Do you believe we suffer from "small family syndrome"?

jlauer95 · May 15, 2006, 5:01pm

Even tho I only have 2 kids, I coined the term, “small family syndrome” to describe the trends that I have seen in recent decades.

I come from a family of 7 kids; my H comes from a family of 8 kids.

There are trends that I don’t think would have “caught on” if so many families weren’t so small.

Some examples:

Lavish birthday parties

Pricey proms

Kids with the “gimme’s”

overscheduled kids

I could list more but will save them for Y’ALL to list…

A.S.A.P · May 15, 2006, 5:37pm

I don’t think the current state of excess is due to small families. (One of the more lavish households I know has 5 children - all in private school)
The appetite for consumerism has many causes.

berurah · May 15, 2006, 5:37pm

lol jlauer! I have ALWAYS said that I am so glad that we have six kids because if we “just” had two, they’d be spoiled rotten!

Joking aside however, I think we have done a fairly remarkable job of raising a big family in a rather small family style. NO combined birthdays, despite the fact that three of mine have birthdays within 4 days of each other, the “indulgence” of individual abilities and interests with various lessons/activities/etc. that we sometimes have to beg, borrow, and steal the money for, wonderful, stylish clothing bought at ROCK bottom sale prices, birthdays done up big, etc…

It is very important to us that none of our kids resent their siblings or wish that they were from a smaller family, and though our oldest can sometimes be a bit embarrassed by the commotion in our rather chaotic and noisy household, our kids DO seem generally glad for their large and loving family. By the same token, we rarely, if ever, ask any of the older ones to disrupt social plans to babysit for the younger ones. That said, however, they are given various responsibilites for them at other times.

In short, I would agree with you that many of the above elements you listed DO have their origins in the circumstances around “small family” because I can tell you without a doubt that many of those things are virtually impossible to do with a BIG one! ;)

~berurah

ariesathena · May 15, 2006, 5:51pm

Sounds about right, often speculated on the same myself.

It almost seems as if kids are accessories; ever seen a 10-year-old with an IPod, designer clothing, and a cup of $3 hot chocolate walking around? If so, you know what I mean.

Nothing wrong with spoiling your kids with love, but I think a lot of kids from small families just have a different take on life. One of my friends flatly refuses to date a man who is an only child. There just seems to be a self-centerdness with “small family” kids that “big family” kids don’t share. Sometime or another, when you’re one of 4 or 6 or 7 kids, you realize that it’s not all about you. You also get used to scheduling some things around other people, waiting to be picked up from practice so Mom can drop off the younger kids, carpooling home, doing things for yourself because Mom only has 2 hands, and the like. I remember living with people whose parents were very involved in their lives - not helicopter parents, but did everything for their kids - and it amazed me. I realized that there are a lot of people my age who have never had to take responsibility for themselves or be independent. Sad state of affairs.

Then again, I come from a big family - guess I can’t look down on others who aren’t so lucky. :)

citygirlsmom · May 15, 2006, 6:12pm

Hmmmm, if two people have 8 people, what does that do to the resources of the world

ariesathena · May 15, 2006, 6:17pm

You don’t need to be among 8 kids to be part of a big family. There’s also enough people like me who don’t want kids and won’t have them to make up for the ones who have a lot, out of choice.

Why so judgmental, CityGirls’Mom?

A.S.A.P · May 15, 2006, 6:19pm

Maybe ctm is reacting to your judgemental attitude, aries.

I haven’t noticed this at all. Maybe that’s because I was one of two, and I have two. I l think we’re able to teach our kids to value others without needing four kids in order to accomplish that.

I’ve also known some amazingly caring only children. But then they had some pretty great parents.

frazzled1 · May 15, 2006, 6:35pm

Seems to me that many couples have small families because they must struggle to provide their children with life’s necessities, not because they want to overindulge them with material goods. And some couples may have 0, 1, or 2 children because they’ve decided this is the best size family for them, quite apart from the issue of how much they can afford to indulge their children’s wants. Yes, some folks are ridiculously materialistic and overindulgent (sidebar: do you think the people on “Daddy’s Spoiled Little Girl” are real? I don’t see how they can be), but I don’t think family size has much to do with it. I know two very wealthy couples, one with 5 kids and one with 6, that have a “money is no object” approach to childrearing (and apparently, neither is common sense - but hey, it’s their money).

