# Kids close together?



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Hello, I'm not sure if this is in the right place (I've spent a while debating, ha) but feel free to move it if it's not.

My husband and I are the proud parents of a 6 week old baby girl. She was a bit of a surprise (a BIG surprise, actually) and while thrilled we're now trying to plan what we want to do as far as subsequent kids go.

We're thinking of TTC shortly, like when our LO is between 6-9 months old.

I've mentioned this to a few other moms the other day and was met with varying reactions of horror. I know 15-18 months can be the hardest, and that's when I'm thinking of introducing #2, but my sister and I were 15 months apart and mom says it was almost easier that way.

Our reasons from TTC range from great (we're so in love with our LO we want more!) to pretty good (we want our kids close together because we believe it makes for stronger relationships- my sis and I are really close, and DH and his brother are not, and they're 4 years apart) to selfish (I want to start school when we're done having kids) to REALLY bad (I want another kid soon so I can put off going back to work longer- I don't think I NEED to go back to work, but DH wants me to).

For those of you with kids close together- did you do it on purpose? What are the benefits? What are the drawbacks?
To those who waited longer between kids- I guess same questions? For comparison purposes.


----------



## Amylcd (Jun 16, 2005)

My oldest two are 15 months apart, and it was never difficult. We did not do it on purpose, but I'm glad it worked out this way.


----------



## SquishyBuggles (Dec 19, 2008)

Mine are 2.5 years apart, and I loved that spacing. My brother and I were 18 months and my mom said it was really hard. The closeness is nice growing up, though.


----------



## Getz (May 22, 2005)

My kids are 13 months apart. Both planned and unplanned at the same time. It took us 2 years to get pregnant with my son so we opted to not prevent the next pregnancy in case it took that long again. We were certainly surprised I got pregnant so quickly, but very happy.

I love the age difference. Mentally it was good for me, because I was doing all the "baby" stuff at the same time and now I am doing the "toddler" stuff with both of them. They play so well together and it is so cute to see them interact. Since I only have two, I do feel I have lots of time with them one on one.

I did have many days where it got really hairy. Neither of my kids were/are great sleepers, so as soon as one would go back to sleep (from a night waking), the other one would wake up. Or having them both screaming at the same time, but I can only take care of one at a time. They rarely napped at the same time. I have a wonderful, helpful DH and that makes my job a lot easier!

My sister's kids are 4 years apart. She likes the age difference. Her oldest is now in school so she has lots of one on one with the younger one. She preferred to only have 1 in diapers at a time. They are 6 and 2 so they are just starting to play together a bit. But, my older nephew gets upset when the toddler destroys his more complicated projects. Or when he can't play with a toy because it isn't safe for his younger brother.

Obviously there is no right or wrong answer. I had no desire for a large age gap, my sister had no desire for a small one. But, our individual families seem to work out just fine.


----------



## katheek77 (Mar 13, 2007)

I personally think closeness in relationships has more to do with personality than age difference. My college roommate is best friends with her sister, who's 3.5 years younger. The three kids I nanny: A is 18mos older than B and B is 28 mos older than C...the two who are 28mos apart get along much better than the two who are 18mos apart. At the same time, another family I nannied for had two kids 19 mos apart (G/G) and another had kids 13 mos apart (B/G), and they got along wonderfully. (The 13 mos family also had a girl 4 years older than the next oldest, and, really, they all got along great)

Yes, I think if there's a huge age difference (like 5+ years), chances are that as kids, they may not be as close, but, even when there is a large difference, I've noticed that many adults are closer with their "further" siblings than their "closer" siblings.

My sister and I are 30 mos apart (but 2 years in school, if that makes sense), and we did NOT (and do not, still) get along...just different personalities and interests, but, when we were in school, a lot of competition between us (academically, socially, physically, etc).

If you have another in 15 mos, they might hate each other. But, that could happen if you wait 4 years. If you have another in 15 mos, they might adore each other. But, that might also happen if you wait four years. I suspect the answers you get will be as varied as the parents' and children's personalities, and there's no way to know in advance how your next child will fit into that dynamic...


----------



## reece19 (May 21, 2008)

Mine are 10 months apart. They should have been one year exactly (had the same due dates, even), but the younger girlie was born early. They're adopted, so I didn't have any say over the timing.

It was hard when they were little. Both had sleep issues, so we were exhausted for a long time. It was hard to spend a decent amount of time one-on-one when they were so small, because both had immediate needs (as in, oldest wasn't really old enough to wait for food while I fed youngest).

It was a lot of fun, though. By the time they were a couple of years old, they could play together, share clothes, and sleep together. If I were able to plan, I probably wouldn't do it *that close* together, but overall it has worked out well. They're 10 and 11 now and are able to be more independent of me because they are their own little buddy system.


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
If you have another in 15 mos, they might hate each other. But, that could happen if you wait 4 years. If you have another in 15 mos, they might adore each other. But, that might also happen if you wait four years. I suspect the answers you get will be as varied as the parents' and children's personalities, and there's no way to know in advance how your next child will fit into that dynamic...









These are both great points. For some reason, in my many years of thinking about kids, it never occurred to me that personality may play a factor in how well your kids get along. I am seeing in my family all four of us kids get along great and we're fairly close in age. My SIL's three kids, with 2.5 years between them, aren't terribly close though they're also very young.

I am definitely OK with varied answers. When I mentioned it to other moms in my playgroup, and to some moms I know online, the only response I got was a horribly shocked expressions, silence, and then... "you're INSANE!"

Honestly, my biggest worry with 2 kids close together is how it will affect my breastfeeding relationship with our current LO, although parenting is a close second as far as the worry goes.


----------



## Lia & Eva's Mama (Jul 10, 2007)

Mine are 13mos apart exactly! They were both planned and it was the greatest decision i had ever made.
Tandem nursing was difficult but do-able.
I had to have a schedule because i needed to time out naps soo at least one was together so i could get a little break.
Some days were hard but most were great! My eldest was a very quiet sweet child, so when the baby was sleeping in the cuddly wrap i could sit an hour and read to the eldest.
i tried to co-sleep with both but DD1 rolled onto the baby, so we had to put an end to co-sleeping.
My youngest was a miracle and slept through the night very early, like 2-3 mos.
I love that i had two babies than two toddlers. I'm planning on homeschooling and i think the close spacing is terrific! one curriculum for both girls.
I ec'd both girls and that was a lot of extra work but very doable, great results for ec too when the oldest was a role model, then when the youngest was a role model.
I guess the hardest thing was getting to the car, carrying one child and holding onto the hand of a very unsteady toddler.
Most days they get along and some days they are yelling and fighting over toys, since they like the same stuff.
After having them close i just couldn't imagine putting more space between.
Good luck on your decision.


----------



## kalamos23 (Apr 11, 2008)

You might change your mind once you get closer to 6 months. I was already planning #2 a couple of days after I had DD, but honestly, she has turned out to be very high needs and because of that, we are putting off TTC for a while. We will probably start TTC when she is over a year old. I don't want to risk my milk drying up, especially because it turns out that DD has many food intolerances, so she really needs the milk.

That being said, I'm the oldest of 9 kids, and we vary in spacing from 17 months to 3 years apart. The closest sets of siblings aren't all close in age, though some are.


----------



## Bluegoat (Nov 30, 2008)

My girls are almost 3 years apart, which is more than I had wanted. I would say the advantages, practically, were that my older girl had some independence when the baby was born, and I never felt like I had too few arms. She was also happy to spend a few nights at Grandma's, when I had to stay in the hospital for a while.

I find that she really enjoys the baby, and they play together, even though I wouldn't have expected it from a 1 and 4 year old. She is pretty understanding when she has to wait for me too deal with the baby's needs.

My neighbour has 3 kids, with 2 years between each. She liked that with the first two, but wished she'd had a slightly longer spacing for the third.


----------



## kalamos23 (Apr 11, 2008)

Oh, I nannied for a family with 4 girls right before I had DD, the 2 oldest were 15 months apart and 8 and 7 years old, the 2 youngest were 18 months apart (she had a miscarriage in between them, they would have been 15 months apart too). It was REALLY tough with the newborn and 18 month old in the beginning but it was great when they were older (when the baby was a year old or so) because they played together.


----------



## hollytheteacher (Mar 10, 2007)

I have not read the other responses yet, but are you sure it is even possible? I mean i know it is possible for some, but i did not ovulate until ds was 15 months old, followed by the meanest of all AFs ever (lol). for me, even if i wanted to get preggo before then, it would not have worked due to my son nursing so often. He did not really even start ingesting solids until 14 months and now is eating about fifty percent solids, fifty percent breastmilk (in terms of calories).

Anyway, my own personal bias is to wait until the child is at least 2 so that you don't have to worry about milk drying up when they absolutely need it the most. Not to say older chlildren don't need it (they do, just not for caloric reasons).


----------



## Amylcd (Jun 16, 2005)

Quote:

have not read the other responses yet, but are you sure it is even possible?
It was definitely possible for me, I got my period back 6-8 weeks after giving birth everytime. I wish I could have been so lucky as to keep it away. Nursing did nothing to help with that


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hollytheteacher* 
I have not read the other responses yet, but are you sure it is even possible? I mean i know it is possible for some, but i did not ovulate until ds was 15 months old, followed by the meanest of all AFs ever (lol).

Anyway, my own personal bias is to wait until the child is at least 2 so that you don't have to worry about milk drying up when they absolutely need it the most.

The first- not sure. I keep thinking I'm getting my period already but I haven't figured it out yet. My PP basically stopped, and now I'm onto bright red bleeding but i"m not sure if it's cuz I'm doing a lot more now that DH is back at work, or if it's my period? No idea. DD is already sleeping well, and I'd read that you need to nurse every 3-4 hours to prevent AF but she'll often go 5-6 without a problem, so I'm not sure.

Second- that's my concern, too. Part of me wants to wait until at least 1 year just in case the milk goes the way of the do do bird, but I'm undecided.

And to the PP who mentioned that DD is still really young- so far she seems like an easy baby, but I'm not sure how much if that is because she's the first and still newborn. She sleeps well at night, but the rest of the time won't sleep usually unless she's being held. This could all change a bit later on, and I don't want to tell DH "okay, plan to start TTC in 5 months!" in case she suddenly stops being an easy baby and becomes very high-needs. So far she really is so mellow and relaxed and it takes a lot to get her worked up, but maybe she's just adjusting and when she can start to focus on things and realize mom left the room, etc, it'll get a bit crazy.


----------



## jmmom (Sep 11, 2007)

Your fertility might or might not have returned by then, as a pp suggested. My husband and I both come from families where 4 kids are spaced about 1.5 yrs apart each, even less in dh's case, and he is not close at all to his siblings, while I am - personality plays a huge, huge role. We thought, before we had kids, that we would also space them very close together, but now our kids will definitely be more like 3 yrs apart, to give them each plenty of time to have a strong nursing and co-sleeping relationship. I think that ap parents can of course make any spacing work, but I would worry about deliberately sacrificing nursing and co-sleeping - i.e., by nightweaning to get your fertility back, or by having your milk dry up when pregnant - in order to have another child. I guess I feel pretty strongly about that.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Mine are all 23-25 months apart and for us, it has been a good spacing. I have a hard time imagining a smaller gap, to be honest, but obvioulsy it works well for many other families. I was comfortable with TTC once the youngest turned a year, each time.

