"Is One Child Enough?" - Huffington Post article (babysitter, prodigy)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm having more than one child but whatever floats your boat. I've found only children to be quite self centered but that is my personal experience.
I don't think I've ever met an only child that was self-centered. I've met a lot of very secure, ambitious, and self-confident ones, though. But then, their parents are all engineers or technologists and very practical people. I think the only probably has more in common with the oldest, and they have some of the same "little adult" and "all business" characteristics and interests older than their years, because they get undivided attention from parents and adult friends of parents. The more kids, the less time a parent has to devote to any one of them.
It seems kind of unnatural to be two people, and not even have enough kids to replace yourselves in society. I also think that not having any siblings to interact with has a tendency to create a very annoying kind of person in some cases.
It seems kind of unnatural to be two people, and not even have enough kids to replace yourselves in society. I also think that not having any siblings to interact with has a tendency to create a very annoying kind of person in some cases.
So you think all human beings should procreate? That's kind of weird. I think annoying people hail from all kinds of backgrounds. There is no shortage of annoying, obnoxious people with siblings.
One child is absolutely enough especially this day in age. Times aren't what they used to be and you can't survive on one income. Like the article I never pictured myself with more than one child. The horrors of my pregnancy confirmed that I never wanted more. Now that my daughter is getting older (3) I laugh at all the people who told me I'd want another when she got to this age. "You want and see you'll want another even though you don't think so right now" ... I have NO desire to ever have another, jokes on them. The fact that she is getting older, can communicate more and becoming more self sufficient excites me and relives me. No more sleepless endless nights of diapers and puke and crying and rashes. I might trade one thing for another but the "older" issues for me personally have been easier to handle.
I realize with one child thats only one more plane ticket, one more dinner plate , one more matress and one more bike. There are two of us for one of her for homework, love, bedtime stories and playtime. I find it silly almost to have more than one simply because people want their child to have a sibling "oh the NEED a playmate" they say.. They need love, support and comfort.. That is all.
Last edited by Sweetbottoms; 11-11-2012 at 02:34 PM..
Here's the thing. On a scale of 1 to 10, raising one child is about a 3.
Raising two is a 9.
Raising 3 is about a 27.
So, yeah, I get it about staying at one. But I think there are problems with only children that parents may not fully grasp:
1) Single children grow up lonelier. Having a brother or a sister gives that child a natural companion
2) Single children do indeed grow up more self-centered. Why? Because both parents are focused on the child at all times. The child becomes the center of the universe, so why shouldn't it agree with that. Meanwhile children with siblings learn to share, negotiate, and argue.
3) Single children have a burden placed on them, namely the entire expectations of the parent.
4) Single children, as the parents get older, have a far higher burden placed on them. I know a single child who is now fifty and she's coping with two parents both facing serious medical issues. It has taken over her life in a way that would not have happened if she had a sibling with whom she could share responsibilities.
Here's the thing. On a scale of 1 to 10, raising one child is about a 3.
Raising two is a 9.
Raising 3 is about a 27.
So, yeah, I get it about staying at one. But I think there are problems with only children that parents may not fully grasp:
1) Single children grow up lonelier. Having a brother or a sister gives that child a natural companion
2) Single children do indeed grow up more self-centered. Why? Because both parents are focused on the child at all times. The child becomes the center of the universe, so why shouldn't it agree with that. Meanwhile children with siblings learn to share, negotiate, and argue.
3) Single children have a burden placed on them, namely the entire expectations of the parent.
4) Single children, as the parents get older, have a far higher burden placed on them. I know a single child who is now fifty and she's coping with two parents both facing serious medical issues. It has taken over her life in a way that would not have happened if she had a sibling with whom she could share responsibilities.
So, now children need to have siblings close in age? Because be clear, there is no sharing and hanging out going on between siblings with vast age differences.
If what you say is true (they're self-centered, don't learn to share, etc) can you explain this study?
Quote:
Study: Children Without Siblings do not Have Problem in Socializing
A new research has revealed that adolescents who do not have any siblings do not appear to suffer from any problem in socializing.
Ohio State University researchers looked at over 13,000 middle and high school children. It was discovered that those kids who did not have any brothers or sisters were as easily befriended by their classmates as other kids.
My mother and her sister have always had a violent relationship. My mom cares for her mother, her sister doesn't help, but constantly voices claims to have of the pittance inheritance. And this woman is a millionaire. The rivalry she's had is on poor with a million other horror stories. Sometimes it's great to have siblings and sometimes it's not. I don't think across the board statements fit anywhere in this conversation.
"Early findings showed that firstborns and only children had a higher proportion of successes in later life and that they tended to have higher I.Q.'s than later-born children have. Firstborns and only children were also shown to be overrepresented in such groups as those listed in ''Who's Who,'' astronauts and students in graduate and professional schools"
"One report was delivered by Judith Blake, a professor of population in the department of public health and sociology at the University of California at Los Angeles. She found that an only child is likely to get three years more schooling than a child from a family of six, and thus was likely to find greater success in later life. She said that this was only partly due to financial factors. She found that many of the later-borns drop out of high school without finishing. Families with two children, for example, have a proportion of high school graduates about twice that of families with seven or more children."
My sister and I are 6 years apart and my brother and I are 7 years apart. We are all close, I see my sister almost weekly and talk daily several times a day. My mother had another child when I was 18 and we aren't close at all. I'm 30 and he's 12. We have nothing in common and I don't see him much nor do my other siblings. Its not at all that we hate him its more about we can relate being closer in age and having kids as opposed to him still being a child.
It seems kind of unnatural to be two people, and not even have enough kids to replace yourselves in society. I also think that not having any siblings to interact with has a tendency to create a very annoying kind of person in some cases.
Are you serious? I would think that those who choose to have one child balance it out for those who choose more than their replacements of two.
Here's the thing. On a scale of 1 to 10, raising one child is about a 3.
Raising two is a 9.
Raising 3 is about a 27.
So, yeah, I get it about staying at one. But I think there are problems with only children that parents may not fully grasp:
1) Single children grow up lonelier. Having a brother or a sister gives that child a natural companion
Nope. It only works if the two siblings have lots in common and are compatible, not adversarial. Loneliness is more closely related to total overall environment, and a lack of suitable playmates, not a lack of siblings. I am the oldest child of three. My sister and I are relatively close in age, but there's a huge 7-year gap between my brother and me. Sis and I have always been polar opposites on everything, from childhood toys and games and activities of preference, to roles of women, religion, and whether or not to procreate. I left home for college at 20, started my career at 21, and never looked back. I was lonely and bored growing up in the bumpkin town, and having siblings did absolutely nothing to alleviate that. My life started at 21.
2) Single children do indeed grow up more self-centered. Why? Because both parents are focused on the child at all times. The child becomes the center of the universe, so why shouldn't it agree with that. Meanwhile children with siblings learn to share, negotiate, and argue.
Nope. Self-centered, I believe, is due more to an individual's personality. If a person prefers to be self-centered, no amount of siblings will change that. The siblings might just be an annoyance, lol. We are what we are, and people who want to be selfish will still find ways to be selfish if that's what's important to them.
Parents who only have one, and have that one later in life, are usually very busy professionals who have careers to keep them busy, and that only child is highly unlikely to receive the indulgences or be the "center of the universe" that you claim. (Excepting maybe the ones whose parents who spend little time with them but toss endless expensive gifts and everything money can buy, but there are a lot of children of divorced parents who have siblings and are still materialized to the hilt, but that's another problem,altogether.) The parents are not likely to be focused on an only child at all times. If they wanted to live that way, focused on a kid all the time, they'd have 8 or 10 kids, not one. The parents might hire a nanny, or they share parenting. They might use paid daycare services. Grandparents are likely to be who is spoiling the kid. I learned arguing from my parents. It's one of the reasons I didn't rush out and procreate.
3) Single children have a burden placed on them, namely the entire expectations of the parent.
I'm one of three kids, and my parents had no shortage of expectations to heap on all of us, but they were more in the form of best wishes for us, not mandates. My patents are also not that sort that is all wrapped up in continuing the family dynasty, as in demanding that there be an adequate supply of heirs. I had literally decided by the age of 6 that I did not like perpetual family life, and that I would not hurry into marriage, and that I would have one child at most, and that motherhood would NOT be more than a 24 year temp job for me.
My sister produced three heirs. My brother, none. So, it's a good thing that my parents were the kind to retire from child-rearing immediately and go have fun after their own kids were launched. Otherwise, they'd have been deeply disappointed by such a sparse little dynasty, lol.
4) Single children, as the parents get older, have a far higher burden placed on them. I know a single child who is now fifty and she's coping with two parents both facing serious medical issues. It has taken over her life in a way that would not have happened if she had a sibling with whom she could share responsibilities.
#4 isn't a problem, either. Good genes. People in my family don't get lingering ill health. They run full-tilt, with a few minor surgical fixes, until well into their late 70s to early 90s, then have a heart attack and die a couple of days later. The only exceptions have been the ones who had a pacemaker implanted. They lasted another 2 weeks to 2 months, evidently unconscious, in nursing homes. That was it. There also hasn't been a non-working housewife in the family since the 1930s. With both Ma and Pa college-educated and working in education or manufacturing that had good pension programs, they are more financially secure than their kids are.
"Here's the thing. On a scale of 1 to 10, raising one child is about a 3.
Raising two is a 9.
Raising 3 is about a 27."
^ That's exactly right. I had only to observe my mother and my sister to agree with that. Each child is an exponential increase in time and emotional demands, if not expenses. I was old enough when my brother was born to observe how adding Kid #3 to the family radically changed the family. In fact, my parents had to sell their house and buy a larger and more expensive one, because they had only a 2BR starter home when he was born. It was a small house, with a galley kitchen and literally a 9x12 LR, one bath, and the BR my sis and I shared was just big enough to cram in a full bed and one dresser, but you had to lie on the bed when you opened the dresser drawers because there was 6" clearance between the dresser and the bed! Additionally, my parents' energies were now focused on the the younger kids and not me. (My mom worked all day outside the home, remember.) I was told to "go play by yourself," so I did. I spent most of my remaining childhood on a bicycle, or roller skates, or ice skates, or sleds, or running the woods and fields, and if anything, I learned how to not give a rat's patoot about anyone else BECAUSE apparently, nobody had any time left for ME. hahahahahaha!
Last edited by SorryIMovedBack; 11-11-2012 at 08:20 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
