I should have enjoyed the day more just being with them instead of being annoyed at how I ended up ‘babysitting’ the neighborhood.

One of my responsibilities as a parent is to provide for my children and I see this simply as one leg of that. My mom did it for me….I am doing it for them and its cheap.

I do urge you sincerely to reconsider the necessity for life insurance, at least for you, as the breadwinner.

If I did not have the expense of child care, I would immediately have an extra $800 to apply towards debt. Since I do have the children, this is a mandatory expense, so the opportunity cost of having children in this scenerio is NOT having an extra $800 to pay towards debts.

Children need clothing. Their clothing gets worn out or outgrown much faster than an adults. Even using thrift stores, garage sales and the like, for my two children, I spend about $800 a year on clothing. Of course, my children probably do have more clothes than necessary – meaning that I provide the luxery of having more than 3 pairs of pants, 5 shirts, 2 pairs of shoes, and a couple of summer outfits. But, since I provide them with the need of clothing and the luxery of having a bit more than necessary, that is $800 a year that is not being applied to other financial goals.

School activities come up. Neither of my children are in school promoted sports programs currently, but that is more because of my current school/work schedule than because of budgetary concerns. Other school activities such as field trips and simple school supplies do come into play. Say I spend $200 a year per child on these things, or $400 total. That is $400 more I am not utilizing towards other financial goals.

Now, do I regret having either of my children. Absolutely not. It is just a fact of life that when you have children, you have obligations and priorities that those without children do not face, thus those without children can move along the path of financial independence at a faster rate.

And this is the point. If you are planning on having children, realize that your priorities will shift and it may take you longer than people without children to reach the same level of financial independence. It doesn’t matter how much or how little you make – having children WILL reshift HOW you spend your money.

First of all, adoption isn’t a cheap or easy process — especially if it’s from a foreign country. It’s not like ordering a sweater from a catalog. I think your ideas of adoption are some what outdated… Unless it’s different in the U.S., there aren’t a bevy of orphanages you can just walk into and take your pick. (Perhaps you’ve never heard of foster care?)

Second, it isn’t selfish for a woman to want to experience pregnancy. (Perhaps it’s difficult for a man to understand). Why shouldn’t a woman explore every option that’s available to her? The fact that you’re using the Octomom as an example of why people shouldn’t do it shows how little you know about the procedure.

Third, as for it being environmentally unsustainable to have more than two kids, well I agree to some extent — but this isn’t China or a developing country. Many couples are only having one child, or no children at all. In fact, some Western countries have to rely on immigration to keep their numbers up because their own citizens aren’t sustaining the population in the long run.

If you don’t want kids, don’t have kids. I realize how much judgment you’ve faced from others because of that decision. It often happens that the decisions we make for ourselves aren’t necessarily what’s best for other people, or for everyone in general.

Live and let live.

If my husband and I didn’t have children — if we didn’t have to provide for them now or worry about providing for them in the future — our non-mortgage debt would be completely paid off, we’d be paying a lot extra on the mortgage, and maxing out our retirement contributions, all while still having a comfortable amount left over as spending money.

* We’ve chosen to have a larger cash cushion.
* We’ve delayed paying off our debts.
* We’ve reduced our retirement contributions.
* We have greater expenses in the form of childcare, clothing, medical needs, and life insurance premiums.

Hmm…interesting. Not only do I have a child, but I am also a SINGLE PARENT (read: ONE income, same responsibilities). I too prefer to have a large cash cushion, BUT I’ve paid off ALL of my non-mortgage debt AND I max out my retirement (both 401k and Roth). In addition, I too have greater expenses in the form of clothing, medical needs, life insurance premiums (for self), and the alternative of childcare (I have a teen but she’s involved in TONS of extra-curricular activities and heading to college in 1 year) – all while having a comfortable amount left over as spending money and vacations each year – let’s talk about a balancing act! However, I find NONE of my responsibilities or extra expenses as a parent to be a deterrent to my financial freedom. I simply have different priorities than non-parents and I have to be strategic with increasing my income and reducing unnecessary expenses. Children are expensive, yes, but they are NOT excuses or roadblocks to financial freedom.

Did I choose this? Absolutely! But I can follow all the good personal finance tips in the world and if the income isn’t there they won’t get me to financial freedom. Because I stayed home with my sick kid for months or turned down the promotion with too much travel or quit the high paying job with the long commute, I’ve set myself up for years of lower incomes and less experience in the workforce.

Spending some years as a single mom, and some years as a stay at home mom, on incomes from 10k a year to 90k a year and back again, usually by choice more than circumstance, my focus has been on knowing my priorities and making the choices I can live with.

For me the priorities are:
- Parenting my children as I want them parented – homeschooling, lots of time outdoors, community involvement, eating healthy food, healthy family relationships.

- Staying in the city we love, in a home where we can have an urban farm. Paying the mortgage drives my financial requirements.

- Living without debt. I’ve got debt on the house and that drives me crazy. But I’ve paid off the rest and have habits that will keep it that way – barring emergencies. That’s the wild card, because if anything really awful happened we’d have to borrow to pay it.

- Spending money on things that build or provide for our long term financial health (insurance, garden), spending on things that provide important experiences for us.

- Saving whenever there is enough income to cover the basics, before going for extras.

I had my kids on the young side and on my own. I was in decent financial shape and quickly lost all that and eventually got it back.

Now I’m only 33 and my oldest is about to turn 10, the youngest is 8. When I’m 43 and my girlfriend is 37 my kids will be entering adulthood, and I’m looking forward to being so young with so much life (hopefully) ahead of us.

In the years that have intervened I’ve become much clearer on what really matters to me and interests me in a way that I don’t think I could have before I had kids. I can assume that trend will continue. While I don’t always have the time and resources to put those plans into action now, I’m glad that I had the kids when I did, so that I’ll have time to make things happen when the kids are older that I never would have thought of if they hadn’t come along when they did.

Unfortunately, the usual fault lines between the childful and childless, or the child-burdened and the childfree, have emerged. Of course, children are a blessing to those who want them and who believe that a fulfilled life can only include children (and grandchildren). And of course, children are a drain on those who believe that a fulfilled life is one spent on reading, travel, volunteering, and other high-engagement activities. And some people cross over into both categories.

It is disturbing to see comments such as this, though:

“Yeah kudos to the guy in the magic third stage who will have all that money in retirement with no kids or family – grandkids, in-laws… I hope he can enjoy perusing his bank statements well into old age.”

So the only choice is family or loneliness? I don’t think so. All people–with children or without children–would do well to build the personal fortitude, inner resources, and social network needed to deal with as many stages of life as possible. No one should be in a situation in which, absent children, there is nothing but an intellectual, cultural, or social vacuum. To suggest that a person’s purpose for living resides not in that person, but in children or other people, is reckless. And in some way, that philosophy makes children no better than an emotional crutch. Many people choose not have children for many valid reasons, and there many other roads to personal fulfillment. To each her own.

I think it’s great if you can stay home but its different for every family and it’s not always the best choice! Of course it would be fun for me to be with them all day but in the long run I think I am doing the best thing for them and isn’t that really what most mothers try to do?

Regarding the quote “that’s what you do”, read “The Selfish Gene”. In a billions year old sense that IS what we were designed to do. Wanting children is no more or less selfish than you wanting your wife all to yourself.

“My wife and I just spent 10k on two rounds of in vitro. We want nothing more than to have kids.”

Wow, that sounds so incredibly selfish.

There are thousands of children out there awaiting adoption, and rather than give one of them a loving home (and putting your $10k to better uses, like feeding the homeless or innoculating African babies), you’d rather spend it in a desperate attempt to perpetuate your own genes. I know this is going to come off as horribly rude, but I’ve got to say, I find that outrageously arrogant. What is so unbelievably important about reproducing with your own genes? Are you really so self-centered that you’ll spend $10k just trying to make a copy of yourself to go out into the world and tell the future how great you were?

Is this the same desire that drove Nadia Suleman to have 14 children whom she’s utterly and completely incapable of providing for? Why do we have to be confronted with such an extreme example of child abuse before we’re finally willing to break with convention and question a parent’s motivation for having children? Is the covenent of parenthood really so sacred and beyond reproach that it’s only when an unemployed, unmarried welfare-queen births her 14th baby that we finally step back and say “whoa, hang on, maybe this isn’t right?”

I’m just in awe.

@Trevor (#120)

“Kids are great! Have them. That’s what we’re supposed to do.”

Who said that’s what we’re “supposed” to do? So if someone is infertile, or never meets “the one,” or (God Forbid) just plain doesn’t want kids, then they’re not doing what they’re “supposed” to do? Well excuse me! I was under the impression that the meaning of life was to enjoy it. If your idea of enjoying it is having kids, then go for it. But if I value freedom and time with my wife over some ingrained need to perpetuate my seed, then is that really wrong of me? Who decided how I’m “supposed” to be spending my life?

I really wonder about these husbands/wives that are so desperate to have kids. Is your marriage really so empty and unfulfilling that you just can’t wait to bring another person into it to give you something to do? If you’re married, and you feel like you’ve got “so much more love to give” that you need one, two, or five babies to share your love, then maybe the person you married isn’t “The One” after all, is that possible?

