English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-25 14:59:36 · 31 answers · asked by nrnsyeda 1 in Pregnancy & Parenting Parenting

31 answers

only 1 or 2. if you have more than one becomes the favroite, one is the baby, and one is left out. usaly the middle child is left out. (like in my family. I am the middle child and my parents do favor the others much more than I).

2007-01-25 16:52:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

2

2007-01-25 23:13:33 · answer #2 · answered by Just Wondering 5 · 3 0

2

2007-01-25 23:15:43 · answer #3 · answered by ?only?me? 6 · 2 1

3

2007-01-25 23:14:54 · answer #4 · answered by cierra 2 · 1 2

It depends on your style of parenting. If you work well with chaos, bigger can be better. If you are very high-strung, 1 is enough.

Some parents find that they often micro-manage having had just one and the kid feels outnumbered, but some parents think that one is great and they can really fortify that one child.

With two (I fall there myself) I feel that I'm too often comparing the two or there's an either or rivalry. As a stay-at-home mom, I still feel like I micro manage them too often, but at least I have one boy and one girl and they are very close...some feel that when they have the second, that made parenting overwhelming for them since now they have to deal with not only the parent/child dynamics, but now with the sibling dynamics as well.

With three, the pros I've heard are having a big family feel without the over-crowding...cons can include the fact that there's the middle child syndrome and since there is an oldest and a middle and a youngest...the kids end up personifying these steryotypical roles.

With four...everyone I know with four or more has said to me, "Once you have 4...it's the same as 7 or 10"...these are the most patient women I know, let me point out...the downfall of course would be money and not feeling like you have enough personal time with each child...the kids will at least learn a sense of responsibility, but may have to do with less family vacations and after school activities. Another pro is that with four or more, they almost always have to learn to share bedrooms and time and rarely come out self-centered.

I guess there's no one good number...it's just more about your parenting style and what you imagine your family to be like.

2007-01-25 23:30:52 · answer #5 · answered by Green Booger 3 · 0 2

I think that depends on your patience, income, energy, outlook, emotional well being, etc. Some people should have none..some people have 12 and do a great job with all of them. We have three and want to have more...but are not in a financial position to add more right now. What people want and what is ideal can be two different things.

2007-01-25 23:24:49 · answer #6 · answered by PennyPickles17 4 · 1 1

I think it is totally based on you, your family and where you are in life. my husband and I have one, we would maybe like another one someday, but our lives are so busy I don't know if it will ever happen. then there are people like my husband's brother and his wife. they are dirt poor, she doesn't work, he works part time and goes to school and they just had their fourth child (all four kids born within a year of each other). they feel that is right for them.
I hate it when I see articles by doctors saying 'oh if you want happy children, have this many and space them this many years apart,' there is really no way of accounting for all the different variables for those kind of studies to be useful for everybody. Do what you feel is right, it's okay to have no kids, one kid or twenty kids, if that is what you want!

2007-01-25 23:23:04 · answer #7 · answered by T. R. 1 · 0 2

I think its different for everyone. I'd love 6 kids, but can't afford that many, so i'm gonna have 2 or 3. If you can handle the stress and have the financial means, then have more kids if you want to.

2007-01-25 23:19:26 · answer #8 · answered by JoshsGirl 3 · 1 2

2 kids

1st born is a male. They're relatively low demand and are easily made happy. Also, to protect the second born.

2nd born is female. 3 or more years away from the first born. With that gap, the boy can protect the girl and they'll have a big enough age gap where they wont get into as many arguements with eachother because they'll be out of reach and in differant social groups

2007-01-25 23:18:44 · answer #9 · answered by 7\/\/34l( ! 1 · 1 3

Everyone is different but I want one or four. One if the first pregnancy doesn't go well, or doesn't happen at all (then I will adopt one child and see how it goes... sometimes adopting older children is difficult and I may want to put all my attention on that child). On the other hand if all goes well I want to adopt two and have two. But families rarely work out like planned, so I will be happy with anything!

2007-01-26 00:05:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

when I got married I my plan was to have 2 kids and the plan was going great until I had twins. I wouldn't change a thing.

2007-01-29 19:24:27 · answer #11 · answered by kiko 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers