The High Price of Raising Kids

by Katy on March 27, 2010 · 38 comments

I have always been very skeptical of statistics that estimate the average cost of raising a child. The number are tremendously, well . . . tremendous. For a child age 12-14 (the ages of my sons) the numbers run $7560 per child, per year. Granted, this number is taking into account the larger house necessary to house children, as well as feed and clothe them, but I still scoff at this number. (Which is the number for the lowest income bracket, which we are not.)

My theory that I’ve always stood behind is that having children lowers your earning potential.

I use myself as an example.

As an experienced high risk labor and delivery nurse, my earning potential is quite good. Not only is my hourly wage quite high, but the opportunities for overtime is usually limitless. However, my husband and I have never wanted to have our sons in day care, so I’ve never worked more than part time.

My locker partner has grown children that live in another state, and she hardly ever turns down the overtime. She is famous on our unit for consistently earning six figures. That’s right, she earns more than $100,000 per year doing the same job that I do.

My husband took the kids up to Seattle for the weekend as a little Spring break treat, (don’t worry — they stayed with my sister, so it was very frugal) which left me all by my lonesome. The reason I didn’t accompany the menfolk was that I was scheduled to work both Friday and Saturday. Because I knew I had no one to come home to, I offered to stay for a full 12 hour shift both days, which ended up garnering me 6-3/4 hours of overtime. This will add hundreds of dollars to my paycheck! Had my kids been home, I would have left work when my scheduled shifts ended.

But what about men, does having children limit their earning potential as well? Yes, but differently. Because we have kids, we bought a house in Portland where our families live. (We had been living in New Mexico before kids) We wanted both the help from having our parents in town, but also to give our kids the gift of truly knowing their grandparents.

My husband’s college degree is in photography, and he ran a commercial photo studio here in Portland, which he eventually closed down. Had we been childless, we could have moved to New York City, (where we also used to live) and had a much better chance at success. Not to mention that I wouldn’t want to transfer my children out of their school unless it were an absolute necessity.

But here’s the thing, my children are more important to me than my earning potential. I don’t really think about the money I’m missing, because their presence in my life is worth more than any currency.

Do you agree with my theories on the relationship between parenting and earning potential? Please add your thoughts and insights in the comments section below.

Katy Wolk-Stanley

“Use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without.”

{ 38 comments… read them below or add one }

Susan March 28, 2010 at 2:07 am

I agree with you completely. My earning potential would be greater as would my career opportunities if I did not have a child. A lot of my decisions surrounding my life are based on my son and that is my choice. I work part time now in a school, I have a low wage BUT the bills, rent, council tax, everything is paid, etc. We have a very low maintenance life style which affords me the luxury of working part time so I can be with my son. I have a monthly budget and stick to it, I have menus for food, I walk to work daily, etc. However, the advantages of this frugal life style is I’m always home now after school with my son and I have school holidays with my son. That to me is something money can not buy.


WilliamB March 28, 2010 at 2:21 am

I think both are true. For most people, kids are quite expensive. They also lower at one parent’s earning potential. The fact that that 99.9% of the time, that parent is the mother is something that angers me every time I think of it.


Kristen@TheFrugalGirl March 28, 2010 at 5:17 am

If that doesn’t bother the mother, why would it upset you? My husband earns way more money than I do, and it doesn’t bother me in the slightest. In fact, I’d be thrilled to pieces if his earnings increased to the point where I didn’t need to contribute any income at all and could focus even more of my time and energy on my family.

It makes me more sad that in our culture, it’s considered necessary for two parents to work, and that so many children spend 40+ hours a week in daycare, away from either one of their parents.


WilliamB March 28, 2010 at 5:52 pm

(After rereading my comment with fresh eyes.) I wasn’t all that clear, was I? If it doesn’t bother the mother than it doesn’t bother me. My anger is that it should be a free choice but it isn’t; social and economic factors push the mother to stay home and the father to work.


Katy March 28, 2010 at 9:38 am

Although it was part time, I worked three nights per week when my kids were babies and toddlers. Those years are barely in my memory and that saddens me to no end.

I am a feminist, yet I feel that it is important to recognize that women are different than then men. My husband worked full-time, yet I doubt he regrets that.

