-
@Smurfette: Is it possible to do partial week day care? Like maybe you could do day care Tues/Thurs, and then have a cheaper nanny on M/W/F? I know it's not a huge savings, but it might be enough of a savings to make it a little more affordable with 2. And, R will still be able to go to school/day care.
-
@mrs. wagon: I am just afraid that things with 2 are going to be so tight that it would take us years to recover. But I really see us with another.
@photojane: That is something we could look into. I would think by 2.5/3 she would need full time preschool, but there might be a cheaper option then the school she starts next week for preschool. A lot we have to look into. -
@Smurfette: we got really lucky in LMW's early months because my mom cared for her full time for the first 6 months, then we got a nanny share (a nanny came to our house with her baby) that was really affordable, until LMW was 15 months old. Then she started at our daycare, which only takes 15 months and up, and is a little more affordable than other daycares in the area. Still, the double daycare is killer.
This summer we are saving a bunch as well, paying a family member to watch the kids Mondays and Fridays, and take them to and from daycare Tues, Weds, and Thurs. They are only doing half days those 3 days. The family member is an elementary school teacher and has summers off, so it works out well! It's only 2 months worth of daycare but we're saving several thousand dollars.
There are always ways to get creative
Good luck in your decision making.
-
@Smurfette: My mom SAH, but I did 2-day preschool at 3, and 3-day preschool at 4. I was definitely prepped for school. So something to look into!
-
@Anagram: I absolutely agree with you. I was just chiming in because we ARE in a harder financial situation and still the material sacrifices have been worth it for us. For example, travel is an oft cited reason but our last trip we went backpacking with the kids and stayed at a 30 dollar a night hotel and still had a blast. So I was just encouraging OP to look beyond the "logical" pros and cons.
-
@Anagram: @Baby Boy Mom: It's not just about prioritizing *stuff* over another child . . . your responses are sad . . . they minimize/make light of a serious consideration for family size, and are a superficial and shallow analysis of financial/*logical* considerations.
-
@Radish: <--- what she said.
It's such a personal, difficult decision to have any amount of children, whether that number be 0 or 10, that I find it hard to list advantages or disadvantages because they are extremely tailored to *my* family. Others would disagree with our priorities or decisions, and that's fine!
Essentially, we are on the fence, and are nowhere near deciding if we are one and done or not. I do find threads like this very helpful and interesting, but I always wonder why moms have so much guilt about having only 1 kid!
-
@Bookish: Because we are always being told that more is more . . . that there is always a way to make it work (sacrifice, sacrifice, sacrifice!) . . . and that it is selfish to "deprive" your LO of a sibling. (Not that anyone in this thread has said all those things)
-
@MsLipGloss: Yeah, and I've heard all those things from friends and family!
-
@Smurfette: forgive me for overstepping, but this isn't a sitiuation where you're debating among getting new pots and pans, but more serious financial ramifications. I lead a middle class life, with middle class trappings. The fact of the matter is that money is a big worry as I don't believe any working stiff (as we almost all are on this site) is "set" if you have to go to work to earn a pay check. There are just too many variables and unforseen things that can happen.
Believe me, I thought long and hard about the decision to remain a mother of one...it has NOTHING to do with pots and pans or vacations. That is just awfully assumptive.
-
Never mind.
-
@MsLipGloss: Agree. I'm not choosing nice pots and pans over a second LO. I'm choosing financial stability and what I believe will be a better life/future for our entire family.
@Bookish: Read the NYT article I linked to.
-
@MsLipGloss: that wasn't my intention at all and I'm sorry if it came off that way. I was just saying that sometimes we make decisions that aren't necessarily logical, and that's ok too. We all do what works for us.
-
@sorrycharlie: relegating financial considerations to better pots and pans really is a cheap shot . . . it is what the family places importance in, and what they decide to do with their money, that matters . . . not what I/anyone else thinks the money should be allocated to/for. but more specifically, it's the implication that those concerns are frivolous/shallow . . . which is not supportive or helpful at all.
-
@lawbee11: Great article, thanks for linking it!
-
@MsLipGloss: sad? in what way? I'm talking about my personal reasons for wanting two. I also said that I can imagine it's a harder decision for people who are on the fence about even wanting two or if they want two but have very tight finances. That's not making light of a situation, it's just a fact of my life/my reasons.
You seem to be reading something into my response that isn't there.
-
@looch: It isn't a matter of pots and pans but more won't be saving (aside from 401K and college), whether that is vacations and home improvements, and just plain emergency funds. Then what if we need to get a new car or something? You are right, I am not working just for fun. While I don't want to be a SAHM, I still work because we need my paycheck.
-
Not sure how this thread is sort of going off the rails, but..
