One and Fun

It never ceases to amaze me.
No matter how much our society has progressed, there's still the very vocal minority that insists that it's their way or the highway, because they're the world's foremost authority on everything.
Get Professor Irwin Corey on the phone.  I think he'd have a strong argument for copyright infringement.
I was reading an article in Parenting Magazine a couple weeks ago called "One and Done", taking a closer look at why an increasing number of parents are opting to have an only child.
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, single child families have almost doubled since the 1960s, to about one in five.
One in five.  That's 20 percent.
And I'm proud to say I'm one of them.
But nonetheless, some feel that they have to offer input insofar as having more.
They run the gamut.
"You don't want them growing up spoiled, do you?"  "They need a playmate."  "They'll grow up to be selfish", "They won't be socially adept."
I can disprove every one of these.
Why?  Because I grew up with a brother two and a half years younger than me.  So here's how I can refute all of those claims.
"I know plenty of only children who were not spoiled", "Our daughter has playmates at daycare and goes on playdates".  As for the last two, those were my own handicaps growing up with another sibling in the house, so your so-called theories are bunk.
You can have a house full of kids and they'll grow tired of each other after awhile and want you to play with them.  Even if you adopted their best friend as one of your own, this would still hold true.
My wife and I have had our daughter in daycare since she was about 14 weeks old.  And we haven't regretted it one bit.
I applaud those who have only children.  Because they're most likely letting common sense guide them into a charted path for their child's future and a desire to help them be the most they can be.
Don't get me wrong.  I don't condemn those who choose to have bigger families.  However, I do condemn those who have them for the wrong reasons.
Like sheer vanity.  "I came from a big family, so I want one too."  Ability to financially sustain them be damned...so public assistance (funded by our tax dollars) comes into play here.
Or, if you've had two girls already, "I'm not stopping until I get a son."
I like that one...where it's all about the family name and nothing else.
If you're able to financially (and independently) provide for a large number of children, God bless you for having the talents and the means at hand to do it.  Not everyone has this luxury.
But if you have the means, I hope you have all the love needed for such a large brood.
And a strong eye for the future.
We're facing a crisis in this country.
A broken pension system.  Not enough jobs for those who want them.  Enormous bankruptcy filings by parents who lose their jobs and then their overpriced and underwater homes.  And as technology progresses, those without a strong educational foundation will be left far behind.
No Child Left Behind is one thing.  No Adult Left Behind is another matter altogether.
And speaking of which, take a closer look at that.  What does this country have to offer those we leave behind after we've gone?
Only as much as they themselves have to offer.
And it don't come cheap.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a middle-class family can expect to pay more than a quarter of million dollars to raise a child to 17 years of age.
We didn't pay that much for our house.
Yeah, it's a lot of money, isn't it?
Now multiply that by the number of children you expect to have.
While, at the same time, planning your own retirement.
Gets tricky, doesn't it?
Did I mention that quarter-million-dollar figure does NOT, repeat, NOT, include a college education?
Your child will need one.  Or at least a substantial trade.
Big families need advance planning.  Lots of it.  Employers don't often pay more money to a prospective employee because they have a lot of kids.  In virtually every case, it has no bearing whatsoever.
It can even be a handicap to some.  Employers may be reluctant to hire someone with a lot of kids because of their obligations to their families.
Oh, and you're probably wondering...what is defined as a 'lot' of kids?
I see it as four or more.
Anyway, some questions to ask yourself when planning for your family:
What kind of house do you want to live in?  Small one or a big one?  More importantly, what kind of house can you afford to live in?  What kind of car will you need?  How much do you plan to spend on groceries each month?  How much will you need for clothes?  Baby needs?  Will you be able to plan your retirement? Is there room for 'little extras'?
It means sacrifice.  Pure and simple.  Giving up for yourself for the sake of your child.  Not everybody can do it...at least willingly.
And the more kids you have, the greater the sacrifices you will need to make.
Putting aside your own needs for theirs.  It takes a lot.  If you can't do this, you're not ready.
My wife and I have one child.  Call us selfish.  Think less of us.  I don't care.
Don't be quick to judge only-child parents as self-indulgent materialists.  It is so not the case.
We prefer to use our resources to give our child the means to a better future.  Being able to afford extracurricular activities such as athletics, music lessons, (and college, that's a given) or the like to help her grow into a successful adult far outweighs a detached emotional need to procreate.
One and Done?
No...I don't think so.
I can still come home from work each night and have just enough energy left to spend on the little moppet clinging to my leg and yelling "DADDY!!!" just before giving her a bath, reading her two stories, and tucking her into bed.
One and Done...or One and FUN?
Definitely the latter.


NEXT WEEK:  So be Good...for Goodness' Sake