My best friend works full-time as a nurse and her husband stays home with the kids. (He’s a trained chef, so she may be the luckiest woman who ever lived.) I know a number of women who have this same arrangement, so I doubt the number is quite 99.9%.

I don’t know anyone who would choose earning potential over their children, although I’m sure there are people out there who have moved away from their kids for a job opportunity.

This issue is beyond gender.



WilliamB March 28, 2010 at 10:33 am

It makes me angry because in US society, it’s not a fully free choice. Socially and professionally, it’s much tougher for the mom to work and the dad to stay at home. I wish that it was just as easy for either parent to work or stay at home, and that either could earn the same amount, and neither would face odd looks or be pressured to explain for taking the “other’s” role.

Katy, I would bring you that coffee if I could. Those sound like some long shifts!


Katy March 28, 2010 at 11:14 am


True, we do not in a society where men and women have equal earning potential.

And I am still waiting for that coffee!



Cate March 28, 2010 at 3:58 pm

I agree with you, William. It makes me sad/angry that many mothers stay home not necessarily by choice but because their earning potential isn’t as good as their husband’s and they need the money / society still looks at stay at home dads strangely.

However, I’m an ardent feminist and love being at home. I’ve just never wanted a “career.” But I’m all too aware that even if I wanted to work outside the home, chances are that I wouldn’t be able to–I lack marketable job skills and daycare would cost more than my paycheck.


Kristen@TheFrugalGirl March 29, 2010 at 4:44 am

Katy, I totally understand. I feel sad about the hours that I had to hand my 8-week old babies over to the moms of my students so that I could teach. It’s what I had to do to make ends meet (my husband worked in a warehouse at the time), but I in no way, shape, or form wish that I could have had the “privilege” of spending more time away from them at work.


WilliamB March 28, 2010 at 2:59 am

Off Topic, but your contact page isn’t working:
Perusing the Sunday paper, I noticed that Pyrex glassware is on sale at my local Target. The 11 piece set is on sale for $18 (regularly $31); everything else Pyrex is on unspecified sale as well.


WilliamB March 28, 2010 at 5:35 am

Again Off Topic: I was reading an interview with a woman in the Democratic Republic of Congo, about how an aid organization helped her set up a business. This is the quote that stuck out:

“My family thought we were rich when we ate rice with beans.”

‘Nuf sed


Sara G March 28, 2010 at 8:46 am

I agree that the statistics that on the cost of raising kids sounds high. It all comes down to choices, and hopefully living a frugal lifestyle gives us more choices in the long run. As your family grows, you do not have to buy a bigger house and put your kids in lots of activities. Some families do need a bigger vehicle when they have kids, and others can buy nice used vans and SUVs.

Yes, having kids can lower the earning potential of both parents. I am happy to live in a time when I have the choice to have a career (full or part-time), or a family, or both. At this point, I chose to have both, which is best for my family’s circumstances. Ultimately, I agree with the statement “my children are more important to me than my earning potential.” I have a family-friendly job, which I have enjoyed both before and after having my son.


Angela March 28, 2010 at 11:39 am

Love the photo! So cute.

Just wanted to add my two cents as a married women without kids: there are all kinds of reasons that we make decisions to lower our own income potential, and kids are one good one. Doing the work you love, living a life you have time to enjoy, moving to a new city, living abroad, traveling, focusing on your partner’s career- there are many reasons.

I purposefully cut my career back drastically about five years ago, cutting my income by more than half. Having more time to do what I always wanted (write), plus actually have a life instead of an 80 hour workweek, has made me infinitely happier. No amount of money is worth that.

I can’t imagine anyone with children would trade it for more income.


KateW March 28, 2010 at 4:31 pm

I just wanted to add my agreement to Sara G – I too am married, but without children. I reduced my income in order to stop working crazy long hours as an attorney and to seek other fulfillment. Although I am not a mother, I can easily see making that same choice for children. Sometimes, I think about studies that show how Americans work longer hours than citizens of other countries and take less vacation –and I see those who make different choices (whether to parent or otherwise) as making a statement about how life can be if you reject certain materialistic cultural norms and expectations. Of course easy to do/say when you can still earn a good/livable income with the reduced hours — the real challenging case is the mother/parent/person who is never home because they must work all the time.