My brother is CBC for 99% financial reasons. He will retire by the time he is 45 completely out of debt (mortgage paid off, etc). Could he afford to have kids, one or more? Of course. Is having the lifestyle he wants more important to him? Yes. Does that make him selfish/materialistic? NO. I get where everyone is coming from in saying 2 would push them over the edge financially.. but all of us would be MUCH better off financially if we'd had 0 kids. Why did we choose to have any? Because something drew us to parenthood. Maybe our kids will hate us when they're older. Maybe they'll end up in jail or a terrorist or a criminal. It's a risk we all chose to take. I think we are all justified in saying 2 is too expensive for whatever reasons we want. I also think we're all justified in saying we will "just make it work" if we're drawn to having 2. To each their own, here..
-
@JoJoGirl: I totally agree. I just didn't appreciate the implication that some *reasons* were more valid than others.
-
Pots and pans? For real? That is insulting and offensive.
There is this paradigm out there that says mothers/parents have to sacrifice for their children, and while I believe that is true to a certain extent (I am fine with sacrificing my sleep, most of my free time, $800/month for daycare etc.), I am not willing to sacrifice my own happiness...and what message would it send my child - particularly a little girl - if I did?
We all have different priorities and different reasons for having the number of children that we do/will, but to imply it's because we are choosing frivolity over another child is really inflammatory and uncool. I don't think anyone takes these decisions lightly, but the sacrifices are only worth it if the overall family/marital balance still reads on the "happy" and "stable" side of the barometer.
-
@lawbee11: I read the book by the same author as the NYT column last summer and it made me feel even more secure in our decision.
-
@JoJoGirl: that's what I was trying to say. =)
-
@mrs. wagon:
-
@mamimami: I love to hear stories of happy only kids since we are for sure only having 1 and I worry about his happiness. : )
-
I'll chime in from a different perspective. We are having only 1 mainly because that's what my husband wants (which we discussed before we got married and I agreed to). I still agree to our compromise, but it doesn't mean that I'm 100% confident about it since I've always imagined 2.
Pros: no worry about saving gear, no questions about my career path based on whether or not I will be taking leave, 100% focus on my little one, more $ (but it's on the low end of the list for us), no IF or prematurity to deal with (HUGE issue)
Cons: just the sibling relationship - lo having someone to play with at home (But we will focus harder on making sure to provide lots of play opportunities for him).
It's actually a relief to "know" that we are done even though I occasionally wonder...
-
My husband is a really happy only child
Sure, he has some issues with it occasionally (he wishes holidays were bigger/louder, etc) but nothing big. He has a lot of close friends that he considers to be family.
-
Since the financial aspect has been thoroughly discussed, I'll stick to the non-money issues, but that definitely plays a part in our decision. If we find ourselves financially able later, we would like to adopt.
We are one and 99% done for the following reasons:
-Both my husband and I found the first 2 years very exhausting and sometimes very stressful. The impact of long term sleep deprivation on 2 working parents really should not be minimized. Not everyone gets a crap sleeper but if you had one you know what I mean. In this way I agree with @MsLipGloss: 2 years is an eternity to get through. The toll on our relationships (friends, family work) and health is lingering. There was a lot of joy, too, and we were mainly able to keep perspective but doing it again, knowing what we know now? No.
-We had LO in our 30s. We didn't do any prenatal testing because we knew we wanted her regardless and we also felt like we could take care of a severely disabled LO if it came to that. My LO was born healthy but has had a chronic respiratory illness for about a year. Taking care of her has been manageable, but her relatively minor illness has shown me I had no idea what it entails to take care of a kiddo with health needs. I am not as mentally or financially equipped as I thought the first time around!
- We are happy. The three of us together is just about the best feeling in the world
Hope you find peace in whatever decision you make, @Smurfette:
ETA- the only con is knowing LO won't have a blood sibling. I don't expect her to have to take care of us (we are planning for that financially), so I am not worried about that. She will just miss out on the *possible* warm fuzzies of siblinghood. I will make an extra effort to provide her with a strong community and she will have to make do with that
-
I just wanted to add a little bit with regards to daycare/preschool. My mom was a SAHM and I didn't go do any sort of structured preschool until I was 4 and it definitely didn't negatively impact me! I did fine in school!
Just wanted to say that if doing a nanny and keeping R home longer might help you be able to have a 2nd (if that's what you truly want).
-
@Adira: Yes but after being in day care for 2.5 years, I wouldn't want to all the sudden keep her home. She is very social, so I can't imagine that she would happy going to playing with kids all day to being at home with a nanny and newborn.
-
@Smurfette: Hmm... that's true. I didn't think of that. That's a good point. Gahhh, this is so hard and frustrating. It sucks when you really feel like you want another, but just don't know if you can't swing it financially!! I hate that you're struggling with this!!
I'll be praying to the money gods that your husband gets a sweet raise and/or promotion in October that will cause all these worries and concerns to just go away!!! Then you can decide if you want another based solely on what you want and not on what you can afford!!
-
So much wise advice here....my question is, could you move? I dunno were in GA you live but I've been looking at daycare a little further out in the metro area (I'm reverse commuting) and even in the exurbs the daycare is much cheaper! And there are montessori options etc. out here.
-
So I was thinking about this last night (because I'm obsessed with all you do, @Smurfette), so here are some advantages/disadvantages that I came up with for having only one LO:
Advantages
* Finances - You'll only have to worry about paying for one of everything - school, activities, braces, college, wedding, etc. You'll have more money for eating out, traveling, keeping up your life style, etc. Less stress about money!
* Attention - Only have to focus on one child, don't have your attention split between two (or more).
* Optional Friend Trips - May have more of an option to allow R to bring friends on trips or to events that she otherwise would've had to just go with her sibling to
* No Sibling Rivalry - You won't have to listen to the probably CONSTANT BICKERING between siblings! Even siblings that get along well fight ALL THE TIME. My brother and I (30+ years old) are best friends and we STILL fight and give my mom a headache!
* No Favoritism - You won't ever have to worry about favoring one child over the other (or giving off the appearance that you do). It's obvious to me that my ILs seem to favor Hubs' sister over him and it really hurts my feelings, although Hubs doesn't seem to notice or care.Disadvantages**
* Attention - Since R won't have a sibling, she may require MORE of your attention while at home since she won't have a built-in playmate
* No Sibling Rivalry - Yep, this is under both. My brother and I were super competitive with each other and it made us both end up doing really well in school because we were constantly trying to do better than the other!
* Smaller Family Gatherings - When everyone is grown and you get together for family get-togethers, it'll be smaller since it will be just R and her family.
* Aunts/Uncles/Cousins - R's children will have no aunts/uncles or cousins on her side.
* No Complete Shared Life Experiences - R will have no one that will share an almost identical life experience as her. No one her age that she can reminisce with about growing up together and everything they did. Also, my brother and I kick ASS at Pictionary because of this.
* No Sibling Help - If you and your DH have any health issues or problems when you are older and even after you pass, R (and any SO) will have to deal with all of it own her own without help from siblings and their families.**Disadvantages can only be speculation - no guarantees that by having 2, you won't STILL have some or all of these issues!
-
@Mrs. Sketchbook: We just bought our house a year ago. Plus DH won't move OTP, says he is a ITP guy. That is the issue! Prices are so much higher ITP! She goes to a Goddard School now (burbs by my work) it is $1130. The one buy our house is $1650. same program, just different location.
@Adira: Thanks! Those are all things that I have thought about it. I don't know what we will end up doing. -
@Smurfette: Yeah, I'm guessing you probably will just wait and see what your finances look like after October. The problem with thinking about all the advantages and stuff is that there are no guarantees of anything if you have another! They might HATE each other and never get along! Which would make your lives miserable! In a way, it seems safer to have one because you already know what you've gotten into and certain things ARE guaranteed!
I just know, for me personally, I always wanted two, so we just went for it without even really thinking about all the ramifications! And now we're just like "Well, can't turn back now, so we'll deal with whatever we have to deal with!"
-
@Smurfette: And even if you were OTP, there is no guarantee that it (daycare) would be less expensive.
ETA: Obviously, this depends significantly on just how far (and where, too) OTP you go . . . but any *reasonable* distance will likely land you in the same *cost* boat, if that makes sense.
-
@MsLipGloss: That is very true. But for the most part it is cheaper. At least judging by where she is now and I see how much nice houses are here too. Mortgage would be cheaper as well. But it does depend on the area.
@Adira: I think the only thing that is guaranteed is that R will be loved no matter what and that she is going to be a handful when she is teenager! -
@Smurfette: hahaha, yes!!!
-
@Smurfette: move to Rome and you can sent her to Montessori for 2100 a semester
!! I promise your DH will love it. He'll still be ITP...just a different P, haha.I wanted to say I do feel you though. We want two and think we can do it if we get beyond the delivery costs, but I am not sure about three. We have scraped. No cable, DH still drives the car he got when he graduated from HS. Unmatching pots and pans, almost all hand-me-downs. But those things don't bother me. What bothers me is getting to the point where you can't afford to be yourself anymore. If DH sees himself as an ITP guy, or you don't want to SAH. It is easy to overgive!
-
@Mrs. Sketchbook: That is something I needed to hear. We can't cut back so much that we lose US! We are parents but we still have needs and wants outside of that and they deserve "stuff" as well.
-
@Smurfette: What if you delayed TTC by a few months so that LO2 would arrive around R's third birthday (or a little after)? By the time your maternity leave is over, you'd only have to pay for two daycares for two years. Of course, that's still a lot of money and scary if you feel like you can't save or repair the house, but it's for a finite amount of time. If you started saving a little bit now, plus DH's raise, you might be able to do it comfortably by for 24 months and then begin saving more again.
On the flip side, I am an only child and I loved it. I made really close friends as a child who still feel like sisters to me. I was able to travel a lot with my parents and attend an expensive college without any student loans because they could afford it with only one kid.
It's such a tough decision but the good news is that you will have a wonderful little family either way!
Good luck in your decision making.
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite2
121 comments