Prioritizing Tuition (Split from School Closing)

↑ MommyZ ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 1:50 pm

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

I have three and if by the time financial circumstances change it's too late for me to have more so be it. I don't think it's my obligation to have more then I have already as I have a heter for birth control that is open ended. If I have another one at some point that's fine and if I don't that's fine too.

MommyZ, we will most probably be limiting the amount of kids we will be having davkah because of money, mostly for day school tuition. If we didn't need to worry about day school, we would be just fine.
I'm not nearly as at peace with this as you are. It's something that DH andI talk about daily. I find it quite sad (for us) that if money wasn't an issue we know that we would want more kids.

I'm 28 with three children BH. I'm also in school and want to finish school before I think about having another baby but I want to get my master's in midwifery. DH works very long hours. The three I have now is just about all I can handle and some days it feels like too much for me with dh gone so much. I don't think it would be fair for them or for me to have another baby. Every once in a while I think maybe I want another baby but it doesn't last very long.

↑ Mirabelle ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 1:58 pm

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

Yeah I guess it's different for us because we are older and finished with school. Although for me having another baby would indeed mean more time off of work and therefore, even less money coming in.

↑ MommyZ ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 2:00 pm

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

Yeah I guess it's different for us because we are older and finished with school. Although for me having another baby would indeed mean more time off of work and therefore, even less money coming in.

DH has two bachelor's degrees and wants to get his Master's degree. He's 27 years old. I want to finish my Bachelor's and get my Master's also. I am not worried about not having another baby and I think I have time to change my mind if I do change my mind. I don't know if will or won't.

↑ Mirabelle ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 2:04 pm

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

Yeah I guess it's different for us because we are older and finished with school. Although for me having another baby would indeed mean more time off of work and therefore, even less money coming in.

My DH was done with graduate school when the first kid was born and I wrote the first draft of my MA thesis (so all the coursework was done) while I was pregnant...was not easy at all. I was working and taking care of DD#1 while working on the final draft of the thesis and that was even harder, so I totally hear you.

↑ JAWSCIENCE ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 4:02 pm

All the talk about Bugaboo strollers on this site, and how they are the best, and a luxury and yadda yadda always makes me laugh.

I live in a VERY wealthy neighborhood, of mostly non-Jews. I live here because besides for the rich people and their poodles there also happens to be a medical school and student housing. All the wealthy wives would not touch a Bugaboo. They prefer something called the UPPAbaby.

However, I think it will take the Jewish community a long time to transition to a new stroller or to admit that anything can be better than a Bugaboo because that stroller seems to have reached the level of a status symbol of epic proportions. It reminds me of when girls at camp used to argue that they "needed" designer clothes because it lasts longer and wears better. (Yet they never wore the same outfit twice, so who cares how well it lasts?).

Ladies, if you want to be viewed as a forward thinking trend setter you might look into the UPPA (which is also very pricey, so don't worry about anyone thinking you are cheeping out on your DDs baby gift or whatever). It's all the rage over here.

↑ amother ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 4:43 pm

JAWSCIENCE wrote:

For every bugaboo that is being pushed down the streets in brooklyn there is one uppababy being pushed as well. Tons of people here have the uppa.

↑ Ruchel ↓

Sat, Nov 06 2010, 1:37 pm

MommyZ wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

That. But go tell them... they're adamant it is so.

It's also a lot of a mentality thing. Those who think every child needs his own bike/tv/x box/room and at least one out of school activity may be right that they should not have more if they think it's almost abuse not to do it...

Ruchel dear I don't believe any of that. I have 3 kids in a smallish two bedroom one bathroom apartment. We don't have any luxuries or go on vacations. I still can't afford another baby now nor do I have the time or energy for another baby. Just because I could have a baby every 2-3 years naturally doesn't mean that I should or that I need to.

Still it's like this in some circles.

↑ Raisin ↓

Sat, Nov 06 2010, 2:46 pm

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

mommyz, it sounds like your reason for not having more children are not only to do with tuition.

