Aaaaand, speaking of large families ...

We have this wee tid-bit: a threadbare article on whether having one child is enough for some families.

I immediately checked in with Babycenter's board for large families and board for onlies to gauge their responses. Sure enough, they'd both spotted it and commented. The large family people had responded with an understandably defensive posture and the onlies folks had discussed it reasonably, except for a few dumb-ass comments (most notably from one nasty little bitch - who likes to Troll the large family board - who’s every post is a study in “I’m so much better than you” - sadly, she’s clearly extrememly insecure).

The article outlines what is a blatent study of people who have a child just for the sake of having a child - just to be reproducing - for whatever reason ('biological clock', parental/societal pressure, child-as-accessory, etc). According to Kohler: the lesson from the study is that "just having reproduced at least once seems to be the crucial aspect of providing the happiness gain."

So, well, DUH. If you ask a person who's spitting out a baby just because her mum and MIL want her to or all her friends have one or it would look great on her Pottery Barn sofa, then "second and third children don't add to parents' happiness at all".

Did I say: "DUH"?

Some of us have children thoughtfully. Some of us don't. Some of us have dreamt of a baby our whole lives, have her, and prefer to stop at one. Some of us want two, some 5, some 12. Some of us have 'Ooops" babies. Some of us think we're putting it in a diety's hands. I feel like I personally overthink the matter sometimes!

So how did I come up with the 'ideal' number of children to have? I have (almost) 4 and want one more. Why that one more?

It's not baby hunger. I see so many posters on my boards who say they are longing for another baby. They miss the concept of a tiny baby - getting to be the center of attention, the smell/feel of a tiny baby, the clothes, etc. I don’t have baby hunger. While I adore my babies when tiny, I find them – frankly – a bit boring. Don’t get me wrong. Love the milestones and am amazed and celebrate every rollover, sit-up, crawl, first step, etc But I don’t desire a baby because it’s a baby. I want X amount of children because I’ve thought carefully about it and feel that our family will be strong and complete with that number.

Perhaps I’ve looked at it too clinically. Once it became apparent that I could (probably) have the number I wanted, I have gone over the scenarios a thousand times in my head – lying awake at night, driving into town, standing in the shower – how X number of children would interact within our household.

I knew I wanted more than 1. I was an only and, for me, it was horrible. I hated the weight of knowing that all of my parent’as hopes and dreams were heaped on me. I’m upset that I’ll be alone in all of the heartache and hard decisions for care of them as they grow older. I’ m sad that when they’re gone I will be the only keeper of the memories from my childhood.

I knew I’d never stop with 2. I couldn’t imagine having just that one other child to interact – and compete with. Especially since my first was a boy and my second a girl. Every smug PC suburbanite asshole I met grinned hugely up in my face and said “Aww, good, now you can stop since you have the perfect family.”

How dare you tell me what’s perfect for my family.

I also knew I didn’t want three. I had experienced the phenomenon of the middle child my whole life. In my generation it seems common to have had 3 kids (my DH is youngest of 3) . I saw over and over the middle child syndrome: a kid who felt like he/she didn’t fit in and tended to be a bit pushy/whiney as a result. (Obviously this pattern doesn’t apply to all middles, but I saw it a fair amount.)

And when I actually had my third I knew for certain that I couldn’t risk that for my fireball of a first daughter bracketed between her laid-back and good natured siblings. She has WAY too much of me in her and would definitely feel like an oddball.

So that left me contemplating 4+. I had noticed something in families of 4 or 5 fairly closely spaced sibs (I’m not counting large families where there is a group of older sibs – then a space of many years - and a group of ‘new’ sibs.). They seemd to be really relaxed and got along so well. You’d think the houses would be more chaotic, that there’d be more fighting, more parental irritation, but it just wasn’t true in my experience. What was that magical tension-release that happened at the birth of the 4th or 5th ?

I have no idea, but I’ve wanted that for my kids my whole reproductive life. My theory, having finally started my dream family, is that having multiple children causes some parents to adopt a thereputic, nessessarily relaxed attitude. It did me. I’d have driven my Boy insane by now if he was an only. He’d have a complex already - at the age of 3 - what with my own dumptruck-full of insecurities and my borderline OCD. I’d have done the same with 2.

But I’ve changed over the short years. I’ve mellowed with the birth of Bitty Girl and the impending arrival of Little Brother. I’m in my groove. I’ve learned to ignore the stuff that doesn’t matter. I can nurse a newborn, read to a toddler, and kiss a baby’s owie all at once. There’s a fabulous dynamic in the house now.

I’m not suggesting that having a bunch of kids is some miracle cure for anything. I’m also not suggesting that it’s for everyone. I know several people who are very well suited to an only and several who are blissfully happy with their PC two. I’m just saying that, for me, it’s forced me to relax and redifine what’s worth flaking out over and what’s not.

As for the article? I feel sorry for folks who're compelled to have a baby for reasons other than they really want to have this little person - and later big person - in their lives. I know it happens a lot, though. I'm also sorry that Kohler and Psychology Today would put forth the idiot notion that one parenting choice would be best for all. Parenting is very personal. No one can make these choices for any of us.

EDIT: sorry, I know this one is already mad long, but this is bugging me. Is anyone else really irritated that this article seems to suggest that mothers of Onlies are content to "just [have] reproduced at least once" (rather than actually want the baby for itself)? Does this bug anyone else? If I was a mum of an Only, I'd be angry at this suggestion.