My great-grandmother had 13 children between 1905 and 1923, all of whom lived to adulthood. Interestingly, none of these children had more than 3 children themselves, and most had fewer. It’s interesting that none of them wanted to recreate a large family experience.

ariesathena · May 15, 2006, 6:41pm

If that’s judgmental, fine - but at least it responds to the OP’s question.

“Small family” kids, by the way, encompasses some kids who are one of three or four and excludes some only children. There are some families where all the focus is on the kids, all the time - life revolves around them. Yeah, those people end up growing up to be dependent and expecting everything else to revolve around them. OTOH, there are a lot of only children or one of two who grow up as part of a larger community or a larger family. Aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, and family friends may feature prominently in the family, which prevents the parent-child relationship from becoming too much of a bubble. Please do not forget that the small, nuclear family is a relatively recent invention. The OP asked if there was a downside to this. CGM is more than welcome to start her own thread if she feels as if overpopulation in America is looking to be problematic in the future (although I’m not sure where she gets that idea, considering that, in reality, we are not replacing ourselves; the American population only grows because of immigration. Some European countries are facing problems of declining birth rates.).

It ain’t judgmental; it’s stating a fact. CGM seems to have a knee-jerk reaction against anything that could possibly be associated with conservatives, the right, or Christians. Tough for her.

As I said… why so judgmental? Why the need to be such a little snit?

alwaysamom · May 15, 2006, 6:50pm

aries, you’re guilty of the same crime as CGM when you use such generalizations. Using the proverbial broad brush, isn’t good, regardless of who is doing the ‘painting’.

citygirlsmom · May 15, 2006, 6:50pm

I asked a questions, wow get defensive…mine was pure math, btw

2 people have 8 people, those 8 have 64, and so on

what is judgemental about stating some math

As well, the OP was extremely judgemental, but guess that’s okay

If you find asking questions and doing some math judgemental, that shows you may feel a little bit bad about having giant families

So here you go:

2 people with 2 “replacements” humans on the planet will maintain some of the natural resources, garbage, etc

2 people with 6, 8 “replacements” humans , well do the math

In a LIFETIME, 4 times the cars, the water, gas, electricty, plastic, medical care, schools, etc

And benefits from large families can be in small families

I found the original OP asking her question a bit arrogant

citygirlsmom · May 15, 2006, 6:58pm

So, lets see, you have 2 kids, and we have two bday parties a year

You have 8 kids you have 8 bday parties a year

You have 2 kids, we use two places in a college

You have 8 kids, we need space for eight more kids, 8 more beds, more teachers, more more more

With limited resources on this planet, I think it can be greedy to keep breeding

Call me mean, call me snooty, call me flip, whatever

I WANT A BIG FAMILY sounds selfish to me, seeing that we have shortages of medicine, clean water, gas, trees are getting destroyed to feed more and more people, clearcutting to build houses, diapers, landfill, etc

Over consumption from a small family is bad, but so is over consumption for large families

The more used by large families - the more used by wealthy families

Which is better

citygirlsmom · May 15, 2006, 7:09pm

Call me whatever you need to , I don’t really care , if I sound knee jerk because I think having large families is selfish when I look at the limited resources our planet has

I aslo find those obnoxious rich people spoiling their kids selfish

But to judge small families like the OP did was gosh JUDGEMENTAL

If I can buy my kid an IPOD because I have planned to have only two children, do not judge me if you choose to have a large family with no IPOD

What I find offensive is the attitude that kids from small families are all spoiled, do not share, don’t have patience, are greedy

Most kids from small families I know are giving, volunteer outside the home, work, etc and are in the world doing things…their families are their cities, their towns, the friends families, their churches, and all the benefits, responsibilites, caring, compassion can be gained from the large village

Wow, I talk about natural resources and get slammed, while you judge people who have chosen to have small families

Because I have two girls, those loans you will take out to put your kids through college will be more available to people with big families because we have planned to have just to kids so we can take care of their education ourselves

Greensleeves1028 · May 15, 2006, 7:12pm

Or… you could have 4 times the teachers, doctors, researchers, professors.

