of what other people say.

[Phteven]

I don't think it's selfish wanting a big family.
Money and material objects aren't going to make you happy (although I'd rather be sobbing in my porsche than in a kia ;p) and if you know that and you don't want 'things' then IMO you're already ahead of those people who define themselves by what they own.
I've got a pretty big family and I wouldn't swap any of my siblings for a flat screen TV (hmmmm maybe my little brother - jkz hehehe). It's heaps of fun having a big family and when I compare the extra material benefits I might have had growing up if I had less siblings against the benefits to me, as an adult, the big family wins. Also it's great for my children, they have oodles of cousins (and second cousins) and we arrange holidays together that are just awesome. Over the summer holidays we have rented a row of flats at the beach for all our families for a fortnight. I feel sorry for the neighbours because en masse we are loud lol.
Another benefit is that I know that if I'm in trouble that there are a bunch of people out there who have my back and it's nice to know that.

I love being home. I can't imagine going back to work. It's way more fun taking the boys out for babychinos lol. And when Imran is at school next year I can have an affair with my tennis instructor *makes mental note - book tennis lessons*

ETA - No need for a van for a big family. We've recently test driven the Audi Q7 and the Volvo CX 90. They are both awesome cars that fit 7 people in comfort.

[Maruschke]

Children cost money, but they don't have to be expensive. It's all about how you want to live and what you are willing to sacrifice.

You don't need to buy all new clothes, hand me downs are fine.
You don't need to go out for dinner together once a week, every now and then picking up a pizza is fine.
You don't need brand new furniture, buy off ebay.

You get the point. I think if you want a big family, there are still ways to afford it. If you want a lavish life, you might not be able to do that with 4 kids unless you or DH have a very high income.

Me personally, I would put family before luxuries. Which is why we are moving to the 'burbs, by second hand furniture and clothes, eat cheap, live cheap.

HTH

[Feijoa Mum]

I dont think you have to be rich. What I get back from my kids is far more than any dollar amount I have put into them.

I want my kids to have everything I didnt. I was one of four with a solo Mum who did so very well with us but money was impossibly tight. There was no extras in our house and I did grow up resenting that. Not fully understanding of course until I was older but I just remember hating been "poor"

I miss out now, my kids dont. Thats not to say they are spoilt but I go without the new clothes so they can have the label clothes for their birthdays, I colour my own hair so they get a new Ipod or DS for xmas.
I spend hours baking and cooking from scratch so the cupboards always have yummy food in them.
We dont have huge family holidays so they have their school camps and Canberra trips.
Im sure my kids still think at times they are "so hard done by" but show me a child that doesnt at some time or other?

Its my sacrifice (although I dont like to use that word) for choosing to have my big
family.
Money does not make a family big or small.

[angelaartsstudent]

I think it is selfish that some people have a gazillion kids with the plan to never work again and get lots and lots of centrelink and baby bonuses. Then spend the baby bonus on booze, cigarettes and flat screen TVs and not actually bring their kids up with love and care. This type of person sadly does exist.

I agree that kids DON'T have to cost a fortune. 99% of Palmer's toys and clothes (the 1% remaining being gifts from family) are second hand. She slept in a cheap porta-cot for 17 months and now is in a hand-me-down single bed. The bed I had in my room at Mum's house! Her bottles (she was FF) were even second hand. All her furniture - wardrobe, drawers, bookcase, bedside table is 2nd hand. Daycare is exxy though, of course. We purposefully (sp) have not bought a house because at this time in life, renting is cheaper for us.

However, once number 2 is born I would like to go back to work ASAP (Becuase I am dying to go back to work, not becuase I am being forced to work) which will make things a bit easier financially....as we're on DHs income only at the moment (no CL or anything). We already have a 2nd hand cot for the new baby.

[Hollybolly]

I don't think its about being selfish or rich... I think its about you personally and what your expectations/limits/lifestyle/choices are.

DH & I have always wanted a big family - many hurdles to this stage (with IVF) but we're on track now
We'll look at trying for #3 around this time next year... we would prob have started trying already if we didn't need the help of IVF and its $6500 a try price tag

We're on the same page as far as wanting to have me at home permanently... we're lucky we have a business that can provide for us to do that financially... but at the same time, we've made a few changes in choices recently.

For example - DS1 starts high school next year & we have had him enrolled for a private school - the fees are really pricey, but for him and our situation, this school is whats best for him in our opinion.
To be able to afford to send him & for me to stay at home, something has to give, and so we're looking at moving house soon and dropping our weekly rent to free up a little money.

We choose to rent for now, as a mortgage would mean for me to need to work... and whilst the 'Great Australian Dream' of owning your own home is fantastic, for us, we've prioritised and Lukes schooling and me to be a stay at home parent is more important right now.

There are many other things as well... these are examples - but you get the point!

DH & I used to live quite a lavish lifestyle when it was just Luke and before 8yrs of IVF treatment, lol.... and whilst we don't live it up like we did, we still live quite nicely.

I think its important to weigh up what you want as far as a bigger picture, and find the balance... whatever works for you.

DH & I still go away every year for our anniversary, we still have lovely things, the boys don't miss out.... but we do live on the coast, which is not what we both would choose if money wasn't a concern.
We used to live in Neutral Bay in Sydney which is ridiculously expensive & pretentious... but we loved it
The decision to have a big family does not allow for living in Neutral Bay though, I'm afraid
So we moved up here and found the balance... still close enough to the city to be able to visit friends and shop in decent areas - just an hour drive on the freeway rather than sitting in traffic

Its not a secret we both struggle a little with living here, but we have a nice house and a backyard with a pool & a dog, and room for everything... as opposed to being squished & limited in a unit in the city...

Its worth the sacrifice though for whats more important to us

A lot of rambling, but hoping you see my point

[berrme]

I hate the notion that children have to have lots of material possessions to be happy and feel loved. There are 3 in my family and we had hardly any money when I was growing up, all went to public schools, didn't have designer clothes, but we were never bored. Dad is an only child, had plenty of money growing up, but would give anything to have had a brother or sister. I would choose family over stuff anyday.

I agree with Angelartstudent that it is selfish to have lots of children if you are already living off government benefits, but it isn't selfish to want a big family just because they won't have the fanciest clothes in the street.

[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.