Janna March 28, 2010 at 2:46 pm

Boy, can I relate to this topic. Pre-kids I spent 13 years building a career with a small consulting firm. It was very lucrative, but I had to travel 4-5 days a week, and the stress was tough to manage. When I became pregnant with my first, I told my boss and although he tried to act like he was supportive, things became tense.

After my son was born, I went back to work, but only traveling 2 days a week. This cut my income in half, but I also got to be at home on the days I wasn’t on the road. I thought it was a pretty good compromise and that I could keep working this way. My boss was grudging, but I had great client relationships and continued to do really good work. Then 2 years later I became pregnant again, and I will never forget my boss’s reaction to the news. He told me had “been okay with the baby thing when there was just one” but that I needed to understand I was jeopardizing my career, throwing away everything I worked so hard to build. He suggested I strongly consider “hiring live-in help” so I could refocus on work, especially since “babies don’t remember who took care of them anyway.”

I was stunned. I know a lot of people would have just walked away, but I was our family’s primary wage earner by a long shot, plus I carried our health insurance. So after my daughter was born, I just went back to my 2 day a week schedule and tried to stay under the radar. I think my boss kept expecting me to ramp back up, but by then our relationship was so strained we didn’t really interact much. This was sad because he had been a mentor to me during my whole career.

So I guess having kids has definitely been costly for me in terms of my earning potential, which is a mere shadow of what it was 8 years ago. However, like Katy, I wouldn’t do one thing differently. Raising my kids has been so, so much more fulfilling than anything I accomplished professionally. I do sometimes think about where we’d be financially if we hadn’t had kids, but I know I made the right choice.


Cate March 28, 2010 at 4:00 pm

I totally agree with you on this. Granted, my daughter is only 10 months old, but there’s no way she costs us that much money, even counting up increased water/heating bills, more square footage, what-have-you. We’re also committed to keeping her out of daycare, so I stay home–and my earning potential took a dive. But living frugally is worth it to us, but we care more about her than anything else.

(I’m not criticizing anyone who’s chosen to put their kids in daycare–it’s just not for us!)


Tara Morrison March 28, 2010 at 4:31 pm

I am a a homemaker, housewife whatever one wants to call it. I call it lucky my husbands earns enough to stay at home and raise our 4 children. I too think that figure is high my kids are still young and things don’t cost as much. My husband and I were very fortunate to have sold our house when the the housing market was inflated in one area and buy in a cheaper area and maintain the same mortgage payment. Yes our utilities are higher because there are 5 people home all day and more laundry and more food but our other expenses are quite low. Also because of my previous career I do most all of our food from scratch with ease.
I personally have never had a great earning potential as a chef. Contrary to what people believe everyone is not paid like Emeril Lagasse.


Jenny March 28, 2010 at 4:34 pm

I also worked part-time while my children were small by necessity, took a one-year hiatus, and upon return to the workforce (as well as during the last five years) found it very difficult to find a real choice of well-paying part-time, family friendly jobs in my line of work. Also I have found that conducting a job search while working and raising a young family is also very difficult, so not every better job lead gets pursued, which could limit career opportunities or earning potential. I think that this is one reason why some moms may prefer to stay at home, aside from the obvious satisfactions of home life, because it can be very difficult to navigate to a meaningful, well paying career, especially in fields that require a lot of networking, night meetings, volunteering etc…


marianne March 28, 2010 at 4:50 pm

My former coworker and her husband have one child. Her commute is between 1 and 1 1/2 hours one way. Her office commands that she be at work for 9 hours. By the time she gets home at night (7ish), her husband and son have already eaten. I have tried several times to tell her their may be something closer to home but she says she cannot take a paycut. I don’t know if she will ever realize the value of the time she has lost with her son because she feels she needs to make the money to survive. Although one time when he was younger, he had to describe his parents for a school project. He talked all about how great his dad was and then ended with, “my mom works a lot”. We both cried when she told me that story. Katy, you are an inspiration for parents who actually spend time with their kids, not working to pay for things to entertain or raise them.


magdalena March 28, 2010 at 5:26 pm

I was a single parent; looking back, I wish I had made different choices that would have put my children with my family more of the time. I probably would not have had to work as much either. They would have been better off, I am sure. Still, we do what we need to do. Everyone survived the difficult years. I have chosen a carer path that regularly demands long hours at one-quarter the earnings of professionals with equivalent degrees. Money is not why we do it. It’s the same with having a family. There are intangibles that outweigh any financial costs.

