If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
I'm with Ericka and Nikki, no need to have them all close together, I
know both my gran and mum wanted more and wanted them close together, my dad put his foot down with my mum and my gran had quite a traumatic 2nd birth and was told to wait longer (her 2 had only a 16month gap) and once she had waited she no longer wanted it. My feeling right now (number 2 is 2 months old) is that I would like a third, but sometime a long way in the future, I feel I need to physically recover from this pregnancy and physically prepare for a future pregnancy. I may find out that by the time I'm ready in terms of physically being able to cope with another pregnancy I may no longer want a 3rd, I might be too used to sleeping and having a little bit of time to myself! I've found going from 1 to 2 quite easy, if we were to have a 3rd before number 1 goes to school I think that would be very hard, having to do everything with 3 children, when you only have 2 hands, right now if I have to I can carry DD with one hand and hold DSs hand. Lots of little things like that can add up to making life really hard. 3 also seems to require planning in terms of equipment and space, it can be very difficult to fit 3 car seats in a car for example. You often need an extra bedroom, whether that be loosing a spare room, or a house move or extension. All in all it does sound rather tricky to me! Cheers Anne |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
I have three - the oldest was 7 when the youngest was born. I found
going from 1 to 2 much harder than going from 2 to 3. We had 2 years 9 months between the first two and four years between the second and third. It is easier when the oldest is out of the preschool stuff. At 7, my oldest was pretty independent - i.e. he could feed and dress himself, do what he was told for the most part, and he was out of the stage where I was constantly worrying he would get into stuff in the house like cleansers or kitchen knives. He was a sentient being! He could also entertain himself a fair bit, with limited supervision. I'm way too old to have more kids now (I had #3 when I was 41) but honestly, knowing what I know now, I can see how you could have even bigger families than three kids and not have it be that hard. After all, even with three kids, our household is set up for kids, and as the older ones get bigger, they don't need the kind of intensive "custodial" care that little ones need (the feeding, dressing, changing, bathing, constant close supervision etc.). My oldest is 14 now, and he certainly takes energy, just not the endless physical demands of a wee one which I found really relentless. Our third was totally no biggie. We were also much more relaxed parents by then, given that we were more experienced, and the best part....babies aren't mobile for the first few months!! I learned to appreciate the fact you could put them down and they'd still be in the same spot 15 minutes later! I wonder why I found new borns the first time out. They got nothing on toddlers. Mary G. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Nikki wrote: Dee wrote: I have also heard two to three is harder I suppose you are trying to juggle three needs not just two. I think that is such an individual thing! It really depends on the age spread between babies, the family dynamics, the personality of the kids *and* parents etc. I completely agree. Going from zero to one was a HUGE upheaval for us. Before my first preganancy DH and I went out a lot--clubs, movies, restaurants, etc. After DS was born "night life" now meant midnight feedings. DS was a difficult baby and toddler (though now at 4 1/2 he's much easier). After that, going from one to two was pretty painless--our social life had already adjusted and, probably more importantly, DD was a much easier baby than DS. Also, I think we'd simply gotten used to some of the things that seemed so overwhelming with DS: Having to pack 10 pieces of luggage for an overnight trip, a simple trip to the grocery store taking all afternoon, the floor being covered in pulverized Cheerios on a fairly regular basis, etc. Now that I'm pregnant with #3, I'm choosing to believe those folks who say that going from two to three is a piece of cake Lila DS 11/00 DD 10/03 EDD 04/09/06 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:12:03 -0400, Ericka Kammerer
wrote: Dee wrote: I have also heard two to three is harder I supose you are trying to juggle three needs not just two. I didn't find 2-3 to be harder (though I had a 6 year gap between 2 and 3). It was much easier having older children and a baby. My third hasn't had a leisurly existence as a baby and toddler, since we have a busy schedule, but she seems happy as a clam. I have also got a small gap between my two, just twenty months, and it has been a very hard slog (and still is!!) so another reason poor hubby is saying no. I would really like another one straight away as I think the larger the gap the more isolated this third, if there is one, will be. Is that necessarily a bad thing? Sure, my third won't have a close-in-age sibling, but she adores her older brothers and they adore her. It is a slight challenge for family activities, as she and her brothers are at different stages in terms of what they're interested in and able to do, but that really hasn't been much of a problem for us. To be honest, having 6 years between #1 and #4 seems nearly as difficult as 6 years between #2 and #3. Although there are still the two in between it is tricky balancing how many out of school activities that Shrimp wants to do with what is good for the rest of the family. As soon as that first one hits school age and wants to start participating in activities outside the house I think you are going to find there are some problems. Any baby that can't transfer from car to house or vice versa may end up being a very tired baby. Cheryl |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
In article 4lgKe.169785$s54.75524@pd7tw2no,
Plissken wrote: Good to know, although I've heard from some people that 2-3 is harder. But I've always figured it would be easier when two can keep each other company rather than trying to keep your one toddler occupied. We are contemplating a third but not for another year at least. 2-3 was my easiest transition. I knew what Iw as doing by then (-; Chana Tovah 15 Eliana 13 Asher 10 DAvid 7 Shoshana 5 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
I am due number 6 in October.. I don't think it's too bad at all.
Andrea mom of 4 boys 1 girl and our last a girl due October. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Cheryl wrote:
Is that necessarily a bad thing? Sure, my third won't have a close-in-age sibling, but she adores her older brothers and they adore her. It is a slight challenge for family activities, as she and her brothers are at different stages in terms of what they're interested in and able to do, but that really hasn't been much of a problem for us. To be honest, having 6 years between #1 and #4 seems nearly as difficult as 6 years between #2 and #3. Although there are still the two in between it is tricky balancing how many out of school activities that Shrimp wants to do with what is good for the rest of the family. As soon as that first one hits school age and wants to start participating in activities outside the house I think you are going to find there are some problems. Any baby that can't transfer from car to house or vice versa may end up being a very tired baby. I already *have* #3--she's 2 years old now--and the older two are 10 and 8, so we're well into the school and activities phase of life--lots of activities. We've never had a problem. Sure, she gets toted around to a bunch of activities, but it was never a problem to work around things. And it was *much* easier dealing with a baby and toddler when the older kids were older and able to take care of themselves more and even be helpful. The boys fed her breakfast and watched her this morning while I got a shower before I took the boys to dance camp and Genevieve to her dance class. Best wishes, Ericka |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Dee wrote: I don't know if anyone is in the same situation as me but I would like to hear your opinions anyway. I am a 33 year old stay at home mum of Erin, 5 and Brennan, 3. I am pretty happy apart from being terribly broody and desperately wanting another baby. I have always wanted three children but my husband is not so keen and is at the moment is saying a definite no. Our two children were difficult babies (no sleep, crying all the time) and I had c-sections for both so there are lots of reasons not to but it is breaking my heart. Especially as everyone around me either has three children or is pregnant with their third! It is really starting to get me down and it is all I can think of at the moment. Respect the wishes of your husband. Dee Regards... |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
misc.kids FAQ on the Pregnancy AFP Screen and the Triple Screen | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | November 28th 04 05:16 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on the Pregnancy AFP Screen and the Triple Screen | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | August 29th 04 05:28 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on the Pregnancy AFP Screen and the Triple Screen | [email protected] | Pregnancy | 0 | June 28th 04 07:41 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on the Pregnancy AFP Screen and the Triple Screen | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | June 28th 04 07:41 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on the Pregnancy AFP Screen and the Triple Screen | [email protected] | Pregnancy | 0 | January 16th 04 09:15 AM |