↑ Atali ↓

Sat, Nov 06 2010, 7:17 pm

Raisin wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

mommyz, it sounds like your reason for not having more children are not only to do with tuition.

Right. The people who object to using bc for financial reasons only object when the reason is purely financial, such as I can't afford tuition for more kids. They do not necessarily object to bc when the mother cannot handle more children for other reasons.

↑ MommyZ ↓

Sat, Nov 06 2010, 9:29 pm

Atali wrote:

Raisin wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

mommyz, it sounds like your reason for not having more children are not only to do with tuition.

I'm glad my reasons pass muster lol.

↑ Atali ↓

Sat, Nov 06 2010, 10:25 pm

MommyZ wrote:

Atali wrote:

Raisin wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

mommyz, it sounds like your reason for not having more children are not only to do with tuition.

I'm glad my reasons pass muster lol.

I didn't mean it that way Smile

.

Rather, I meant that it is strange to use not being able to handle more kids as an argument that one should limit one's family size rather than relying on assistance from others. They are two totally separate issues. It would be similar to a poster saying that one should stop nursing at three months in order to go to work because she had to stop nursing at three months due to medical problems. The logic doesn't follow.

↑ MommyZ ↓

Sat, Nov 06 2010, 10:40 pm

Atali wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Atali wrote:

Raisin wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Mirabelle wrote:

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

mommyz, it sounds like your reason for not having more children are not only to do with tuition.

I'm glad my reasons pass muster lol.

I didn't mean it that way Smile

I'm not telling anyone what to do or not to do. Also ouch on the nursing comparison. I'm a lactivist who has practiced extended nursing with all three kiddos currently nursing a 21 mth old. My reasons are both not thinking I can handle another one and not being able to afford any more.

↑ saw50st8 ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 7:53 am

To the amother who said I lack bitachon for limiting my family size due to tuition prices:

If you use BC for any reason, you are lacking bitachon. Doesn't Hashem know what you can/can't handle? If Hashem really wants me to have more, nothing, including abstinence would work right? I don't buy that argument one bit.

If people really had bitachon they would pay their tuition bills first in full and then worry about paying rent mortgage. Realistically though, people skimp on tuition.

Here's the basic idea. When you are 18 and thinking about what life will be like, it should be somewhat like the following:

I see myself getting married between 20-22 and would like to have 7-8 kids. I imagine I would live in Lakewood and being a SAHM. So I need to plan on 8 tuitions (at $5000/year), rent/mortgage for a place large enough (lets say $2000/year), food ($1500/month) etc...go through the basic plan. If that's the case, we need to earn $125,000 approximately before taxes (or whatever). That may mean my husband has to be in a high paying position or I might not be able to be a SAHM. If I become a nurse, within 10 years I cna reasonably be expected to earn $60-75,000, which would mean my husband would need a job that also pays in that range.

Something to that effect. Obviously, life changes, plans change etc. But if your plan is something like I'm going to be a secretary and earn $20/hr, my husband is going to bag groceries at shop rite, you are destined to be a drain on society.

At every stage of life where you cannot afford what you want, you should look at "How can I increase my income or decrease my expenses?" You can't really plan for curves in life. But the guy who went from earning a high salary to $25,000? He should absolutely be supported by the community and AT THE SAME TIME, he should reduce expenses to reduce how much assistance he needs.

If you find yourself in a position in life, where you realize you are never going to be self sufficient base don jobs, salaries etc, you should do everything in your power to change that. Go back to school. Take on extra work etc. If you just say "well scholarships are available" you ARE being a drain on society. If you are working towards being financially independent, then you aren't.

This should be BASIC. Relying on communal assistance for the long term, without trying to change it is WRONG.