Katy and her family are a good example of how stability and happiness are not dependent on income. How we react to our circumstances means a lot more than what we have in those circumstances.


Jeanine March 29, 2010 at 6:17 am

Couldn’t have said it any better.


Karen March 28, 2010 at 7:57 pm

I’m not surprised at the costs you mention to raise kids. We have 2 grown kids and are still paying college bills for the youngest, ugh. The cost didn’t seem so bad when they were younger; we found many ways to have fun for little money. Then middle school came along and more costs got piled up. They really started to escalate when the kids were in high school: cars, even used clunker type cars, cost money and so does insurance, particularly for boys, ouch. They needed more classes, trips, bikes etc. The schools were now under budget constraints, and we had to contribute more toward supplies, field trips, labs, etc.

So even though both kids worked so they could contribute, low wage jobs do not approach being able to pay for all the extras. And when I compare what my kids had compared to many of their classmates who had brand new everything, my kids were not spoiled–it just seemed to cost a lot more, year by year. Incidentally, during college my son decided the price of running a car was not worth it to his budget, so he uses public transit instead.

As far as parenting lowering our income, yes, it certainly did. And that’s okay as far as it goes, since no one forced us to have children. But I sigh in envy at my Swedish relatives and their wonderful support system for families who want to stay home with their kids longer, and at the many systems they have in place to take care of their citizens.


namastemama March 28, 2010 at 8:03 pm

What a timely topic . We were on spring break last week and my kids were at grandma’s. I told everyone how I can understand how those cost estimates are made. Before this topic was even posted. R U reading my mind? For one week I didn’t turn off extra lights constantly. Imagine how few times the toilet was flushed or water used. Two less people to feed. No gas taking them to activities. I ran the dishwasher ONCE instead of daily. Less laundry etc. Now imagine that ALL the time and then not paying those fees to begin with or clothes and school fees etc. I would never sit and figure the cost over the year, too tedious and I might get depressed but I wouldn’t question it after last week. Especially when grandma told me on Tuesday she was out of milk and had to order my son extra food at a restuarant. I told her to just get the big tub of yogurt and feed that boy some plain oatmeal in the morning! Of course our earnings potential is less. I choose to stay home and homeschool but again I’m not putting a price tag on my kids. What good are 2 jobs if you spend it all? It’s not what you make it’s what you keep. My hubby has lost his job twice and it amazes me how little it takes to live off for just the basics. People don’t realize anymore that cable TV and a cell phone are NOT the basics. Second wage earners often find they make little to no money once they do the math on childcare, clothes, cars lunches etc. We do what works for our family.


Lyn March 30, 2010 at 11:10 pm

I will never forget talking to my neighbor about the cost of living. She said that these days, two parents had to work to make ends meet. But she and her husband had four vehicles, a motocycle, a camper, a pool, satellite tv, cell phones, etc. On the flip side, when my MIL complained our children had so much more than her children had, I quietly suggested she had more than her parents had had as well. It’s not just that children are spoiled, we all are these days. And while it’s true that there are many more people truly struggling to put food on the table, many of us have more than we realize. But at what cost? I appreciate Katy sharing her own struggles to live thoughtfully and with intention.


Christy March 28, 2010 at 8:59 pm

I have unique circumstances. My husband and I adopted 2 children, one of whom has special needs (fetal alcohol syndrome). I fully agree that the cost of having kids isn’t in what I am buying for them. It’s in the limited ability to work. After several years of trying, I’ve realized that my kids CAN’T be in day care because of behavioral/transitional issues related to their prenatal circumstances (yes, I am a slow learner!). At first, I really struggled with this. I am a physical therapist by trade, and I sometimes think about how much more “comfortable” it would be to have 2 incomes. However, my physical therapy skills have come in quite handy with regard to caring for my kids, and I have learned to be a really good home economist. Ultimately, I love my life with my kids. I admit that I do sometimes feel the twinge of jealousy when I see people taking nice vacations, going to concerts, eating at really nice restaurants, etc. However, the peace I have at home by providing a stable environment, and knowing that we have made a difference in the lives of 2 kids who didn’t have the most auspicious beginnings, makes me sleep really well at night. I try to give my kids time and stability, and not so much “stuff.” After reading “Affluenza” and being a follower of Dave Ramsey, I have become very creative with doing fun things with my family. I think I have become much more focused and at peace by not spending blindly on myself or my kids. I love that feeling. Great post, Katie.