4 times the number of people working to keep the Baby Boomers out of the poor house in their retirement.

4 times the people raised in a household that values education, service, moral behavior, hard work, etc.

If people can support more children, financially AND emotionally, they ought to be able to without being called selfish. There are plenty of selfish parents out there who have any number of kids. If a family is going to love and support their children, they should have as many as they want.

berurah · May 15, 2006, 7:13pm

This isn’t straight math, CGM, because what you are proposing involves some very LARGE assumptions. I am under NO delusion that my kids will be so enamored of the “large family” experience that they will procreate similarly. In fact, most of them will most likely NOT. That’s O.K…it is THEIR choice, as it should be.

My husband has 85 first cousins. His mother was one of 15 children in a big farm family (and they also adopted two cousins, so 17 altogether). One of the kids had 13 kids of her own. Another had TWO. So, you cannot just assume that 8 kids will each have 8 kids of their own…it doesn’t always work that way. Regarding “resources”…well, I kind of figure that as long as I don’t ask anyone for any help in raising my kids, then the number I choose to have is solely MINE.

I would wholeheartedly agree with this. The fact is, it is simply NO ONE else’s business how many children a couple decides to have (unless they are foisting responsibility for those children on the government or other people). Childbearing is one of the most intensely personal and private aspects of someone’s life, and everyone should be given the respect of making that decision with no judgment from others.

In addition, I know FAR too many people whose ONE or TWO kids are absolutely LOVELY to generalize about the behavior/characteristics of small/large families. Generalizing this way is simply not productive and only serves to promote division and stereotyping. In general, I would agree with A.S.A.P. above…that there are many, many reasons for the increased consumerism rather than small families being the cause. In fact, it may be equally likely that small families are the RESULT of this increased level of consumerism.

~berurah

berurah · May 15, 2006, 7:18pm

This remark is unnecessary and is vastly lacking in consideration and basic manners. Considering the things I do without so that my kids can grow and develop to their abilities and become productive members of society who will contribute to YOUR sustenance in your old age, I’d say that I am being rather selfless, wouldn’t you? ;)

~berurah

ariesathena · May 15, 2006, 7:31pm

That was completely off-topic. New thread if you choose to address the issues of small v. large families. Your math is also faulty; infant mortality rates in developing countries are high, and there are a lot of people who marry later, choose to not have any children, are infertile, adopt, or just don’t procreate.

When I first lived in an apartment, I shared the space with three girlfriends. One of them was the eldest of three (A); one, the eldest of two (B); one, the middle of four (C). Here’s what happened:

Without help from my parents, I moved my stuff in. I also moved in (C)'s stuff, because her parents were busy with another sibling. I then moved in half of (A)'s stuff, because she just couldn’t organize it by herself and left it to us. (B)'s father helped her move in.

We needed furniture, housewares, to set up bills, and all that other stuff. I did ALL of it. I was also the only one who made her own money; the other three had parents who were willing to help pay for things, but the girls never wanted to ask their parents. So I paid for everything. All of the furniture - we needed a place to eat dinner, so I arranged to get a table. I went to a yard sale to get the living room furniture. (C) helped me and split that cost. We needed silverware, cups, plates, mixing bowls. During the first few weeks, we would realize that we needed stuff for our apartment. No one ever did anything - couldn’t get one of those girls to buy a thing of Fantastic or a package of sponges. So Aries ended up doing it. I had to FIGHT to get them to understand that I was working my butt off and spending a ton of money to get the whole apartment together… but it was like they didn’t think they should have to do anything at all. Why do something when Mommy and Daddy do everything for you? I did damn near everything, from cleaning to setting up the utilities to weeding the back yard or shoveling the steps. It was like pulling teeth to get them to clean up after themselves - even putting a glass in the dishwasher. So I did everyone’s dishes, because they were piled up by the sink for two days straight. The fights to get any of the two from small families to do anything was unbelievable. The girl from the larger family, who has parents who are less focused on their kids, was the only one who ever really pitched in. Incidentally, upon move-out (in which they left me with all of the cleaning, packing, and moving… because it was all my stuff, because they flatly refused to help out a year earlier), (C) was the only one who so much as thanked me. Not counting my bedroom, it took two straight days to get the house in shape - which included cleaning their own bedrooms! Sadly, most of this happened when I had severe medical problems and my family was going through its own horrible situation. I was, in theory, the least well-equipped, but ended up doing everything because I was the only one raised that way.