My dad and his bro are 11 months apart and while I don't know if it was difficult for my grandma, they are super close to this day. But, chances are they would be even if they had been 2-3 yrs apart, too.

I think you have valid reasons for wanting a close spacing but you may very well feel differently 6 months for now. Also, if nursing for 2 yrs is important to you, you may want to hold off since there is no way to know how your supply will hold up thru pregnancy.


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Amylcd* 
It was definitely possible for me, I got my period back 6-8 weeks after giving birth everytime. I wish I could have been so lucky as to keep it away. Nursing did nothing to help with that









Your kids are beautiful!


----------



## BamBam'sMom (Jun 4, 2005)

Mine are 2.5 years apart, and I even think that spacing, for us, was too close to be ideal. There are many. many times when I can't meet both of their needs. I would never space them closer than two years. I think they would both have to share Mama too much. Also, our bodies need time to recover between pregnancies.

I agree with others who said that personalities have more to do with sibling relationships than age differences. Two boys I knew growing up were five years apart, had very little conflict as kids, and are best friends as adults. My neighbor's kids are 17 months apart and fight CONSTANTLY.


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jmmom* 
.e., by nightweaning to get your fertility back, or by having your milk dry up when pregnant - in order to have another child. I guess I feel pretty strongly about that.

if AF isn't back by the time I want to TTC, then I would consider it "not meant to be" and leave it at that- if BFing was still going well and mutually enjoyable, I wouldn't nightwean just to have another baby. It feels like I'd be messing with fate or something.

Milk- yeah, it's a big concern of mine, I had it in my head i'd do CLW and/ or tandem nursing, but what I want often isn't what I get.

Jmmom- the co sleeping... yeah, hadn't thought of that either.

Hmmm! <stumped>

Thank you all for your great responses, though, I've got more to think about and feel less like a freak for considering it!


----------



## jmmom (Sep 11, 2007)

I will also say that, while when ds was a newborn I couldn't even begin to think about ever, ever having another baby - and so wasn't in your position - now that he's almost 2, I've been really, really starting to want another one, and it's a little bit hard that he's still so attached to nursing that I feel like _he_ isn't ready yet. So I can kind of understand your dilemma! For me, the realization that we wanted, for our children, to space them, has made me be really, really patient, and try to learn to take my time with the big things in life. Good luck with your decision, as it draws closer to the time when you'll make it!


----------



## pigpokey (Feb 23, 2006)

Mine are 15 mos apart, currently almost 4 and young 5. If you sleep in between the children they can't interfere with each other. It's great and I would not want it any other way, or possibly closer in age.


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jmmom* 
I will also say that, while when ds was a newborn I couldn't even begin to think about ever, ever having another baby - and so wasn't in your position - now that he's almost 2, I've been really, really starting to want another one, and it's a little bit hard that he's still so attached to nursing that I feel like _he_ isn't ready yet. So I can kind of understand your dilemma! For me, the realization that we wanted, for our children, to space them, has made me be really, really patient, and try to learn to take my time with the big things in life. Good luck with your decision, as it draws closer to the time when you'll make it!


I had a ridiculously easy pregnancy, and a really good birth experience which I think helps considerably in thinking about new kids.

Patience with the big things is not something I'm very good at- I want it all planned out in advance! I think I may need to practice it more, though, this year has already been a bit crazier than I'd like (well, the last 2 years I guess). All the big stuff seemed to happen at once!


----------



## N8'sMom (Jun 25, 2007)

Mine are 14 months apart. My first was planned. My 2nd was an awesome surprise! I'm really glad it turned out this way. I have to admit the transition from 1 child to 2 was really hard....just with him being a baby himself! The first two months were very hard on me. From then on it seemed to get easier. I already had my baby stuff out.

And it's so cute watching my now 21 month old play with my 7 month old. He tried to hold her and baby talks to her. It's awesome. I do want more kids and I won't have a very big age gap. But this close age gap is quite nice. They will be a grade apart when they get in school, so I think that will be helpful.

Just do what you think is best for you and your family!


----------



## thepeach80 (Mar 16, 2004)

My first 2 are 18 mos apart, the next 2 are 23 mos apart, and these 2 should be about 27 mos apart. This pgcy has been the hardest by far, whether it's from having to chase the other kids or just getting older (I'm a whopping 28 now, lol) I don't know, but it's been hard. I had a really easy pgcy w/ my first and it went downhill from there. I had ptl w/ my 2nd and I'm not positive it's not from not being ready to have another baby physically yet. I was still nursing and did till I was about 3.5 mos pg (he was 13 mos), but I wouldn't change it. They are both the best of friends and worst of enemies, lol! I'm assuming this is what DH and his brother were like as kids, they're 15 mos apart. DH's older sis is 15 mos old than him as well. Now #2 and #3 get along beautifully, but Evan is a much 'younger' 4 than some of his peers so I think that has something to do w/ it. Ilana is the oldest any of my kids will have been when we have a new baby and she's already quite the mommy. It'll be nice to have someone to fetch me diapers, lol! Congrats on the baby and just take it a day at a time. I told DH we weren't having any more before AJ was even born (I had to have a c/s w/ him and it wasn't good) and here we are on #4 (though this one was quite unplanned unlike the rest). It took me a while to want to TTC again, but we had decided 9 mos was a perfect time and af came back right then, we got pg right away and along came Evan 9 mos later.


----------



## Sierra (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Astraia* 
We're thinking of TTC shortly, like when our LO is between 6-9 months old.

*Looks like you've got some time to decide. This is good. You'll get a chance to get to know what your LO's "older babe" personality might be like and to see how you are feeling after this initial "newborn high." My best advice is to just ride this out and see how you feel when your babe actually is 6-9 months*

I tend to advocate more on the side of _not_ waiting because I had a very painful experience with secondary infertility (not being able to get pregnant after having been pregnant before). Since no one knows how long it will take them to get pregnant, I feel like if you think you might want them closer together, better to start trying *before* you feel you are ready because you will have an unknown amount of time you will be ttc followed by a 9 month pregnancy.

However, this is only if you truly feel like if it did happen right away, you would be ready. Not just you actually (and this includes your body, which needs time to recover and may not even be menstruating yet) but your LO, whose life will be forever changed even just by the mere fact that you are pregnant (for example, I self-weaned from my mom when she got pregnant with my younger brother because the taste of her milk changed which made me very unhappy...I was over a year by that time but you are talking about just a 6, 7, 8, or 9 month old!).

Quote:

I've mentioned this to a few other moms the other day and was met with varying reactions of horror. I know 15-18 months can be the hardest, and that's when I'm thinking of introducing #2, but my sister and I were 15 months apart and mom says it was almost easier that way.
I think you gamble with any spacing because its really more a matter of personalities. I get along the best with my sister who is three years older than me, and pretty badly with my brother who is 18 months younger than me. We got along great, according to my mother, until I was about five. It has been downhill since that time.

Like I said, I think it is about the personalities, and you gamble no matter what. BUT...and this is a big but...when kids are spaced closer together, there are some things that almost certainly will become challenges. My two are eleven months apart. You can bet pretty heavily that:

Your younger will not have as much time to be "the baby" as s/he would choose, and will have to grow up in some ways more quickly.
You will be juggling a LOT of different needs in a hard core way! Take sleep for example, which may or may not apply to you at any given time. When one of your kids keeps you up for one reason or another until midnight or 1am (the newborn being fussy or the toddler being sick or on a "sleep strike," etc.) and your newborn needs to nurse all night long but your toddler needs to be up at 6am, you will be having to figure out how to survive without the sleep *you* need.
Take whatever attention your little one is currently getting and divide it by some number even if not exactly in half (sometimes kids successfully share mommy). You only have so many resources. You only have so many arms, hands, minutes in the day...etc. You will, at times, be torn. There is nothing like the awful experience of figuring out which crying _baby_ to respond to first...and believe me that your oldest will still be something of a baby through the toddler years.
The logistics will be difficult. At times, both kids will want to be held at once (believe me, I've even had both in carriers strapped to my body...not something that can be sustained for long periods). Or the two will keep each other awake at night (bedtime here is nutso...just wait until one busts out laughing just as the other is drifting off after a long day...urgh!).
[/quote]

There is more, but I won't go on. There are a lot of wonderful things about my kids being spaced the way they are too, but its not something I am likely to _jump_ to do again. dfd is now almost 3, and we are just starting to talk about having another.

Quote:

For those of you with kids close together- did you do it on purpose?
Yes and no. When ds was 13 months old, we adopted him (he'd been with us since 1.5 days old as a foster child). A few months later, we started feeling like we could begin what we thought was going to be a long process of getting ready for another foster placement. All we did was start talking to the state again, though, and within a month we got called about a little girl in need of a family, possibly for the long-term. We made the choice, but we had thought it would have been many more months down the road. Before we knew it we had a 17 month old and a 6 month old. And even without the craziness of the newborn period with dfd, it was still a crazy time. Good crazy. But also *hard* and a LOT of work to keep life just sane. I'm talking just sane.

Now they are 2.75 and 3.5. Two has been a really intense age with dfd, and three was great with ds, but three and a half has also been pretty hard, so we're still experiencing some challenges. Whining is a big issue right now, and I think that having them so close in age encourages them to do it more because they clearly, clearly immitate each other. Also, ds really eggs dfd on to do stuff he knows is against the rules, so he won't get in trouble but still gets the joy of something crazy happening (her throwing plates or something while they are supposed to be setting the table). That drives me up the wall. I'm pretty confident if ds was a little older, I'd have an easier time teaching him out of this behavior.

Like I said, there are lots of pluses too. And I don't want to sound all negative because I love parenting my kids. It's just that I want you to be very realistic, and I wouldn't encourage you to rush this. I hear a lot of moms of newborns and young infants have this urge to have more right away that settles down when their babes get a little older.

ETA: Consider also if you want to have more than two and how this might impact later spacing. My dw and I originally envisioned a three year spacing between our kids. But because ds and dfd are so close in age, we've been living for a few years with a lot of intensity. Like I said, a lot of good. But intense hard work too. So now, even though dfd is almost three, it looks like she'll be closer to four before we have the next because dw just needs some more time before we have another babe in the house. I don't think it would be this way at all if ds and dfd were the originally planned three years apart.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

I think it's a bad idea.


----------



## Shahbazin (Aug 3, 2006)

I think it's a gamble about whether any 2 kids will "get along," regardless of spacing; I think that your personality type & degree of involvement of your spouse are big things to consider when thinking about spacing.