Alison March 29, 2010 at 6:42 am

Anyone who’s a parent knows how un-selfish you’re required to be at times and it sounds like you are putting your kids’ well-being ahead of your own desires, which isn’t always easy. I hope that feeling of focus and peace continues for a long time! Bravo to you.


Dawn March 29, 2010 at 4:48 am

Katy I agree with you. I am also a labor and delivery nurse in a local hospital. Before my divorce, I started working as a school nurse so I could be home with the children during the summer. AFter the divorce, I continued to work as a full time school nurse and per-diem in the hospital for the extra income. I could have returned full time to the hospital, as I would make more money, but to me the quality of life is better than the money. I take my children to school every morning, have snow days when they do, and mostly the same vacations. Possibly when they both are in college I will return to the hospital, but I will see when the time comes.


sandy March 29, 2010 at 4:53 am

We never had children (it just never happened), but we also decided not to go the double-career, make-as-much-money-as-we-can route either.
Because we’re frugal, we have everything paid for, no debts, plus we can live a less-stressful life on one moderate income. You don’t have to opt to work your butt off just because you don’t have kids–there are other things to do with your time to make your lives better. Money is not as important as living a good life.


monique March 29, 2010 at 5:37 am

My husband and I were very lucky in that we never got used to two salaries. While he was studying, I was teaching full time. When we had our first son, he was home with him 3 or 4 days a week and then once I quit teaching, he began working full time. We have a lower income than many families around us, but we still have a comfortable life.
We have a single family home with two acres of land, but of course we bought a fixer-upper (which some day we hope will be fixed-up!!). We share one car, which leaves my sons and I at home three days of our homeschooling week (which allows for frequent visits from friends!).
My husband has turned down opportunities to climb the career ladder in order to maintain his flexible hours (7am-3pm) and two work-at-home days.
Some day when our children are older, he may accept some of these opportunities, but if he does not, it will not matter as our children will be out of the home (hopefully) and our home will be mortgage-free.
I have had many people see our lifestyle and say “Oh, I would love to homeschool my kids, but we couldn’t afford to do it.”. The fact is, if we lower our expectations and make do with less of what everyone seems to feel is “necessary”, we can create whatever lifestyle we wish….


Anne March 29, 2010 at 8:20 am

My daughter costs us almost nothing–between thrifted clothing, prefolds, and breastfeeding, the costs are really not high. BUT, I have a law degree and a master’s that are not being utilized (but that I have to make loan payments on), because I refuse to put her in daycare. I’m 100% certain that I would be working a full-time job if I didn’t have her (and another on the way)…so, yes…mothering is definitely hurting my earning potential. But I wouldn’t have it any other way!


BarbS March 29, 2010 at 8:27 am

Hmm… does being a parent limit earning potential? Well, for me the answer is yes.

But I also think that for some people, having children does not limit their career growth. I look around at some of the people I work with, who have stay-at-home spouses, and in fact I think their career potential may have increased. (To be clear, I work with several men and a few women who have stay-at-home spouses. It’s both genders.) It’s not because they have kids that increases the earning potential, but rather it’s because they have a stay-at-home spouse.

If someone else is doing the cooking and the cleaning and the managing of the household, then you are able to spend more time at work and to worry less about home-stuff and getting the errands done and so on. These people are available for early morning meetings with international colleagues, they can go out after work to networking functions, and they can easily travel to other locations for business purposes (sometimes for several days or even weeks at a time). In addition, the at-home-spouse is often able to do things like cook from scratch, manage home maintenance projects, and various other activities that can help reduce household expenses. Some of these folks are very frugal (though not all), and do not buy into the “more more more” of consumerism. Still, they are more easily able to advance, to earn bonuses, etc. , all of which can make a huge difference in their earnings.

Would I trade my life or my kids for this earning potential? Never. Never in a million years. Never. I do, however, recognize that my lifetime earnings are affected significantly. It’s a tradeoff I am more than willing to make.


Molly On Money March 29, 2010 at 3:55 pm

I have two kids and the first child I raised as a single parent (the father contributed financially and emotionally) for the first 3 years of her life. I’m married now and my husband and I both work full-time.
When I read statics like ‘the average cost of raising a kid’ I find that it is one more myth I need knock down and prove wrong.