By your definition, CityGirlsMom, they are lovely ladies - they help out in their communities, are caring, compassionate, and all that good stuff. They just expect that someone is there to help them through life, because heaven forbid that a 21-year-old should be able to do a few things for herself, like cleaning up after herself.

I don’t judge people who have chosen to have small families. I judge those who dote on their kids to excess, which makes the family “small” not in the numerical sense, but in the sense of not knowing how to function in the world, how to work with other people, and how to realize that there are other priorities in the world aside from them. They are like the high-class ladies of days past, who needed handmaids to even get ready in the morning. Their husbands took care of the finances; their servants took care of other things; and she was allowed to live her life without doing basic things for herself.

One of my friends is a perfect example. He’s an only child, but he was raised with his cousins and a lot of extended family, so he doesn’t come off as an only child. OTOH, my ex-boyfriend is almost 30 and is completely dependent upon his family (and me). His mom does everything for him, so he’s never learned how to do it himself. We broke up a year ago, and he still looks to me for help with things (like getting transportation to a wedding that our friends are having). It’s dependency and inabilty to help oneself that reminds me more of a middle schooler, not an adult.

It’s not about caring and compassion. It’s about self-reliance. It just happens more naturally when there’s a half-dozen other people around you with their own needs, problems, and issues.

ariesathena · May 15, 2006, 7:37pm

Yes, Berurah, I’m looking to your kids to help out in my old age. Should everyone on the planet procreate like me (i.e. not at all) we might have some issues.

I’ll also say that I think it’s incredibly selfish to have children just because you are supposed to have them, not because you want to be a mom or a dad. I know people who say that you should have kids, because that’s the only way you can be provided for in your old age; that’s selfish! Creation of human life for those reasons is just sick. Results in miserable, unhappy children who often end up being enstranged adults.

system · May 15, 2006, 7:50pm

My H and I are both from big families.
The only reasons we didn’t have more than 2 kids (I wanted six, too, berurah- so I’m jealous!:)) were:

1) I would have been practically post menopausal, so no go there
2) it would have been selfish on may part with having to split myself more than I already had for the first 2, with a hectic day, night and weekend work schedule- hey, I’m realizing it might have been impossible to actually make those other kids!

Having said that, we have consciously worked to have a “small family” with a “big family” feel, i.e.- EVERYBODY PITCH IN, or we all suffer!!

But I have seen what the OP describes many times, and family size is just one of the reasons for that small family culture.

sjmom2329 · May 15, 2006, 7:54pm

Well, I think I’ve seen both sides of this question. My mother was one of 12 children, I’m one of five, and H is one of four. Yet we only have two. I see benefits in each configuration and think it just really comes down to the individual families involved.

In large families, cooperation and thinking about the group seems to come naturally, because there’s just no way for things to work otherwise. At the same time, there can be a level of individual attention that’s missing.

I’ve also seen large families (some very wealthy) where the kids are just out of control. I’ve seen small families with spoiled brats. I’ve seen large families where everyone just seems to have turned out great and small families and only children who are terrific and will definitely contribute to society. Most of the time, if parents take the time and effort to teach their chilren decent manners, consideration for others, responsibility and that they are not the center of the universe, the kids will turn out fine. That can happen in large and small families.

Do you believe we suffer from "small family syndrome"?

CONNECT WITH US