My girls are 14.5 months apart







We did plan the spacing on purpose (we're older & didn't want to waste time), & did have to supplement w/some formula & start solids from 8 months on, as while my milk supply didn't dry up, it did drop quite a bit by my 2nd trimester. I planned to tandem, but DD#1 weaned 3 days before her sister was born. At 1 1/2 & 2 1/2 years, it's getting easier, & there's something to be said for getting the same stages over with all at once (we only planned to have 2 children), but since the infant/early toddler stages are the roughest for us, having 2 kids at there at once has been hard for us. Some families thrive on having babies around, so it's easier for them. Another one of those "it depends" answers


----------



## Sweet_Island_Mama (Sep 8, 2008)

My DC#3 and DC#4 (I'm 26 weeks pregnant) will be 15 months apart and we're really happy with how it is working out.....we wanted to have our children close together because we hope it will foster an even closer relationship between them. My husband and his 5 siblings are spaced 18 months between each of them and they are all very close. My M-I-L says that she couldn't imagine having them any other way.


----------



## Super Glue Mommy (Jan 4, 2009)

I have 3 kids ages 7months, 2y,and 3 1/2 years. Knowing WHO I know now (them) I would do it all over again. But if I had known then WHAT I know now, I would have had them further apart. The first 2 close together wasn't really an issue- but my son's learning disability was not in full swing at that point. It would have been better for him I think if I kept him and his sister 3 years apart. But then maybe she wouldnt be here and she rocks so I'm glad she is.

IDK - it definitely has its benefits having 2 close together, but in all honesty I feel like I would have been a better parent if I had them further apart. So... I'm glad I had them close together because they are all really neat kids... but at the same time, I wish I had more time to devote to each of their "babyhood" and really... at 2 and 3 years old they are still such babies, and I lost sight of that in comparing them to newborns.


----------



## somelady (Nov 16, 2008)

My brother is 14 months younger than me, not on purpose (trouble conceiving me, then he was a surprise). We swung between friendly and bitter enemies throughout growing up, and now we get along, but are not close. My mom had generally sounded positive about it before, liking being done with something (diapers, or stroller or whatever) when she was done. Now that I've had a baby though I'm hearing a lot of "well, I couldn't X because I was pregnant" comments, and he's not even 3mo yet, so she's thinking of these things even before he's the age I was when she was pregnant.


----------



## 3pink1blue (Jun 23, 2008)

mine are 13 months apart. its been really no big deal. its my older two that cause me stress, just with their daily needs.

ETA: -- NOT planned. It took 23 months to conceive DD3. I never got a period in between having DD3 and getting pregnant with DS. I was EBF on demand a hundred thousand times a day (or so it seemed.) So it can be possible.

I can tell you though, having them close together was VERY hard on my body. And I had to wean DD at 5 months because my milk dried up despite all our best efforts. What's cool is, if you count, mine are exactly one year, one month, one week, and one day apart. Try planning THAT! lol.


----------



## jennybear (Sep 4, 2007)

Some random thoughts from a non-parent:

--I am pretty sure that for the health of the mama, it's good to wait at least a full year before becoming pregnant again. You need time to fully recover and getting pregnant after only six months could be really depleting.

--I think (can't find a source to confirm this) that from an attachment perspective, around 3-4 years separation is ideal.

--Logistically, dealing with two kids in diapers seems like a nightmare, but that's obviously a personal call.

--If possible, I think it's nice to let each LO have a couple of years to be "the baby."

--I think you'll find that sibs close in age get along well/play well together while young but tend to fight more/deal more with competitiveness as they get into adolescence than those with a larger age gap.

In any case, how lovely that you're enjoying your new baby and already wanting another! GL in whatever you decide.


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Thanks everyone for your very well thought out replies. Having so many opinions from people who have BTDT (or haven't, and are happy with it) is a fabulous resource.

At this point, after reading the replies, I'm not positive that TTC soon is really the best idea. My milk drying up is a big concern of mine, and I do want to enjoy this time with my LO being a baby, and not rush through it or feel sick or exhausted while she's learning to walk, or be unable to get down on the floor and play as much as I'd like to because I'd be too giantly pregnant. While there do seem to be some advantages to having kids closer together, I'm not sure our reasons are reason enough to put my body though it again so soon, and miss out on the early baby-stages of my first child.

This of course isn't a definite decision, but now I have more thoughts to present to DH when we discuss it again... now I just need to convince him to let me stay home in between kids







:


----------



## GooeyRN (Apr 24, 2006)

Mine are 25 months apart. The first 6 months were ROUGH. I imagine it would have been rougher if they were closer in age. However, now that they are 3 and 13 months, it is sometimes easier to have 2 than have just the one. They play together great and just love each other. I would do it again this way if I could turn back time. It was really worth the rough patch to have them as playmates now. It is great, they share and play with the same toys.


----------



## Amylcd (Jun 16, 2005)

Quote:

--If possible, I think it's nice to let each LO have a couple of years to be "the baby."
They can both be the "baby". It is very possible to babywear two children, and breastfeed two children at the same time. Cosleeping together, etc. was no problem.


----------



## bc1995 (Mar 22, 2004)

Our first two are 18 months apart. We planned it that way. It has been awesome, and I am so thankful that we did. The first year (especially the first 6 months) was a ton of work, but it looks more rough looking back than I actually felt when going through it. I tandem nursed, and I feel strongly that is one of the things that made that transition easier for ds1. We spent most of our days lounging around and nursing the first year or so. We coslept with both. I just always made sure I was between the boys. I also found with tandem nursing that letting them each have their own 'side' worked well. They slept on the side of me that was theirs. We chose to start TTC when ds1 was 8 months since I felt like if I did have a decrease in supply, he could be making up for it with solids. It was not an issue until 22 weeks, and even then it did not slow down the amount he wanted to nurse. I also do not feel like their spacing made a difference in CLW. Ds1 weaned just past his 4th birthday, as did ds2. Good luck with your decision!


----------



## StormySar (Jul 21, 2006)

We have four within five years. It's been easy, I think. With our fourth I fell behind majorly with house cleaning and whatnot and am still catching up, but for the kids and dh and I emotionally I think its been pretty easy... They play well together, love to help me with the baby (the toher 3 are in the stage of wanting to help me wtih everything!) and it seems that they're so close in age, that we never "finish" one stage of anything but just move right into it with the next baby. Like diapers... We've never had one child out of diapers completely be fore the next arrived, so there was no "remembering" how to diaper or get back into the swing of things (we use cloth) with washing and whatnot.


----------



## SAHDS (Mar 28, 2008)

Ours are 16 months apart, both were surprises, and we LOVE it! I never found it hard, I thought it was actually easier because you're just doing the same things more often - more feedings, more changings, etc. My DD was really self-sufficient and she adored her baby brother (never had any jealousy problems) so that made it a lot easier too. She was a helper from day one.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *amylcd*
They can both be the "baby". It is very possible to babywear two children, and breastfeed two children at the same time. Cosleeping together, etc. was no problem.

I agree. Plus, they're *both* the babies, LOL. When they're that close, it doesn't really make any difference (imo). I mean, how can a 16 mo old *not* be the baby (even though there's another LO)??? We've never held DD more accountable or had different rules or expectations just because she's only a year older. Just like we've never babied DS more or been more lenient. Heck, they know they're both still my babies.


----------



## SAHDS (Mar 28, 2008)

OH! I just thought of a drawback. I miss my babies because it went so fast.

When you space them out, you get to enjoy your first as a "baby" for about 3 years, then you have another and they're a "baby" for 3 years. So, you get a whole 6 years of having a "baby". When you have them close, their baby years over lap so you only get maybe 4 baby years. I hope I'm explaining this in an understandable way that makes sense. Especially since those are my only 2 and we're not having more, it feels as though it flew by even quicker than it would have if they would have been further apart.


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

My DD and twin DSes are 17 months apart.

We wanted close spacing. We did NOT anticipate MZ twins.

My daughter nursed throughout my pregnancy, she did not say the milk was gone until right around the 3rd trimester. We coslept.

I did have to commit the sin of using a stroller, but the nice thing about being sleep deprived is that at least for me it helped me get over what other people thought of me.

My kids are really close. The first 2 years were extremely brutal to me, though. I have never experienced the depths of despair due to absolute exhaustion and touched outness before. After that though, it's been pretty fun.

And BTW, we cloth diapered all three, and all three of the kids self-weaned to table food.

I had a few things in my favor though. My Dh works from home (and was really essentially able to cut things down to part time or less for a year). I am an ample producer of milk and all 3 children were excellent right out of the vagina nursers. My MIL was able to come live with us for 8 weeks after the boys' births. And MOST IMPORTANTLY, all 3 of my kids were extremely easy going personalities as babies. I really dont' know what I would have done if one or more had been high needs.

So I think your experience is less about how awesome an APer/mother you are and more of a crapshoot.

The main disadvantage that I see is that I was just totally exhausted. I don't know if I suffered brain damage or what, but seriously--I'm even a different person than I was pre-twins. But for all that I know it has nothing to do with that. You also may have little dreams and fanasies stripped away from you one by one--but most of the time they'll be replaced with other ones.

I enjoyed not having to do 6 or 8 years of diapers. It was nice not having to worry so much about the older child's teeny toys because everyone kind of evolved out of the mouth phase at once (another crapshoot, since they all got done early!). It was nice that they could enjoy a lot of the same toys/activities for a long period of time.

But really, those kind of concerns really only apply to a very short period of time. I'm thankful that their personalities and inclinations seem to be realy complimentary and that they enjoy each other but I really don't think that has anything to do with me or the spacing.

I will say though that I have met A LOT of moms of multiples who conceived their MZ twins while exclusively nursing a young baby, like me. Or right after a miscarriage (like me). So just saying, you may get more than you bargained for and it sometimes can be VERY VERY hard on you in the short term.

So I would pick when *you're* prepared. Not based on what you want to happen with things beyond your control (like whether they'll be close).


----------



## Amylcd (Jun 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SAHDS* 
OH! I just thought of a drawback. I miss my babies because it went so fast.

When you space them out, you get to enjoy your first as a "baby" for about 3 years, then you have another and they're a "baby" for 3 years. So, you get a whole 6 years of having a "baby". When you have them close, their baby years over lap so you only get maybe 4 baby years. I hope I'm explaining this in an understandable way that makes sense. Especially since those are my only 2 and we're not having more, it feels as though it flew by even quicker than it would have if they would have been further apart.

I totally understand and agree. The time did seem to fly by much faster than it is now with my little one.


----------



## katheek77 (Mar 13, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tigerchild* 
I will say though that I have met A LOT of moms of multiples who conceived their MZ twins while exclusively nursing a young baby, like me. Or right after a miscarriage (like me). So just saying, you may get more than you bargained for and it sometimes can be VERY VERY hard on you in the short term.


Just an interesting fact - Di twins (dunno about mono) are DEFINITELY more likely your first few postpartum cycles or after a miscarriage - women are more likely to release multiple eggs when their body is trying to "regulate" itself again.