I love my wife. I love spending time with her. I love it so much that I don’t want to share it with anybody – even my own offspring. Does that make me a bad parent or an awesome husband?

If every couple had 6 children, this planet would be destroyed within a couple of generations. 2 people having 6 babies is simply unsustainable. It’s selfish, in my opinion. And every time I see a yuppy couple with 6 babies boasting about driving a Prius and installing CFL lightbulbs, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. Because the amount of meat, oil, and freshwater that is going to be consumed by their triplicate copies of themselves will far, far overshadow any token “green” efforts they think they’re making to “save the planet.” Yet they’ll drive around in their hybrid SUVs with their yellow “Support the Troops” ribbon sticker on the bumper, buying organic lettuce from South America and thinking they’re part of the solution. Unbelievable.

I waited to have a child until I was quite established in my career, so I am making quite good money. That gave me some good choices I could make in childcare and I went with a nanny, which costs me $1760 per month for one child. $800 for everything seems like peanuts to me. I can’t wait until she’s in school full-time and I can bank the nanny costs.

@Erin – I live in Los Angeles, and $800 is on the low side here too. But their preschool is a nonprofit which helps keep costs down. And I agree, having children makes me more creative too – I don’t think I would have started blogging (at least, not when I did) if I hadn’t become a parent. Thanks so much for your good wishes!

@Kristin – Thanks for your kind words. I would definitely encourage you not to worry too much! As others have noted above, my point was that having kids can delay the achievement of financial goals, but if you’re focused, you’ll get there anyway. And what you’ll gain in return from becoming a parent is absolutely immeasurable. Good luck!

@tamarind – You make an excellent point – there are so many variables to consider when it comes to kids and finances. I also love what you said about considering the cost to one’s future income in the staying at home equation – it’s so true, and not something I’ve seen mentioned much.

@Nancy – Well said. I’ve always known I would be a mom somehow, but I certainly don’t think less of anyone who decides not to have children. Some of the most wonderful people I know don’t have kids!

My personal feeling is that there is room in our society for all sorts of people and all sorts of life and family configurations. Kids, no kids, married, single, etc. Everyone’s different and our life stories will and should play out in different ways. There are many paths to being happy and getting fulfillment from life.

Kids are worth any price to those who have them. The rest of us have other priorities. If we were all so focussed on our own kids, there would be fewer of us donating money and time to educational charities, foster child support, ending childhood disease, child abuse, child poverty, child hunger… the list goes on. Parents (or future parents) like Jason seem to think they’re superior, but the fact remains they need us.

Sorry JD and Cathy – but I guess you know, when you post about kids you open a can of worms. Didn’t the same thing happen to the “cost of pets” thread?

It is not:

1. To have a mini-me who you automatically think will share your interests.

2. To save a marriage.

3. Because “that’s what we’re supposed to do” — this is not a valid reason.

4. To have someone take care of you in shifts in your old age. This greatly restricts the life of your children to the point that they won’t be able to do what they want to do in life until you die. Do you know how it feels to not be able to leave your house for more than two days until you’re over 50 because of your mom or dad?

5. Because they’re cute or because someone told you to.

If you have children for these reasons, this may back-fire on you.

I agree with you that in some respects many of the expenses associated with children are optional ones. However, for myself and many people, the “basics” which while still representing a “choice” don’t have the frivolous feel of the kinds of “best of everything” that you list (health care, access to decent public schooling,housing, insurance,–and I won’t even get into any associated costs if your child ends up with any special medical/developmental needs).

I think we also need to be careful with our assumptions about what our parents were able to do with us vs. what we can do now, because employers also used to provide pensions, more subsidized health care, and the costs of basics such as housing has grown dramatically.
Also, a key factor centers around higher education. As someone who works in higher education and thinks about this a lot, even low-cost public higher education costs have skyrocketed. (And more middle class jobs require a BA as the minimal entry requirement than 15 years ago). And the financial aid that may have been available 15 years ago to supplement college education has drastically shifted towards student loans. I was able to piece together a college education through scholarships, financial aid in the forms of grants and small loans, my high school and college part-time work, and contributions from my family that they could afford with 3 kids and a family income between 40-50K. I have very few students currently who are able to do the same.

My parents raised me on and my sister on a family income of $40k. I just turned 30 and as far as I can remember, I got gifts for birthdays and Christmas, had clothes that fit, was fed and we had reliable cars and they own their home.

We make kids more expensive because we expect more and have taught them to do the same. Most of us, and our kids, would be just fine without most of the “necessities” the consumer culture has convinced us we need.

Oh, yes I do have a 2 year old daughter.