WM March 29, 2010 at 5:50 pm

Such an interesting post. I can totally see your point.

I don’t have children, but I’ll share my father’s point of view, which he’s shared with me. As a little background, my parents had their first child at 24 which was young in their group of friends/family and in our area. They were married at the time, but they’d both just finished school and hadn’t been planning on having a kid so soon. They were earning very little money at the time. They have since become very successful.

My father credits having children young as the driving force behind what propelled his earning potential/career path/successful business. Having a kid really made him “do some soul searching” (in his words) and figure out what he wanted to create for his family and then drove him towards doing that and got him to figure it all out a lot earlier than he otherwise would have. In his case, having kids was the motivation behind a lot of hard work and a number of key decisions that made him successful.

Now, knowing my father I find it hard to believe he could ever be anything but a raving success. He’s the most hard working guy I know. But it’s his story and this is how he tells it!

It also may bear mentioning that even when we were little kids and they didnt’ have much money both of my parents were completely committed to having my mom stay home full-time. My mom always says that marriage is about “the power of two.” And as I learned in micro-economics, specialization means a higher standard of living for all!


Alyssa March 29, 2010 at 8:28 pm

We have 4 kids under the age of 6 years old.
My earning potential has been limited by the children because I now work extremely part-time (1/8 of a full-time position in my field, which is elementary teaching) whereas before I was working full-time. I do not regret my decision to stay home with my children; it is a joy. My husband makes significantly more as a chemical engineer, so it was easy for us to decide who would stay home. If I were the chemical engineer and he the teacher, likely I would be the one working full-time. It’s a very practical matter and we live in one of the most expensive areas of the country.
I think my husband’s earning potential is greatly increased by having children. He is viewed as a very stable, reliable worker who is unlikely to ever leave the company. Everyone knows we have extended family here who we don’t want to uproot our children from. As the kids get older and start school, I think that anchors families even more. The stakes are high for my husband: he has 4 little ones to provide for. He works extremely hard. I believe his perception/reality as a “family man” is positive for his career and ultimately, for his earning potential.


Laura March 31, 2010 at 7:21 pm

I so agree, Katy. Six years ago, I took a new job that was an easy transition from my job into an administrative (read: higher paying) position. I just need to complete a year’s program at the local university – but after taking the first class back then, I realized my kids were too young for me to take on the additional responsibility. When I look back, I realize this represents over $60,000 of additional income. When I look at my kids, I know I made the right decision – even though my 10 year old needs new shoes and grows out of pants before I can schedule a new trip to Goodwill…


Donna Besst April 2, 2010 at 8:32 am

When my children we little(1983ish) my husband and I made a choice to live a frugal lifestyle so that I could stay home wit the children as long as I wanted to. We made this choice before I had the children. I have always felt ver, very lucky that my hubby felt it was as important as I that we raise our children..not daycare. Yes, we did not have tons of extra money but it was the best..staying home. Many years later, when my oldest daughter started college, she came home on day to announce that she was surprised to find out that not everyone had a family like hers growing up..There were many kids in the class that had never to her surprised self.. made homemade cookies with their moms, had parents red them endless amounts of books on a daily basis or taken roads trips to national parks each summer. She was just astounded by all these discoveries. Their mommies all worked full time. These things that her classmates considered “extra” were the norm in our little house. It was at that point that I was very pleased that we had made the choices that we had to parent our own children.
I have never felt bad that we didn’t have the best clothes or newest toys. We had enough..but most of all, I have an endless bank of memories about what my kids did and said on a daily basis.

A side note..I teach full time now that they are both adults and my two teaching partners have hubbies that stay home as house dads..Yay for them!


David April 9, 2010 at 8:09 am

Let’s say a kid costs $400 a month. Instead of having a kid you could have invested that $400 a month in good stocks at 12 percent compounded monthly then after 20 years you will have $399,659.
If you have any doubts about the math then check out this savings calculator.

Many people don’t understand math or the power of compounding and that’s why they have a kid in the first place.

So the question becomes would you use protection to get $400,000?


Katy April 9, 2010 at 8:31 am

Let’s not forget that the kids will pay for my nursing home.




Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: