Wednesday, December 06, 2006

Public Opinion Poll

Here’s a question for you all: How many kids does it take to make a family “large?”

I don't consider a family big until there are at least five or six kids. Growing up in a family of five kids I never felt like there were that many of us, but I’m guessing that from a mother’s viewpoint five could seem like a lot to keep track of. (Honestly though, two seem like a lot at times!)

So what do you think?

7 comments:

Debbie said...

Five or six? Geez! One is one more than my husband and I can afford to take care of!

I would consider 4 children as being a big family, at least for the present time. Given today's economy, I just think that 4 children would be somewhat unmanageable. You have to feed four children, clothe four children, and then (if you're lucky) get those four children through college. It's hard enough to put money into my daughter's college fund, and I certainly couldn't imagine doing it for four kids!

Four children probably wouldn't seem big to me if I were wealthier, though. I guess the viewpoint just depends on how many kids you can afford to provide for.

I also live in California, and it's very rare to see a family with more than two children here. That may also factor into my opinion.

I look forward to reading more of your page!

Seth Ben-Ezra said...

At least six. Five children is the "normal" size. Of course, I'm saying that because I grew up in a family of five (the same one as you, oddly enough), and I currently preside over a family of five children.

Therefore, six children is "big".

James said...

I grew up in a family of four, but I don't consider six to be big.

Of course that's what we have now, and we'd like to have more. Big is anyone with more than 8.

barb said...

I've always thought 5 or more was a large family. But I;m the youngest of 4. My father was 1 of 7, and his sister Sis had 14 children. That's large in any language!

pentamom said...

I always thought of five or six as "medium-large" and then after that it gets large. Probably like others, my perception is colored by having been the youngest of five. I'm sure people used to much smaller families would see five or more as large.

Having five myself, I can't imagine doing it in California, but in other parts of the country it's not so unrealistic, if you have a realistic standard of what is really necessary to provide materially.

pentamom said...

Hmm...I used a poor choice of words there above. I shouldn't have said "unrealistic" -- I know there are people who can and do have large families in all sorts of locations and circumstances. I only meant that it's not as difficult as some may think in less challenging circumstances, but I have a hard time grasping practically how people do it in such high cost of living places -- though I know they do.

Jeremy Beach said...

I know that my comment is a bit late for this post, but I haven't been keeping up with blogs much lately. Sorry!

To answer your question, though, I like to think of children like beer. Anything less than a 6 pack is too little, anything more than a case (24) is probably too many. ; -)

Oh yeah, as is true with beer, having 6 kids at one time could be a bit hazardous to your health. So, be sure to space out your 6 to 24 kids, i.e. don't take any fertility drugs if you can help it.