I am 14 months into kid #1. I've observed friends and family who are well into kid #2.
My thought process was that going from 1 to 2 was going to follow some sort of logarithmic increase in complexity - but I am now convinced that the change is exponential.
With 1, you can split the work. With 2, the dad will probably be focused on the older kid and the mom on the younger kid. Thus, there is less help to go around.
Maybe at #3 there is some sort of loop-back effect where the older kid can help out with the younger siblings?
I'm on 4 with 5 on the way. Here's how I think about in terms of effort. Basically, after 2 it's logarithmic. I can do lots of things in batches that shave off time. So, brushing teeth happens for all 4 kids at the same time and the set up cost would be the same with 1. With more kids, you end up setting rules for how they play together, rather than micromanaging entertainment for one. Once one kid can read, the older can read to the younger. This puts the older one on a good task and entertains the younger one.
It's not the life for everyone, but I really enjoy it.
In terms of effort, the per capita cost goes down after each kid IMHO.
In my experience going from two to three was a bigger change overall than one to two. Primarily because the kids now outnumber the adults. Also, particularly while they're little, you now have more kids than one parent has hands. So mom/dad can't physically restrain/direct all the kids by themselves. One to two felt to me like roughly a doubling of work. And that was when we felt like we weren't sure how much more we could handle. Then with our third it felt like the exponential increase you mention and we laughed at our previous feelings. The same strategies and patterns will scale from one to two but not necessarily to three because you get outnumbered. So three felt like more of a sea change.
At the same time, the mental adjustment was easier. None to one was the biggest mental adjustment for me (wow, I'm a parent now! Oh God help I'm responsible for keeping another human alive). One to two and two to three were more like changes in degree rather than a complete paradigm-shift mentally. For number two and three I've already worked through the reality that I'm now a father.
Age difference has to play some role as well. Our three are very close in age. Maybe the experience is different when there is more distance between them.
Parenting style definitely changes 1 to 2, 2 to 3, after 3 it's kind of a wash. Helicopter parenting or "Tiger Mom" styles don't scale well.
A colleague of mine has 7 kids. Both she and her husband work full time with white-collar jobs. If she hadn't gotten raises and promotions they likely couldn't afford the childcare costs and she would be a stay at home parent. (Cultural norm for her).
I can't imagine how this would work in a blue-collar setting where work has to be done on-site. Between sick kids who can't go to school/childcare, doctor vists, dentist appointments, parent teach conferences, flexible work hours to come in late/leave early are normal things parents need to do and even more so when you start talking 3 or more kids.
The loopback can happen, but it doesn't really manifest until much later. Spreading them out 2-3 years seems like the best way to scale to large families as that first two years really are all parenting unless you have teenagers in the house.
(Also don't get me started on current employment laws as it relates to pregnancy and how being a mom can impact both wage and career opportunities)
I have three, they live with me every other week, since I have had kids for 13 years now it is hard to imagine how it was without them, how it was with only one or two of them. My oldest two helps taking care of my younger one sometimes. I also tend to let the younger one do more stuff earlier on than I let the other two do. On top of that, it is more or less impossible to fill 5 days with 8 hours work the weeks the kids are at my place, but age solves that, they can stay a bit longer at daycare, when they get to 8-9 they can walk home by themselves etc. Life is complex at times, but most of the time it is quite awesome. Weeks when I don't have the kids tend to be work and trying to get enough sleep to have the energy needed for a 100% week with my kids. Even if I dont do 8 hours every day the weeks I have the kids, I'd say it is more or less 100% responsibility from 6:30 AM to 11 PM.
Yes. The older kids help. My wife comes from a family of eight. It's arguable that she's changed more of her siblings diapers than our own two kids (2 and 1.5m). Not only that but house duties are also split among them (dishes, cooking, trash, cleaning, etc.).
My thought process was that going from 1 to 2 was going to follow some sort of logarithmic increase in complexity - but I am now convinced that the change is exponential.
With 1, you can split the work. With 2, the dad will probably be focused on the older kid and the mom on the younger kid. Thus, there is less help to go around.
Maybe at #3 there is some sort of loop-back effect where the older kid can help out with the younger siblings?
Anyone with more experience care to opine?