↑ chavamom ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 10:19 am

saw50st8, I ran your whole premise of those who have no plan to pay full tuition and yet - *gasp* - keep having kids by my husband and the "being a drain on society". His comment was that you are relying on a totally non-Jewish concept. Much as secular society taxes everyone to provide for schools regardless of if they are using them, the Jewish community has an obligation to provide schools to educate Jewish children in a torahdik fashion. Not everyone has the wherewithal to pay full tuition for "x" number of children - and even if they did, tuition wouldn't cover the expenses of the school. We as a community have an obligation to support the schools (something the chassidish communities seem to be doing a much better job at). Notions of being a "leech" or a "drain on society" not to mention saying "oh, we'd love to have more kids, but we can't afford full tuition" are just......non jewish. Seriously, has anyone asked a rav if this is a valid reason not to have more children? If there are no other factors involved?

yummymummy ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 10:57 am

amother wrote:

chavamom wrote:

I also ran her posts past my husband. He thought perhaps she's not all there. She took a perfectly good idea (like striving to pay full tuition if you can afford it) and turned it into an obsession. There's just too much force behind her obsession for this to be normal, he said. And he agreed that Hashem is definitely not in the picture, the way she presents it. Chavamom, have pity on yourself and just let the whole thread go.

This is a really nasty post and I for one could care less what some anonymous amother's husband thinks of another poster. Embarrassed to use your SN for trash talk like this?

I haven't been following the entire thread but Saw50st8 - I completely agree with this post:

saw50st8 wrote:

Tablepoetry ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 11:02 am

yummymummy wrote:

amother wrote:

chavamom wrote:

saw50st8 wrote:

↑ yummymummy ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 11:03 am

chavamom wrote:

To me it sounds like saw50St8 is trying to argue against the "free rider" problem, which is what happens when enough people use the arguments you've listed above to shirk their financial responsibilities.

↑ Tablepoetry ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 11:20 am

yummymummy wrote:

chavamom wrote:

Precisely.
And the question is, what happens when the community becomes more and more poverty stricken? Who will support the schools? Someone has to be the responsible one. Who's it going to be?
I live in Israel, so I'm not a part of the tuition debate. But today there was an article in the paper on how 56% of charedim in Israel live below the poverty line. How they earn on average 50% of what chilonim earn (and don't forget, their families are larger). How 20% of the Israeli poor are charedi. They're very lucky the gov't pays for most of their tuition - I have no idea how they would pay for it themselves, and honestly, I have no idea how those in America manage.
Maybe it's a miracle.....

↑ Atali ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 11:30 am

saw50st8 wrote:

I agree with the bottom half of your post.

However, Part of being a frum Jew is following the guidelines of halacha in every area of ones life and putting halachic considerations above all other considerations, including financial ones. A Jew is often required to do things that are against his economic best interest for the sake of following halacha, including not working on shabbos (which eliminates quite a large number of potential career paths), not eating treif food at business lunches or in general to save money, etc. The same applies with regard to family planning. Birth control is an area that is discussed in halacha as far back as the times of the gemara, and just like an observant Jew must follow the piskei halacha of his rav with regard to shabbos or kashrus, he must follow his psak halacha with regard to family planning as well.

If your rav says that financial considerations are a legitimate reason for using birth control, then that is fine for you. However, if someone else's rav says that financial requirements are not a legitimate reason for bc than that is halacha for him. It is absurd to then argue that it is the rav's responsibility to pay for the family's expenses because the rav is simply there to interpret the halacha and is not required to pay for any financial problems that result (a rav does not have to pay you if he declares that your chicken is treif).

It is wrong to call someone a leech for following halacha as his rav paskens. Even leaving Torah values aside, it is the fundamental right of individuals in a free society to follow their religious beliefs. Would you consider someone who continues to accept unemployment benefits rather than work on shabbos a leech? I would be willing to bet that the majority of the population of the US would think that this person should take the job rather than rely on the government. Does that make him a leech?

If the answer is no, then why is an individual receiving benefits, tuition or otherwise, who continues having more children in accordance with his or her religious beliefs, even if they aren't yours, considered a leech in your eyes? It is outright hypocrisy to expect others to tolerate your religious beliefs if you do not tolerate their's.