Number of kids -- 2 vs. 3?

Alphawave wrote:


Yes, somewhere close to my limit now, but the point of asking is to gauge
the future, not the present. What I don't know is what it's like to have
a child close to kindergarten age, a toddler, and a newborn.


I think it really depends on the person. I wasn't quite
ready at the time that spacing could have happened, but it would
have been easier than closer spacing.

So I was
hoping to hear from anyone who could tell me first-hand what their
experience was/is like. Is it easier, because you're a more experienced
mom at that point, or the oldest child is in somewhat better position to
help?


Both were true for us. I'm far more organized now than
I was, and it helps a lot to have older children who are more
able to handle themselves.

Is it just plain harder because more kids means more work?


There are times when more kids mean more work, but
on the other hand, there are times when more kids are *less*
work (because they occupy each other).

Or does
it depend on the personalities of the kids?


I'm sure this is a big part of it. Some kids just
demand more of you than others.

Or do moms in this situation
just tend to take greater advantage of things like pre-school, "mother's
morning out", babysitting co-ops, cleaning service, etc.?


There are only 24 hours in a day, and taking advantage
of time savers does give you more time to do the things you
want to do. I'm a big fan of having groceries delivered ;-)
I have to say, though, that we chose pre-school more for
what it offered the kids than for time off (it doesn't add
up to much time off, especially when you consider the
transportation time and the time it takes to participate)--
although some days *any* time off seems important. And
so much also depends on your partner and how much he can
share in the parenting. It's a lot easier if the other
parent gets home at 5pm than at 8pm!

Best wishes,
Ericka

On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 18:03:13 -0700, aps wrote:

I don't disagree that it's not always good short-term economic policy
to favor immigration over high birth rates, but that kind of policy is
awfully kind to racist thought and to hints of fascism.

Well, in Australia, we have controlled and uncontrolled immigration.
If you are from NZ or you marry an Aussie, there is no limit to how
many migrate to Australia. However, if you are any other category,
there is a cap.

I married an Aussie so I didn't worry about numbers.

--
Daye
Momma to Jayan
"Boy" EDD 11 Jan 2004
See Jayan: http://jayan.topcities.com/

Alphawave wrote:

Barbara says:

Well, I have to tell you that three under 5 was a good deal easier than
three under 6 was! Life got dramatically more complicated, IMO, when
Julian started kindergarten last fall, and it's even more complicated
now that he's in first grade. Before he started school, we could pick
up and do what we wanted when we wanted. If he missed a week of
preschool here or there, it was no big deal. Now, it's a big issue.

Yeah, I haven't really thought much in terms of what it would be like
throughout all of childhood -- I tend to think about that intense time
when #3 would be a newborn; and then the future, when they're all adults;
and only in passing do I think much about having to coordinate 3
children's schedules. Of course, I guess I tend to feel that by the time
they all have schedules, I'll be an old hand at all this. :-) (Naive,
eh??)


;-) I have to say that coordinating schedules is
*hard* with a first grader and a third grader. My only hope
is that by the time Genevieve's schedule starts ramping up,
Adrian and Colin will be managing a bit of their own
schedules. Obviously, they won't be driving, but I could
probably drop them off at the dance studio rather than
staying for the whole class, or we could carpool to soccer
practices with other families, etc. We could choose to do
less, and perhaps some would argue we *should* do less.
But at the moment the boys are doing what they love and
thriving on it and I'm still managing to keep up, so
we're forging ahead. It is tough to juggle activities and
homework, though. And it's not just the activities and
homework. There are all these demands that come with
school, too--lots of paperwork, helping out with the PTA,
helping out in the classroom, fundraising, projects, field
trips, book fairs, parties, etc. etc. etc. You can pick
and choose what you're going to do, and you don't have to
do everything, but I do feel like I ought to do *some* of
it. If you don't learn to say "no," you can get totally
sucked in and have no life.

Best wishes,
Ericka

"Circe" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:Ar25b.14152$n94.845@fed1read04...
"zeldabee" wrote in message
...
"Nina" wrote:
"Daye" wrote
In Australia, the government is encouraging woman to give birth.

In Italy and Singapore as well.

It's a bit silly and short-sighted of them, IMHO. I just can't see
it as a
bad thing when the population growth slows or even reverses in some
countries. It's a global issue.

The problem is that people in countries with falling birth rates (you
can
add Japan and Germany to this list, as well and the US and Canada
would be
on it as well if it weren't for immigration) can suffer fairly
dramatic
economic hardship.

Yep, yep, yep. The health and pension systems must be reformed
thoroughly, but for the foreseeable future there won't be any change in
today's problem that there are too many pensioners and too few workers
for our system to work much longer. My husband pays a fifth of his
income to old-age pensioners.

--
Tatjana
PCOS - TTC #1 for 2 years

Sophie says:

That help?

Yep. ;-)

I wonder the same about 4. I
just keep telling myself when #4 comes all the others will be that bit
older, that bit more self sufficient. Personally I think in some ways
it gets easier. Obviously in other ways it gets harder.

I also wonder if it just seems harder in the moment because it's *new*.
When Eamon was a newborn/infant, it seemed really hard. Then when we had
Quinn, we realized -- no, one is cake; *two* is hard. ;-) Now that Quinn
is almost 5 mos., it doesn't seem as hard anymore.

So far the challenges have
been fun/do-able, obviously, or we wouldn't have done it so many times


:-D

Thanks for your thoughts, Sophie. :-)

-- Alpha
alphawave at earthlink dot net

Em says:

I feel fairly strongly that only two
children sounds like too small of a family to me (personally) and also
I do not want my kids to have only one adult sibling when grown up.
Three sounds like a good size--not too big, not too small.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I've thought about that too.

One thing I wonder about is how it sometimes seems like the world is
designed for the 4-member family. Most tables and booths at restaurants
seat 4; standard hotel rooms sleep 4; cars are more comfortable for 4;
etc. -- just seems like it could be easier to be 4 people rather than 5
when you're out as a family.

-- Alpha
alphawave at earthlink dot net

Alpha wrote:

One thing I wonder about is how it sometimes seems like the world is
designed for the 4-member family. Most tables and booths at restaurants
seat 4; standard hotel rooms sleep 4; cars are more comfortable for 4;
etc. -- just seems like it could be easier to be 4 people rather than 5
when you're out as a family.

That is definitely true. It's not a deal breaker, mind you, but it is true :-)

--Helen

Alphawave wrote:


One thing I wonder about is how it sometimes seems like the world is
designed for the 4-member family. Most tables and booths at restaurants
seat 4; standard hotel rooms sleep 4; cars are more comfortable for 4;
etc. -- just seems like it could be easier to be 4 people rather than 5
when you're out as a family.


I do think that's true, but obviously not insurmountable.
Fortunately, while the kids are small, you can often fit in
a situation designed for four ;-)

Best wishes,
Ericka

Oh don't get me started on the perfect four in a family. Everything is for a
four member family. Any kind of contest is for four people. I once won
tickets to see Sesame Street live and recieved four tickets, um hello, I
have five in my family, what am I supposed to do, leave one child home?
Camping this summer, we had to pay extra for our third child. It drives me
mad especially when the average number of chidlren for a household is like
2.3 or something. Why don't they round up, ugh.

--
Sue
mom to three girls
Alphawave wrote in message
...
Em says:

I feel fairly strongly that only two
children sounds like too small of a family to me (personally) and also
I do not want my kids to have only one adult sibling when grown up.
Three sounds like a good size--not too big, not too small.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I've thought about that too.

One thing I wonder about is how it sometimes seems like the world is
designed for the 4-member family. Most tables and booths at restaurants
seat 4; standard hotel rooms sleep 4; cars are more comfortable for 4;
etc. -- just seems like it could be easier to be 4 people rather than 5
when you're out as a family.

-- Alpha
alphawave at earthlink dot net