----------



## caro113 (Aug 25, 2008)

Thank you for posting this. I would love to start trying again and have my babies close in age. Plenty of people nurse while being pregnant and there are plenty of vitamins you can take to increase milk supply while not hurting baby. Like others have said, there are pros and cons to everything. I had two friends in high school who were 14 months apart and there extremely close. DP and his sister only got close after they both moved out and they're 4 years apart (minus 5 days), but growing up they didn't really care for each other were spaced so far that they didn't have any common friends. But then again my cousins' two boys are four years apart and they get along great, always did, so it really depends on the children and the parenting.
As far as being able to conceive again, I got my period back 6wks post baby, so for some people it is possible. Although there are plenty of moms on here who didn't get it until 20+ months!!
Good Luck in your decisions!!


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
Just an interesting fact - Di twins (dunno about mono) are DEFINITELY more likely your first few postpartum cycles or after a miscarriage - women are more likely to release multiple eggs when their body is trying to "regulate" itself again.

Yep, totally makes sense to me. I mean, I don't want to toss out "maybe you'll have twins" as a drawback, because...well, that's rude and I get really pissed when people imply that my twins are a burden or something.

But on the other hand, I know so many other MoMs who went for close spacing and got 'bonuses', and it is really hard. It might sound fun, and after a while it is...but it is something to consider if you're just barely recovered/coping with sleep dep from round one, and more than the "perfect" plan might shove you over the edge, KWIM?

I wasn't even close to the edge, and it pushed me awfully close.







Have to admit, having a pack of 3 toddlers running about the house screaming with laughter and tossing each other over babygates can be pretty fun!


----------



## BabyBugsMom (Jun 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tigerchild* 
My DD and twin DSes are 17 months apart.

I will say though that I have met A LOT of moms of multiples who conceived their MZ twins while exclusively nursing a young baby, like me. Or right after a miscarriage (like me). So just saying, you may get more than you bargained for and it sometimes can be VERY VERY hard on you in the short term.

So I would pick when *you're* prepared. Not based on what you want to happen with things beyond your control (like whether they'll be close).

This was me! Our MZ twins were born at 36 weeks, 13.5 months after our dd. It was IN.SANE. for the first year after their birth--having twins is crazy enough without having another LO only 13.5 months older--but I wouldn't change it for the world. My three bigs are the very best of friends, and it is SO fun to see them grow up together.

Our twins were almost 3yo when our next was born. #4 was 18 months when #5 was born, and #5 was 2.5yo when #6 came along.

I'd say the most difficult spacing between children (not including between our first and the twins, because that was just nutso) was the 2.5 year gap between #5 and our littlest. It could be just a personality thing, but he had the hardest transition from being the baby to being a big brother of any of our children.

I really like the 18 month age difference between #4 and #5--they're close enough to be the very best of buddies, but not so close that I felt completely overwhelmed with having two (or three!







) babies at once.


----------



## Sierra (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Amylcd* 
I totally understand and agree. The time did seem to fly by much faster than it is now with my little one.

That's very true! And it is another thing-- as parents of two spaced very close-- impacting our decision to not plan for this approach in the future.


----------



## Onemagicmummy (Jul 27, 2007)

i have 4 kids, and one on the way, they are all pretty close together.
DS1 is 6 DD1 is 4 DS2 is 3 DD2 is 15 months

DS1 was planned, DD1 was a lets have anoher baby, oh lets wait, oh dear im pregnant, there is 27 months between them.

DS2 was a OMG im pregnant when the heck did that come from!!!! he was not planned, there is 12 months and 17days between DD1 and DS2. it was hard, the first 6 months were a blur, a newborn and a walking 12 month old was HARD. but i was lucky that DD1 was a easy laid back baby, she slept throught at 12 weeks, she was in her own room by 9 months, she coud entertain herself while i nursed the baby.

once DS2 hit 6months ish it got a lot easier. i decided that i wanted another one while DS2 was still young as i had done baby/toddler before i can do it again. when he was 15 months old i got pregnant with DD2. there is 22 months between them. it was a breeze. DD1 was a fairly easy baby, i carried her for 4 month almost none stop in a wrap. it was like she jsut slotted on with us all.

she is 15 months old now, and im around 8 weeks with number 5. DD2 will be 23 months old when the baby is due.

once i did the whole baby/newborn/toddler thing i felt i could do it again.

after DS2 i decieded tohave the rest close together to get teh whole nappy/broken sleep thing done, by the time the youngest is 18 i will be 46 so till young enought to go do my own thing.

there are downsides but its not oo bad. its never quiet, we eat a loaf and a half of bread a day, fruit disapears in an instant, they all grow out of their clothes at the same time, same with shoes, it wil get more expensive as they get older.
if the baby is born in teh month it due (august) i wil have 5 sequential birthdays (July. August, September, October, November, then its chritmas)

ok i completely lost what i was saying as DD2 is climbing on me!

sorry.

Kiz


----------



## Justmee (Jun 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Amylcd* 
My oldest two are 15 months apart, and it was never difficult. We did not do it on purpose, but I'm glad it worked out this way.









:

Except 1&2 are 17 months older than #3. It's been a wonderful spacing for us and I'm glad it worked out that way.

The baby is almost 3 years younger than Rivka. There are some great things about that spacing too, but I love how my big three girls are best friends, go to bed together, wake up together, have similar interests, etc.


----------



## mytwogirls (Jan 3, 2008)

Mine are 16 months apart and I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!! I was not using birth control when I conceived DD2, but I was nursing full time, no period but I knew I could get pregnant. I found out on Thanksgiving Day but didn't tell DH until Christmas Eve with an ultrasound in the card







He was so happy and we loved having them close together. The benefits are endless, they are playmates, use the same toys, do the same activities, are interested in the same things. The drawbacks: SLEEP! I was up all night with the newborn, then I could not sleep when she did because I had a 16 month old dying to chase me around the house







It was hard in the beginning I will be honest. But once the girls got settled in to the routine they made (I let them make their own and followed, it worked like a charm. Both were sleeping at the same time!) it got a lot easier. Now it is really easy. I don't know any different than what I have. I recommend it if you have a lot of energy and patience!


----------



## OkiMom (Nov 21, 2007)

My two are 22 months apart, it wasn't planned or unplanned. We started talking about wanting another when DD1 was 10 months old. I got pregnant when she was 11 months and miscarried the day before her first birthday. I got pregnant again the next month. It has its good moments and bad moments. DD2 is a night owl, she LOVES to be awake between 10pm and 1am, DD1 is a morning person, shes up between 6-7am. There are days were I put a short movie on or give DD1 a special activity so I can take a catnap (Im in the same, child friendly room with her so shes safe and if she gets upset she knows she can wake me up without me being mad)


----------



## mags (May 4, 2004)

Mine are 18 mo apart. It was really, really hard and I don't think I coped well at all. They are very close, so luckily, I have been able to see the benefit of that. However, I really wish I would have made it easier for myself by spacing out my kids out a little bit better. I also felt a lot of guilt. Guilt for my oldest for no longer getting my undivided attn, and guilt for my youngest, b/c I was constantly having to chase after my oldest one and he didn't get as much time with me 1-1. It was a battle of trying to find a balance.

For me, we had infertility issues ttc #1, he was my Clomid baby. So, we thought it would take another 2 yrs+ to ttc for another child. Started to ttc when my oldest was still under a yr old and were VERY surprised that I got pregnant on the first try and w/o any help (and it stuck) so quickly. If I would have known it would be that easy, we would have waited. Now I am expecting baby #3, he/she will be almost exactly 4 yrs apart from my youngest. I think I will feel a lot less overwhelmed this time around. My older two are, "easier" now, b/c they are more independent, my oldest will be in K next yr and my 2nd will be in preschool, I'll have a little bit of time for just the baby and myself. I feel a lot more prepared this time to deal with baby #3, than baby #2. I look back now and think I was crazy for having two kids 18 months apart. I survived, just barely...


----------



## Marylizah (Jun 17, 2005)

I don't think I could be the mother I want to be to two children close in age.

And as for both kids getting to be the baby, I disagree that they both get to be babies. One always has to wait while mama deals with the other one. There's only so much mama, and no matter how much you baby-wear or breastfeed, other interactions NEED to be one-on-one and some of that gets sacrificed when you have two very small children. I love that DS has gotten so much undivided attention. I hope number 2 will get a comparable amount as well.

DS was a very high-needs kiddo, from birth. The sleep deprivation the first year was brutal. Breastfeeding a full two years was EXTREMELY important to me. And I feel like women's bodies really do need time to recover from pregnancy and birth. The thought of having a second one gave me chills for the first 18 months of DS' life.

I would have liked to space my kiddos three years apart. Unfortunately, life had other plans. I'm not sure when I'll get to TTC, but it looks like our kids will be 4 years apart, possibly more.

Those are my reasons for not spacing children closely, YMMV.


----------



## Amylcd (Jun 16, 2005)

Quote:

And as for both kids getting to be the baby, I disagree that they both get to be babies. One always has to wait while mama deals with the other one
This is simply not true. If you have not been in this situation, you have no idea how it works. It may seem like it is not possible to give each child the one-on-one time they need, but it most definitely is.


----------



## Fridaxsky (Jan 17, 2007)

Our kids will be 20 months apart. We started TTC when DD was 10 months, got pregnant when she was 11 months, though we started talking seriously about TTC when she was 8 months - no AF at that point though, so it was more "we'll see what happens". I'm glad that they will be so close together and having a toddler has kept me nice and active this pregnancy - more tired for sure, but no time to whine about it too much. I am very lucky to have relatively easy pregnancies physically though, so that is something to consider. If we go for more, we plan to keep about the same spacing between all the subsequent kids, though we'll see once #2 gets here if we're up for it









One of the major motivations for having our kids close was to be able to be fully immersed in the 'baby stage' for a few years, then move on from it. I love newborns, nursing, CDing, cosleeping and all of the baby stuff, but I will also be very glad to have older kids and all the fun that brings. Both DH and I did not want to have a few years off from the baby stuff, only to get right back into it.

I have 3 sisters - the oldest and I are 19 months apart, me and #3 are 22 months apart, and me and #4 are almost 5 years apart. I am the closest with #3, but I really feel like that is more of a birth order/personality thing than the actual spacing. Overall, all 4 of us are very close and I DO think that has to do with how close everyone is in age. It is also nice, now that we are having kids, that all of the cousins are close in age - my youngest sister and our new baby will only be 4 months apart, DD has a cousin only a year older than her.

Good luck with whatevery you decide!


----------



## Getz (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marylizah* 
And as for both kids getting to be the baby, I disagree that they both get to be babies. One always has to wait while mama deals with the other one. There's only so much mama, and no matter how much you baby-wear or breastfeed, other interactions NEED to be one-on-one and some of that gets sacrificed when you have two very small children.

Since you don't have two kids, I am not sure how you can make that judgement. Both my kids were essentially babies at the same time (my hat's off to twin moms for sure!). And, I disagree that every interaction NEEDS to be one on one. My children absolutely benefit from being together with me as much as they benefit from one on one time with me. They play together and comfort each other. And, my older one bonded deeply with his father when his sister was a newborn as daddy took over more of his responsibilities. I am sure some would see that as a bad thing, but I think it is a great thing!

