What do you consider ‘a big family’ these days?

I was one of three and wanted three children. After a girl and a boy I became pregnant again. MIL was horrified saying why would you want another since you already have one of each. It was a bit rich from her since DH is one of six! DD has gone on to have three too.

I had 5 daughters, spread over 12 years and two marriages. I never planned it that way, although being an only Child myself, I had always wanted more than two children.
We both worked to support them, gave them the best start in life we could, and we now have 11 Grandchildren, and 3 Great Grandchildren, although we very seldom see the little ones due to DGS being estranged from their mother.
Sadly we lost a daughter to Cancer in 2015, something that makes you appreciate even more the ones that are still with us.

Obviously that will depend on the kind of accommodation they’re in, @NotSpaghetti, but anywhere around here, a lot of families with 2 children are restricted to 2 bed flats, or small 2 bed houses, because the step up to a 3 bed is just too much.

Just a short distance from us, a very small 1930s 3 bed, with a tiny 3rd bedroom - or box room as they used to call it (8 feet x 6) - will easily sell for £500k+. This is outer SW London, nowhere near the centre.
Of course other areas are cheaper, very likely a lot cheaper, but this is the reality for many around here.

grandmajet they never found the coil I had fitted when I got pregnant with our son. I had him by c-section but no sign of the coil.
They concluded it had slipped out

When most of us were having children the dangers of rising world population was well known - and unlike now - the cause in the 1960s - 1990s(?) was an excess of births.

This certainly affected our decisions about family size and that of many of our friends.

We would have had 5 but I lost 3. DD has 1, DS sadly none, it wasn’t to be.

We should be aiming for a shrinking population, and that can only come by more countries having an average family size of less than 2, Italy and Japan are among the countries in that situation.

Currently population growth is caused by longevity rather than large families. We are the cause of over population, we are all living to long.

Oh good, I'm an in betweener Would have loved a couple more but in a 3 bedroomed cottage there wasn't any space. We can all be judgemental if we choose, think some people's view is..... an only child will be spoiled and selfish....two children (preferably one of each sex!) ideal....three, well everyone can have an accident.....four, well you're tending towards selfish.....five, say no more just feckless...and on and on.
The only criteria should be, every child is a wanted child, and that includes "happy accidents" or "arrived sooner than planned" .....hello number four
I don't consider I have a large family despite coming from a two child family myself. I suppose I start to think large is six or more, and good luck to them if they have the space and love each one.

Any more than 2 is a large family.

We had 5, when the last one was born the eldest was 7. We didn`t have a car at the time, later we had a normal estate car, in the days before seat belts, so were able to carry more to a seat. None of mine have had large families, one son has 2 with his wife and 1 from a previous marriage, youngest son has 1, I daughter has 2, another daughter has 1. I did decide after number 5 that that was enough, and went to be sterilised, that was in 1973.

We have 5 and nowadays people regard us as a large family. No regrets. Loved the fun , laughter and mischief of 5 small boys at home! It was hard to do anything quietly!

You must have been very fertile Grandmajet to defy all the contraceptive methods! Yes people have something to say if you have just the one or more than 3!

Thank you BlueSky. We adore them all! My last was a ‘coil’ baby, and I spent a week in hospital six months after she was born seeking it out and removing it! The surgeon said I was a first for him!

Probably 5

I have three, I would have liked four but they were very well spaced out, and the last one was a terrible pregnancy, so we decided three would do.
Now I’m quite pleased, I’ve got enough problems with the three I’ve got.

grandmajet

We had 4 in under 7 years. One for each method of contraception. Then he had the snip!

Grandmajet
How lovely 4! I wanted 4 but stopped at 2! The Pill sorted that out!

timetogo, you experience might have been different but I brought up all of my 5 children myself!!

I have 4 children but none of my children have more than 2.
I think 4 would be considered too many by today's standards.

I had two,would have loved a third but heyho.
I think it`s selfish to have more than 5 tbh.
How can you possibly show love and spend time with each one.
The older ones tend to do the bringing up, i know that for a fact but don`t want to add more onfo.

Ooops! Both Dh and I have 3 brothers and we have 5 children. We have 7 dgc and 2 step grandchildren.

I apologise if that offends any of you.

From what I gather from dd and her friends, quite a few of them would like more, only quite apart from general expenses, the bigger accommodation they’d need would be unaffordable.

Do you think this is true Witzend about the houses... or do you think they want everyone to have their own bedroom?

To answer the OP, I think 6 or more is big.

4 or more nowadays.

One dd has 3 (3rd was a ‘surprise’) and has often said she’d have loved more if she and her dh were younger and richer!) Other dd has none, and I don’t think ever will (her choice).

From what I gather from dd and her friends, quite a few of them would like more, only quite apart from general expenses, the bigger accommodation they’d need would be unaffordable.

IMO a large family has become a luxury not many can afford any more.
I often think back to the good-sized family houses we lived in when I was a child, that my parents could just about afford on just one very ordinary salary. They were always skint when we were young (4 children) but no matter how much you skimped and scraped nowadays, such houses simply wouldn’t be possible on one nothing-special salary.
(I’m talking the SE, London commute area here - I dare say say things might be different in other areas.)

Funny how times have changed. Large families were, years ago, a sign of poverty. Now in these times they seem to shout ‘affluent’ as in Gordon Ramsey, Jamie Oliver, Katie Price etc.

Mind you times have changed regarding obesity. Historically only wealthy people could afford to eat well and poor people were thin, skinny people. The roles have reversed. Wealthy people eschew large meals, have personal trainers and look thin. Poor people are the fatties eating junk food....

Granygravy13, I don’t know the large vehicle terminology, will have to check, but 4x4, or people carrier, whatever, they all seem very big to me in my fiesta.