Some of my favorite memories as a child were with BOTH my sister and my mother. Whether it was snuggling in bed or riding horses, it included both of them. I never felt slighted by my sister (we were 18 mos apart) nor she me.

Different mothers are suited for different things. Just because I couldn't successfully mother 5 kids doesn't mean other women can't. And I would never presume otherwise.


----------



## ann_of_loxley (Sep 21, 2007)

Quote:

To those who waited longer between kids- I guess same questions? For comparison purposes.
I dont have a second child yet, but we are TTC and I guess the gap is going to be what is considered 'big' to most people - 4+ years.

This was planned though - for many reasons.

The first off the top of my head for not having a small age gap - and I wouldn't recommend a small age gap (that are not really 'personal' reasons - just common sense):

1). Body. Your body needs time to heal. Pregnancy and birth is a big thing for it and it needs time to recover. Generally, they say to give your body at least 14 months to recover if you had a smooth easy pregnancy and childbirth - more if otherwise.

2). Breastfeeding/breastmilk. Only something like 30% of woman are able to keep their breastmilk during pregnancy. Its personally not something worth risking with a baby so young. I personally would like to let my child self wean before I risk my milk drying up - But many people are happy with allowing their child to have at least 2 years of breastmilk before they take their chances. You might want to think about how you feel about breastfeeding - and remember, there is more to breastmilk than just nutrion... A lot of other reasons I would not want to mess with that. Not to mention, that even if you did keep your milk - its pretty painful during pregnancy with such super sensitive nipples, and whilst you might like the idea of tandem feeding and some mothers can/do do it...its not always as straight forward as you might think!

The rest of my reasons are personal and because they are personal, they are going to vary from family to family because every mother is different, and so is every child - hence difference age gaps will be 'best' for different families meaning there is no 'one' answer. But my main personal reason to have a larger age gap is because I felt that the bond/attachment/connection between my son and I needed to be stable/settled/etc before I introduced another memeber of the family. I simply could not be the mother I want to be, and feel that I _should_ be with a small age gap. I not only had to think of my wants, desires, capablities as a mother/woman - but as DS was also a part of our family I felt it was pretty important that I thought of him too - his wants, desires and capabilties - and for us, that meant him having a good few years with just me before introducing a sibling. Now he is old enough for this sort of change in his life and all the little differences in him now will really help when that change happens. (such as the fact that he can talk, walk, take himself to the toilet, basic understandings, understands cause and effect, emotions/feeling communication, etc)

No matter what gap you choose - what you can not gurantee either way is wether or not your children will be 'close'. Their bond has not much to do with age gap - but how the parents handle the growing sibling relationship. Of course, age gap can affect how the parents handle it all! (which is part of my personal reason for choosing the large age gap - I like my sleep and know for certain I would not be able to cope with two who woke frequently in the night! lol)


----------



## Sheal (Apr 19, 2007)

Mine are 8, 7, 5, 3 and almost 2. Two oldest are 12.5 months apart.

I find my kids very in tune with each other and they are very, very close emotionally with each other. Yeah, it's difficult when they are all in their 2's and 3's and doing the "testing" of their environment and the people in that environment but it's worth it to see them grow up together so close like that. I like seeing the emotional bonds they have with each other, how they support each other and play together so well.

Mind you it's not all rainbows and roses all the time. They do have their moments where they fight like cat and dog and get on each others nerves but that's normal too. I say follow your heart and do what you feel is best for you because not every situation works for every person. To each their own is my motto.

Congrats on the little baby girl!


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Amylcd* 
This is simply not true. If you have not been in this situation, you have no idea how it works. It may seem like it is not possible to give each child the one-on-one time they need, but it most definitely is.

I think that this would have to factor in both the mothers personality (I know my sister, for example, would feel horrible guilt and would barely be able to cope. I might be OK with it, however) and the personalities of your children. If your children are high needs, for example, then it would be a lot harder to give them the attention that they need.

Im still catching up- so many fabulous posts from everyone, thank you all so much!


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

I think at this point, if i was to follow my heart (or in this case, my gut) I think the main reasons I'm thinking about having kids so close together is fear. I'm thinking about doing Midwife training starting in the fall, but I know that if I'm pregnant I wouldn't do it. I LOVE the idea of being a midwife, and I'm excited about the prospect, but I'm so scared of failing that I almost don't want to start, just in case.

My husband and I have talked it over, and he is willing to support me 100% through my schooling, and enjoys the idea of being a SAHD while I work so that I don't have the heart-wrenching decision of day care/ public schooling, etc, to contend with as well.

We're still talking it over, but I'm not sure I'm willing to sacrifice my health, my breastfeeding relationship, or my time with my little one (2 children under the age of 2 with a dog while my husband works overnights- leaving me alone all day while he sleeps and all night while he's gone- isn't a smart decision, I don't think. I would be so horribly drained).

If I knew in my heart of hearts that this was the right thing to do, given where we are now, and felt strongly enough about getting the baby years over quickly and having them play together well, etc, then I would do it in a second. But my gut feeling says "no," and if I were to look back and say, "I did this because I was scared to go to school?!?!" I just wonder what regrets I might come up with instead.

Thank you all for your help, information, and support. I am overwhelmed by the response! (not actually, but I am surprised that so many have taken time out of their busy days to answer my questions).


----------



## Jennifer3141 (Mar 7, 2004)

My two are 14 months apart. DD was 5 months old when I got pregnant again. Both pregnancies were completet and utter surprises.

I had some guilt with DD because my milk dried up when she was about 7 months old. We had to use forumla. But as soon as we were all gathered again, she tandem nursed like a pro.









Some of my most amazing memories of the two of them have them nursing to sleep holding hands. That does mean that my boobs can now be tucked under my arms at this point but, oh well.









My kids are incredibly close. And they've always played with each others' toys so DD has a lot of MLPs and DD has a collection of Disney Cars. They share a passion for bugs, dinosaurs, and books.

DS turned out to be a child who just needs more care. DD turned out to be an amazing big sister. They do fight. They fight all day long. But the spats are quick and if anyone else gets in the way - look out! Disciplining one means disciplining both. They behave like twins in some respects.

I do think that I mentally spaced out on DS' first year. There is so much I don't remember at all because I had some serious sleep deprivation going on and well, TWO babies.

I am so happy with things now though. Watching them fight for the other, defend the other, love, hug, and work together is the best part of my day. Although they do gang up on me!!

I just want to add one more baby to the mix and then I'll be perfectly content. I cna't wait to see both of my kids be big siblings to a baby together. I so hope it happens.








That would be a much bigger gap though.


----------



## prothyraia (Feb 12, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *caro113* 
Plenty of people nurse while being pregnant and there are plenty of vitamins you can take to increase milk supply while not hurting baby.

I know the OP has already made her decision, but I had to chime in here.

Yes, there are supplements you can take while pregnant that can help milk supply BUT there is still no guarantee that you won't lose your milk. Hormones are the main factor. Most women will have a significant reduction in milk supply regardless of what they do.

If not being able to breastfeed your older child would be devastating to either you or the child, getting pregnant is a poor choice. (you can certainly still dry-nurse until your milk comes back in, though. I did!)

I had my two as close together as I felt I possibly could (conceived the second when my first was 11 months old), and while I'm absolutely *delighted* with how things have turned out, any more children I have will ideally be spaced further apart. My secondborn is seriously the easiest, most mellow baby in the entire world, and the first 6 months were still pretty challenging. The two of them are fascinated with one another though


----------



## mytwogirls (Jan 3, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marylizah* 
I don't think I could be the mother I want to be to two children close in age.

*And as for both kids getting to be the baby, I disagree that they both get to be babies. One always has to wait while mama deals with the other one. There's only so much mama, and no matter how much you baby-wear or breastfeed, other interactions NEED to be one-on-one and some of that gets sacrificed when you have two very small children.* I love that DS has gotten so much undivided attention. I hope number 2 will get a comparable amount as well.

I HAVE two girls who are 16 months apart and yes they did get to be babies together because they WERE babies together. I nursed them together, bathed them together and yes they did get one on one time with me because Dh would play with one and would play with one and switch. It depends on your parenting style. I don't quite understand what you mean by interactions NEED to be one on one, but I can't shut one kid in a closet while I play with another one. That is perfectly fine your DS has gotten so much undivided attention. I think you will see what we mean when you have another child. Both children can be demanding at the same time. For me having them 16 months apart worked great because their needs were quite similar. Both wanted to rest at the same time, both wanted to eat, and so on. It worked great. Plus I am a SAHM so I can have more attention with my girls. And yes, you have to have a certain personality I think to have two children close together in age and patience is a must.


----------



## Marylizah (Jun 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mytwogirls* 
I HAVE two girls who are 16 months apart and yes they did get to be babies together because they WERE babies together. I nursed them together, bathed them together and yes they did get one on one time with me because Dh would play with one and would play with one and switch. It depends on your parenting style. I don't quite understand what you mean by interactions NEED to be one on one, but I can't shut one kid in a closet while I play with another one. That is perfectly fine your DS has gotten so much undivided attention. I think you will see what we mean when you have another child. Both children can be demanding at the same time. For me having them 16 months apart worked great because their needs were quite similar. Both wanted to rest at the same time, both wanted to eat, and so on. It worked great. Plus I am a SAHM so I can have more attention with my girls. And yes, you have to have a certain personality I think to have two children close together in age and patience is a must.









I'm not trying to offend anyone who has chosen to have kids spaced closely. I do think that some interactions (I didn't say all, but certainly some) need to be one-on-one because kids thrive on one-on-one attention. And I think having two young, needy kids means that they get less attention than they might ideally need or want.

Personally, I would struggle with horrible guilt about "sacrificing" one kid's needs to meet the other one's needs. And that is why I don't have two kids spaced closely.







To mamas who make it work, my hat is off to you.

OP, definitely go with your gut!







I agree that fear is not a good reason to have another child.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marylizah* 
I'm not trying to offend anyone who has chosen to have kids spaced closely. I do think that some interactions (I didn't say all, but certainly some) need to be one-on-one because kids thrive on one-on-one attention. And I think having two young, needy kids means that they get less attention than they might ideally need or want.

*Personally, I would struggle with horrible guilt about "sacrificing" one kid's needs to meet the other one's needs. And that is why I don't have two kids spaced closely.







To mamas who make it work, my hat is off to you.*

OP, definitely go with your gut!







I agree that fear is not a good reason to have another child.

But it very well IS possible to spend one-on-one time with closely space (or several) children. I don't think you understand this because you only have one, and when you have one, that child is your whole world and you probably wonder how on earth anyone else has time for another kid considering you give 100% to the one you have now.

Also, the part of your statement that I bolded: you should probably not plan on any more kids, regardless of how far they are spaced because you will HAVE to "sacrifice" one's need for the other's at some point. SO is life, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

ETA: and I'm not trying to pick on you, Marylizah. I just think your opinion might offend other's who either have closely spaced children or several LO's (or both) and what is 'too small of an age gap' is always subjective anyway. I know some people think all my kids are super close together but they are all 2 yrs apart, which was perfect for us. Other's may think 3 yrs is too close, or 18 mos, or whatever they consider "babyhood" and the most challenging time (diapers, nursing, not sleeping thru the night, not talking well, etc.,)

I also did not mean to say, you should not have any more kids, that came out wrong. I just meant that no matter the gap, somone will have to wait. Maybe more so if they are younger and less independant but it really just depends on the kid.


----------



## ann_of_loxley (Sep 21, 2007)

Quote:

Also, the part of your statement that I bolded: you should probably not plan on any more kids, regardless of how far they are spaced because you will HAVE to "sacrifice" one's need for the other's at some point. SO is life, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.
Hmmm... I am going to reply to this because I think I know where she is coming from in this respect. It is one (of the personal) reason why we have decided on having a larger age gap than most - and it is something that I have spent a lot of time thinking about and feel very strongly about for _my_ family. But I am going to add a disclaimer here because I do not want this to come out the wrong way and if you read this and are offended or think I think you are a horrible parent or something because you have a small age gap - then please do forgive me because I do not mean it that way. I do not really care if you have a 7 month age gap (the world record so far! lol) or a 17 year age gap! lol I know each family and each child are different - each to their own and all of that.

For me - and we try our best to live consensually/TCC, so its not that I am child centred because I am far from that (if you know anything about consensual/TCC philosophy you will get the general idea) - the first few years of a childs life are so important, espeically that 'one on one' time with mummy and daddy and other close family and friends. But I think there is a big difference in the 'sacrafice' you have to/might make with a baby vs. and older child. For example, you are right...someone at some point in time is just going to have to _wait a second_ becuase there is only one of you and two or more children - thats common sense...logistics, etc. But...What is more 'damaging' (though damaging isnt really the right word it will be close enough for now! lol)...a _baby_ crying having to wait whilst you deal with _another_ baby? Or an older child (this will vary from child to child of course because children develop differently in this respect - some at 3 and maybe some not until 5+!) who knows a bit about patience and others needs and whom you can communicate with (and problem sovle together via the spoken communication you use in your family) waiting whilst you deal with a baby crying?

The world is a big bad tough place...thats life right? I do not feel I need to rough and tough my son up though to show him that (he will learn that in his own time and he has/is - Already he knows, though disapointed, that I can just not defy the laws of physics to make him happy though I wish I could! lol). And in the same respect, I am not sure how I would feel - or what that could do to my son having to stretch to meet the tough hard cold facts of life before _he_ was ready when _I_ decided to change his life by bringing another baby into it.

When DS was only 3 months old, I was broody like no tomorrow. Wanting but waiting this long has been hard - but I knew it was the best for our family despite my own desires, sometimes I have to think of others as well. If anything, being a parent has taught me how to be selfless and patience! hehe Sure, I could have gone along with my desires but I can guess how that would make me feel now (and part of that would have been the feeling that I would have cheated my son of something he had the right to) - and how that would have affected my DS. I picture everyday situations and then throw a baby of various ages into that picture to see how it will play out. When he was younger, and experiencing deep emotions he didn't know how to handle or what to do with at the age of two...I am pretty sure it would not have been nice for either of us for me to have to tell him something he could not understand (such as the general idea of waiting and patience) whilst I had to attend to 'the baby' because babies have real important immediate needs as well (like being fed! lol). Or how a baby would have felt and/or been affected by me leaving them to attend to a small child who also have real important and immediate needs. Of course, I am not saying the same logisitcs and common sense do not play the same role with a large age gap...they do but because I have waited, I know my son is not going to be 'changed/damaged' in any way (emotional, developmentally, etc) by having to 'wait a second' whilst I meet a babies important immediate needs at the time because now at his age he understands these things.... Is any of this making sense? lol (and dont tell me I only feel this way because I only have one child who is my 100%!... I could bring up the fact that I have had two miscarriages recently and thats probably not the best thing to say to someone in my state...or the fact that I childmind/nanny/babysit babies and children of all ages with my son so do have experience of having more than one child in my care, or my parenting philosophy which has a lot to say about this in practicle terms, etc etc...one child - one hundred, I would still feel this way! lol)

Of course, I also feel that parenting the way I choose also has its benefits when considering siblings of any age gap. For example, I co sleep (this is a great bonding time for all the family!) and wear baby in a sling continously for a good part of their first year (which is fantastic for breastfeeding hands free and meeting all of babies needs hands free as well which can help if you need those hands for your other child/children). If an accident would have happened, I am sure I would have coped and so would my son - but I would never _choose_ a small age gap.

When I consider myself _and_ my son - a larger age gap seems the natural thing to do for us - which is why we have gone that route.


----------



## mytwogirls (Jan 3, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife* 
But it very well IS possible to spend one-on-one time with closely space (or several) children. I don't think you understand this because you only have one, and when you have one, that child is your whole world and you probably wonder how on earth anyone else has time for another kid considering you give 100% to the one you have now.

I agree 100 percent here because I used to think "Wow how will I have time with TWO children?" But it IS possible and I do make it work. I have a very cooperate DH who jumps right in after a long day at work to help out around the house and fixes dinner and cleans up while bathe the girls. It is QUITE doable to have two children close together and give them PLENTY of attention, love and one on one time.


----------



## Liquesce (Nov 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mytwogirls* 
I agree 100 percent here because I used to think "Wow how will I have time with TWO children?" But it IS possible and I do make it work. I have a very cooperate DH who jumps right in after a long day at work to help out around the house and fixes dinner and cleans up while bathe the girls. It is QUITE doable to have two children close together and give them PLENTY of attention, love and one on one time.

















I agree. And I did it as a completely single mom for the first five months. The *kinds* of attention a newborn and a very young toddler need are very different and can be made to be complimentary. The first week or two was rough; the rest has been a relative cakewalk ... sometimes a little maddening, but mostly a lot of fun. I didn't intend to have two so close together, but were pregnancy not so hard on me I wouldn't hesitate to do it again.


----------



## luv_my_babes (Dec 8, 2008)

My kids are 15 months apart. Neither of them were 'planned' but I am very happy that they are so close in age.
Even though they are not the same gender, and have different interests (ds LOVES dinosaurs and dragons, dd loves princesses) they are the best of friends.
I'm happy that they are so close in age, as I never had a sibing close in age to me (my brother was almost 10 years younger than me) and I always felt really lonely growing up.

Granted, they both have their 'moments' when they are sick of each other, and usually I suggest that they play apart for a while.

It wasn't really that hard having them so close, my older child was so young when the 2nd one came along that he didn't fully understand and was not really jealous (although maybe it helps that I have really easygoing children).

HTH


----------



## ~PurityLake~ (Jul 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jennifer3141* 
My two are 14 months apart. DD was 5 months old when I got pregnant again.

I had some guilt with DD because my milk dried up when she was about 7 months old. We had to use forumla. But as soon as we were all gathered again, she tandem nursed like a pro.









Some of my most amazing memories of the two of them have them nursing to sleep holding hands. That does mean that my boobs can now be tucked under my arms at this point but, oh well.









My kids are incredibly close. And they've always played with each others' toys.

I am so happy with things now though. Watching them fight for the other, defend the other, love, hug, and work together is the best part of my day.

All of what I quoted from your post I could have written. I didn't plan to have two girls so close in age. Sophia defied two forms of birth control with her strong will to exist.

Abigail was/is a very high needs child, so when Sophia was born, I thought she was SOOOO easy. But I suppose she only seemed easier in comparison to Abigail.

Also, Sophia is very independent. Both my girls were walking by 10 months and climbing by a year.

There have been a couple nights that my mom has taken Abigail for overnights with her and Sophia was absolutely heartbroken and was yelling out the window while crying "Abigail, Come back, I miss you, Abigail!' over and over again. They just love each other so much.


----------



## prothyraia (Feb 12, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marylizah* 
I'm not trying to offend anyone who has chosen to have kids spaced closely. I do think that some interactions (I didn't say all, but certainly some) need to be one-on-one because kids thrive on one-on-one attention. And I think having two young, needy kids means that they get less attention than they might ideally need or want.

Personally, I would struggle with horrible guilt about "sacrificing" one kid's needs to meet the other one's needs.

Okay, but...what about parents with twins/triplets/etc.? I understand what folks are saying about attention and particularly consensual living, but to suggest that it's *impossible* to fully meet the needs of two very young children is just plain wrong. Is it harder? Certainly. Are parents of multiples or those who have children close together doomed to cause their children to suffer from a certain about of emotional neglect? I don't think so.


----------



## Dov'sMom (Jan 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ann_of_loxley* 
have real important and immediate needs. Of course, I am not saying the same logisitcs and common sense do not play the same role with a large age gap...they do but because I have waited, I know my son is not going to be 'changed/damaged' in any way (emotional, developmentally, etc) by having to 'wait a second' whilst I meet a babies important immediate needs at the time because now at his age he understands these things....

What "damages/changes" a child is often very different from what you expect. My mother had me when DB was 19 mo; my sister is 24 months younger than me, the next another 24 month gap, and then there are twins who came 4.5 years later. Let me tell you, my second sister (who was 4.5 when the next children came along) had by FAR the hardest time adjusting to the change. My husband has a friend who was 5 when his brother was born and still remembers the hurt and rejection he felt. Granted, that guy has other issues, but waiting until the first is several years old is no recipe for instant sibling success.

My DS1 was 14 mo when DS2 was born. They're now 25 and 11 months old. Yes, it was very hard on my, but DS1 is a happy, well-adjusted toddler who loves his brother to pieces and has absolutely no memory of being an "only." I know that he needs alone time with me, and he gets it.


----------



## Ceinwen (Jul 1, 2004)

I think you really need more info on the close spacing issue: mother's temperament, children's temperament, help, etc.

My best friend and next door neighbour has two boys 11 months apart - she conceived right at the six week postpartum mark, and her second little guy came a bit early.

I was reading her this thread, and she literally cried. The past two years have been a nightmare for her. Many, many nights I took the older or younger little one to give her a break.

They are both high needs, her milk dried up, her older lo wouldn't go back to the breast, and she definitely, definitely feels her older son was shortchanged.

Many times they would both be crying inconsolably, and I would get a middle of the night phone call to come and save her. Her dp is a good guy, but he was deployed overseas at the time.

I'm really glad to hear all the positive stories of babes close together, but there are other, much more difficult experiences too.

(I actually have her older lo here tonight. Her younger lo is teething, and she can't seem to catch a break either way!)


----------



## Jennifer3141 (Mar 7, 2004)

About the milk thing: you may have no control over it at all. I nursed DD through my entire pregnancy. It hurt like (insert expletive of your choice here) but it was very important to DD. I had NO idea that I wasn't producing milk until her 6 month checkup when she actually weighed a little less than she did at 4 months.

We felt like idiots when the pediatrician asked if I was sure I was producing milk and I tried expressing and found nothing there. Doh!

I consulted a very knowledgable herbalist and some of the stuff we considered can also be used as an abortifact. So those were out. And then I just decided that I wans't willing to experiment with anything new in my body when my son was in there.

So I dry nursed DD though my pregnancy and bottle fed her too.

Our first year together was nice. It passed in a blur but it was nice. Our second year was harder but that was because DS was having a really hard time with life. It's getting easier with every year they grow older too.


----------



## Multimomma (Jan 25, 2008)

I also had two close together, my #3 and #4 are 14 months apart, and it was awesome (even taking into account that I had two older children, aged five and three) As babies they were like twins, always with each other, nursing together, sharing everything. As a ten and almost nine year old, it is like an ongoing sleepover....they're best friends. They get along with just about everybody else, but they save everything for each other. They have their arguments as well, don't get me wrong, but they are like the arguments an old married couple have.









My boys are further apart, two years and three years, and while they play together, they don't often choose too, and the developmental stages are so far apart that it's not as easy. JME, of course.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Astraia* 
If I knew in my heart of hearts that this was the right thing to do, given where we are now, and felt strongly enough about getting the baby years over quickly and having them play together well, etc, then I would do it in a second. But my gut feeling says "no," and if I were to look back and say, "I did this because I was scared to go to school?!?!" I just wonder what regrets I might come up with instead.

I think your gut is all you can really trust with this kind of decision. Other people's experiences, while interesting, aren't really going to be any kind of predictor...too many variables.

For example, I am struggling with two that are three years apart. I feel like I am totally cheating my daughter most days because I cannot give her the attention she needs even though many people would assume by her age she would be more independent. Yet, other mothers here seem to have no problem managing kids much closer together. Different mamas, different kids.


----------



## Babina's Mommy (Dec 27, 2008)

This thread is all very interesting and hits close to home...I found out I was pregnant recently and am already more than halfway through the pregnancy. I became pregnant when my daughter was 13 months, and she will be 22 months when the next one gets here. I honestly would've spaced mine apart further, even though 22 months isn't even too close, compared to some others. But it was all a complete surprise. I was nursing a lot still and not even having regular cycles when I became pregnant. I am not ready to stop nursing my daughter or stop co-sleeping, so I'm still doing both and plan to even when new baby boy shows up, as long as I can and as long as daughter wants to. I too have had fears about her having to sacrifice because of the new baby and I've cried over this, but with the next coming, the only thing I can do is deal with it. There's nothing else to do but....just make it work.


----------



## traceface (Feb 17, 2003)

Quote:

When he was younger, and experiencing deep emotions he didn't know how to handle or what to do with at the age of two...I am pretty sure it would not have been nice for either of us for me to have to tell him something he could not understand (such as the general idea of waiting and patience) whilst I had to attend to 'the baby' because babies have real important immediate needs as well
I agree with this. There is a world of difference between 1) a 2year old w/ no concept of time, who just feels 'Mama is holding this other guy when I need her2) a 4 or 5 year old who can happily look forward to "their" time later when the baby is settled.

It's amazing to see how much my older one understands about babies, their needs - he's the one urgently saying, "mama, mama, he needs you!" if I take like an extra 10 seconds putting down whatever I'm doing when the baby cries.

My children are 5 years apart. I really love it. I wouldn't have traded the intensity of the first few years with my first for anything. And now I get to really give my new baby the best of myself. I see all those mamas with a 2 year old and a newborn and I tell ya , it looks like they are just not enjoying it that much. it's hard to be that tired and pulled on.
Maybe some of you who are posting here are pulling it off with much more grace and happiness, sounds like it from your posts.

But 2 kids that close in age is quite a piece of work and takes a special type of mother, who is naturally very grounded/emotionally healthy and has lots of family support around her.


----------



## Marylizah (Jun 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife* 

Also, the part of your statement that I bolded: you should probably not plan on any more kids, regardless of how far they are spaced because you will HAVE to "sacrifice" one's need for the other's at some point. SO is life, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.


Ummm.... ouch. Thanks for the clarification, I guess







. I agree that kids always have to do a little sacrificing when there is a sibling in the picture. To me there's a big difference between asking a 3-4 year old to be patient while mama helps the baby, and asking a 15 month old to do the same thing.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ann_of_loxley* 
But I think there is a big difference in the 'sacrafice' you have to/might make with a baby vs. and older child. For example, you are right...someone at some point in time is just going to have to _wait a second_ becuase there is only one of you and two or more children - thats common sense...logistics, etc. But...What is more 'damaging' (though damaging isnt really the right word it will be close enough for now! lol)...a _baby_ crying having to wait whilst you deal with _another_ baby? Or an older child (this will vary from child to child of course because children develop differently in this respect - some at 3 and maybe some not until 5+!) who knows a bit about patience and others needs and whom you can communicate with (and problem sovle together via the spoken communication you use in your family) waiting whilst you deal with a baby crying?

.....
When I consider myself _and_ my son - a larger age gap seems the natural thing to do for us - which is why we have gone that route.









:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Liquesce* 







I agree. And I did it as a completely single mom for the first five months. The *kinds* of attention a newborn and a very young toddler need are very different and can be made to be complimentary. The first week or two was rough; the rest has been a relative cakewalk ... sometimes a little maddening, but mostly a lot of fun. I didn't intend to have two so close together, but were pregnancy not so hard on me I wouldn't hesitate to do it again.

Maybe newborn + toddler is easy, but the mamas I know who have two closely spaced seem to struggle more as the kids get older. Two young toddlers seems particularly difficult.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *prothyraia* 
Okay, but...what about parents with twins/triplets/etc.? I understand what folks are saying about attention and particularly consensual living, but to suggest that it's *impossible* to fully meet the needs of two very young children is just plain wrong. Is it harder? Certainly. Are parents of multiples or those who have children close together doomed to cause their children to suffer from a certain about of emotional neglect? I don't think so.

To me that's a totally separate issue. Twins/triplets aren't usually planned, they're a blessing, of course, but not something you have much control over. Of course you make things work, and there's love and all that. But life has got to be harder than with a singleton, I don't think any twin/trip mom would disagree.

And we're talking here about mamas who CHOOSE to space their kids closely, not those who don't, or those who are blessed with more than one at a time.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nursemummy* 

My best friend and next door neighbour has two boys 11 months apart - she conceived right at the six week postpartum mark, and her second little guy came a bit early.

I was reading her this thread, and she literally cried. The past two years have been a nightmare for her. Many, many nights I took the older or younger little one to give her a break.

They are both high needs, her milk dried up, her older lo wouldn't go back to the breast, and she definitely, definitely feels her older son was shortchanged.

Many times they would both be crying inconsolably, and I would get a middle of the night phone call to come and save her. Her dp is a good guy, but he was deployed overseas at the time.

I'm really glad to hear all the positive stories of babes close together, but there are other, much more difficult experiences too.

(I actually have her older lo here tonight. Her younger lo is teething, and she can't seem to catch a break either way!)

Yes, this is the kind of situation I hear about most. I have several friends who have closely spaced children and their lives seem much, much harder and more of a struggle. I'm glad to see so many positive stories here, too, but they don't reflect my friends' experiences very much.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
I think your gut is all you can really trust with this kind of decision. Other people's experiences, while interesting, aren't really going to be any kind of predictor...too many variables.

For example, I am struggling with two that are three years apart. I feel like I am totally cheating my daughter most days because I cannot give her the attention she needs even though many people would assume by her age she would be more independent. Yet, other mothers here seem to have no problem managing kids much closer together. Different mamas, different kids.









:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *traceface* 
I agree with this. There is a world of difference between 1) a 2year old w/ no concept of time, who just feels 'Mama is holding this other guy when I need her2) a 4 or 5 year old who can happily look forward to "their" time later when the baby is settled.

It's amazing to see how much my older one understands about babies, their needs - he's the one urgently saying, "mama, mama, he needs you!" if I take like an extra 10 seconds putting down whatever I'm doing when the baby cries.

My children are 5 years apart. I really love it. I wouldn't have traded the intensity of the first few years with my first for anything. And now I get to really give my new baby the best of myself. I see all those mamas with a 2 year old and a newborn and I tell ya , it looks like they are just not enjoying it that much. it's hard to be that tired and pulled on.
Maybe some of you who are posting here are pulling it off with much more grace and happiness, sounds like it from your posts.

But 2 kids that close in age is quite a piece of work and takes a special type of mother, who is naturally very grounded/emotionally healthy and has lots of family support around her.









:

Once again, I wasn't trying to offend anyone. Just explaining my reasons for having a larger gap. Everyone does what works best for them and their families.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marylizah* 
Ummm.... ouch. Thanks for the clarification, I guess







. I agree that kids always have to do a little sacrificing when there is a sibling in the picture. To me there's a big difference between asking a 3-4 year old to be patient while mama helps the baby, and asking a 15 month old to do the same thing.

.

oh, sheesh! did you read my entire post? because I ETA that I didn't mean to say you shouldn't have kids, just that if you wanted to wait until your first baby didn't have to 'sacrifice' any of their needs or wants, that you might as well wait forever because regardless of age, it will be a reality. There's also a big difference between a 15 month old and a 24 month old in terms of patience, needs, understanding, communication, etc.,

Traceface, I think what you said re: 'it takes a special kind of mother' must be true. Of course it's hard sometimes having more than one young child but parenting is hard in general. Obviously it's not awful for everyone or there wouldn't be all these families (mine included) that purposely have children closer than 3-4+ yrs apart.

Anyway, i only responded again because it sounded like people thought it wasn't possible to have one-on-one time w/multiple small children and that only siblings close together make sacrifices. That just isn't true. And, I'm pretty sure I recommended (in my first post on this thread)that the OP wait a while because of their nursing relationship.


----------



## mytwogirls (Jan 3, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *traceface* 
My children are 5 years apart. I really love it. I wouldn't have traded the intensity of the first few years with my first for anything. And now I get to really give my new baby the best of myself. I see all those mamas with a 2 year old and a newborn and I tell ya , it looks like they are just not enjoying it that much. it's hard to be that tired and pulled on.
*Maybe some of you who are posting here are pulling it off with much more grace and happiness, sounds like it from your posts.*

But 2 kids that close in age is *quite a piece of work and takes a special type of mother, who is naturally very grounded/emotionally healthy and has lots of family support around her.*

I can honestly say it IS easy for ME. I am not speaking for all mothers, but I think it is FUN, enjoyable and works for me having my children 16 months apart. Why? I guess it might be my personality and I am grounded, have patience and LOVE little ones. I don't really know what you mean by "piece of work" but it has its own set of challenges. Quite honestly I would not want to have my children four or five years apart. I like them close together because they are interested in same activities, play together, grow up together and they can even share clothes. I LOVE it. It is personal preference (sometimes a new baby is a surprise!) but it does not mean they don't have the opportunity to be given any less attention, love, support, one on one time and such if we would have had them five years apart. For ME right now, they are almost 2 and 3 and very fun ages. Maybe I just enjoy my children too much?


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mytwogirls* 
Maybe I just enjoy my children too much?









Huh?


----------



## mytwogirls (Jan 3, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Huh?

I got the impression from some posters that having kids close together in age is a headache, impossible to give them attention all the time, blah, blah blah. Someone said she moms with young ones close together and the mom looks worn out. I LOVE my children close together and yeah it can be challenging, but all in all having them close together is a perfect fit. Maybe I am not making sense, it has been a long night for me....a friend had a 15 hour labor and insisted I be her RN the entire time, and she ended up with a section so I am very tired so sorry if I came off wrong or whatever.....


----------



## prothyraia (Feb 12, 2007)

I'm not advocating for closely-spaced children (I've done it, and won't do it again intentionally), but there are much better reasons to have a longer spacing than 'the baby/toddler will have to wait sometimes while I take care of the other child'.

In a 100% perfect world, yes, every child would have his/her needs met without delay, all the time. But I don't live in even close to that world. I get to them as soon as a possibly can, but sometimes, yes, I'm making hamburgers and need to wash my hands first, or I'm getting the fire going first thing in the morning from a few coals so we don't all freeze, or I tried to grab a shower and someone woke up while I have suds in my hair, or I'm elbow deep in the other child's poopy diaper.

I don't avoid cooking, we haven't switched to electric heat, I still bathe, and we had another baby. I'm pretty sure my children will be able to survive all of this with emotional security and attachment intact









Even at 6 months old and 2 years old, I really do think my boys get more joy out of each other than they do frustration because of my occasionally divided attention. The reasons to space the next baby farther out are almost entirely for MY benefit (with the exception of milk supply).


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *prothyraia* 
I'm not advocating for closely-spaced children (I've done it, and won't do it again intentionally), but there are much better reasons to have a longer spacing than 'the baby/toddler will have to wait sometimes while I take care of the other child'.

In a 100% perfect world, yes, every child would have his/her needs met without delay, all the time. But I don't live in even close to that world. I get to them as soon as a possibly can, but sometimes, yes, I'm making hamburgers and need to wash my hands first, or I'm getting the fire going first thing in the morning from a few coals so we don't all freeze, or I tried to grab a shower and someone woke up while I have suds in my hair, or I'm elbow deep in the other child's poopy diaper.

I don't avoid cooking, we haven't switched to electric heat, I still bathe, and we had another baby. I'm pretty sure my children will be able to survive all of this with emotional security and attachment intact









Even at 6 months old and 2 years old, I really do think my boys get more joy out of each other than they do frustration because of my occasionally divided attention. The reasons to space the next baby farther out are almost entirely for MY benefit (with the exception of milk supply).

very well said. Thank you for that post







I think the best perspective honestly comes from mama's who have BTDT and have closely spaced children. No offense, but if you only have one or have a 5 yr age gap, you really don't have the experience to make blanket assumptions regarding sacrifice and how it could negatively impact the children's well-being.


----------



## AlpineMama (Aug 16, 2007)

My period returned 2 weeks after giving birth and I was pregnant the next cycle. I had DD 10 months after having DS. DS was planned, DD was a happy oops.









Honestly, the hardest part was being pregnant while DS was still a baby. He was very colicky and I was very burnt out, and also very sick. I didn't get to go to any mommy-baby things with him. I was too busy getting IV therapy and the like.







DS also had a number of OTHER issues. We suspected autism for the longest time, but at the moment apparently it's just severe sensory stuff. He is nonverbal but it took him a while to catch on to signing, so there was a LOT of frustration screaming. And it was definitely hard in the first months when DD was nursing round the clock, and I would only get maybe 15 mins of sleep at a stretch because one or the other would be screaming and waking the other up. And getting out of the house was VERY hard because of the sheer logistics. Before DS could reliably walk, I would put him on my back and put her in the stroller or car seat in the shopping cart. But of course she would scream there and yargh. Sometimes I would wear both at once but that was a bit cumbersome for shopping.

Now, that DD is almost 1... It's better. They play together a LOT and they really love each other. DS shares everything with her, they're actually at around the same phase developmentally (she's a bit ahead and he's a bit behind) and he's sleeping through the night in his room and she's still co-sleeping. Sometimes I can give her a sippy of water now instead of a boob. Her unique challenge is that she's a total momma's girl and won't settle for anyone else, including DH. Only I'm allowed to hold her, and this has been going on for months and months now. But it's OK, I love her.









As for aging me, well... Yeah. I'm slowly starting to feel normal again, but honestly it was the pregnancies and sleep deprivation that did me in. I have always looked young for my age, as in being thought to be in my mid-teens when I was 23-24. Then all last year people were calling me ma'am, and definitely not carding me for ANYTHING anymore. Just in the past week they started carding me again, so I think I'm getting back in my groove.







But I can definitely see there are wrinkles on my face now and I have a bit of a worn look. My New Year's resolution is to look like I get more sleep. Heh. I'm only 25 but I do need those age-defying make up things a bit. I think I'll be OK though. I felt old for a while and now I'm just starting to feel young and fun again. DH and I are even starting to talk about another baby.







:


----------



## Marylizah (Jun 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife* 
very well said. Thank you for that post







I think the best perspective honestly comes from mama's who have BTDT and have closely spaced children. No offense, but if you only have one or have a 5 yr age gap, you really don't have the experience to make blanket assumptions regarding sacrifice and how it could negatively impact the children's well-being.

I'm sorry that you think my opinion isn't a worthwhile one, since I haven't BTDT. But I have repeatedly said, the divided attention issue is one of the reasons *I* don't want closely spaced kids. If that isn't an issue for you, then why are you taking this so personally?

And to be totally honest here, the mamas I know IRL with closely spaced kids, well, I watch their kids constantly compete for mama's attention and time. There seems to be a lot of fighting, whining, crying and stress for everyone.

If this doesn't reflect YOUR reality, then that's great!

We're all trying to be good mamas here, why don't we stop feeling so defensive about *other people's choices and opinions*?

In any case, I think the OP has made her decision.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marylizah* 
I'm sorry that you think my opinion isn't a worthwhile one, since I haven't BTDT. But I have repeatedly said, the divided attention issue is one of the reasons *I* don't want closely spaced kids. If that isn't an issue for you, then why are you taking this so personally?

And to be totally honest here, the mamas I know IRL with closely spaced kids, well, I watch their kids constantly compete for mama's attention and time. There seems to be a lot of fighting, whining, crying and stress for everyone.

If this doesn't reflect YOUR reality, then that's great!

We're all trying to be good mamas here, why don't we stop feeling so defensive about *other people's choices and opinions*?

In any case, I think the OP has made her decision.

um, who wouldn't get defensive or take it personally if it's assumed that closely space children are worse off than those that are not. And FWIW, I've never thought my kids were in that category, 2 under 2, that to me, is closely spaced... so it's all relative.

If somone was saying your kids have a disadvantage becasue they won't have as much in common or get along very well because they are several years apart, you might take it the wrong way, too. I don't even believe that to be true, which is why I would never make a statement like that considering my almost 8 yr old gets along wonderfully with the almost 2 yr old.

ETA: if you go back and read your first response here, even though it included the phrase "no offense" you have to see how it could come across that way... considering the number of mama's on this thread (and mdc) who have closely spaced children. And it wasn't just you, I happened to quote you because it obviously struck a chord with me.


----------



## AlpineMama (Aug 16, 2007)

I just read most of the replies to the OP. I added on before reading them. I'm just a little overwhelmed (underwhelmed might be more apt to say) about the attitudes from people saying that the kids are shortchanged or that you can "only" do it with lots of help. I have no family or friends to help out, although I am a full time SAHM. I am married but I am the only one who parents the kids. So like. It's possible. And my kids are happy. I feel responsible for my OWN happiness.

Am I a little awed when I see SAHM's who are so devoted to their only toddler, who spend hours and hours with one on one attention? Yeah. It's not my life, but it interests me looking in. I know that looking in from the outside my life would be sheer hell to a lot of people, but what can you say, that's life. Am I sometimes jealous of moms of onlies? Not really. I am jealous a LOT of the time, of a LOT of things, but that was never one of them.

Don't believe me? I was jealous about a lot of baby-related things. Like when I saw babies peacefully going out and about with public, snoozing in strollers or chilling in mommyies' arms, when I had to literally jump up and down with DS in the Moby while signing my name at the checkout counter at the grocery store. Because he would scream bloody murder otherwise. Or had to rock him for 4r+ hours of him SCREAMING every night whereas other mommies just gave a bath, a lullaby, nursies and a snuggle and their kid was asleep in half an hour. I was also awed to see pregnant women around me glowing, enjoying pregnancies, having baby showers and bonding with their babies in utero and taking belly casts. When I was in the hospital, sticking myself with cancer medicine an the like. And I was jealous, and still am jealous of moms who have kids who say mama... My son STILL doesn't call me mama, and he's almost 2. I'm waiting to hear that magic word, but I'm not holding my breath.

OK, does that sound bitter enough?







My point is, if I can still be happy and my kids can be happy with all that going against us, I'm pretty darn sure that any mommy of two spaced closely together... can have a happy and satisfying experience!


----------



## mytwogirls (Jan 3, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AlpineMama* 
I just read most of the replies to the OP. I added on before reading them. I'm just a little overwhelmed (underwhelmed might be more apt to say) about the attitudes from people saying that the kids are shortchanged or that you can "only" do it with lots of help. I have no family or friends to help out, although I am a full time SAHM. I am married but I am the only one who parents the kids. So like. It's possible. And my kids are happy. I feel responsible for my OWN happiness.

Am I a little awed when I see SAHM's who are so devoted to their only toddler, who spend hours and hours with one on one attention? Yeah. It's not my life, but it interests me looking in. I know that looking in from the outside my life would be sheer hell to a lot of people, but what can you say, that's life. Am I sometimes jealous of moms of onlies? Not really. I am jealous a LOT of the time, of a LOT of things, but that was never one of them.

Don't believe me? I was jealous about a lot of baby-related things. Like when I saw babies peacefully going out and about with public, snoozing in strollers or chilling in mommyies' arms, when I had to literally jump up and down with DS in the Moby while signing my name at the checkout counter at the grocery store. Because he would scream bloody murder otherwise. Or had to rock him for 4r+ hours of him SCREAMING every night whereas other mommies just gave a bath, a lullaby, nursies and a snuggle and their kid was asleep in half an hour. I was also awed to see pregnant women around me glowing, enjoying pregnancies, having baby showers and bonding with their babies in utero and taking belly casts. When I was in the hospital, sticking myself with cancer medicine an the like. And I was jealous, and still am jealous of moms who have kids who say mama... My son STILL doesn't call me mama, and he's almost 2. I'm waiting to hear that magic word, but I'm not holding my breath.

OK, does that sound bitter enough?







My point is, if I can still be happy and my kids can be happy with all that going against us, I'm pretty darn sure that any mommy of two spaced closely together... can have a happy and satisfying experience!










That is quite possibly the most powerful, insightful post I have read in a LONG time. Hat's off to you mama! I could not have said it better myself. And yes, like many other mamas, it does get under my skin when other ASSUME my kids are shortchanged, scream for my attention, compete and other nonsense. Thank you for posting this.


----------



## GooeyRN (Apr 24, 2006)

I don't think my dd was short changed by me having ds when she was only 25.5 months old. He brought her so much joy. She just LOVES him. Sometimes I wish I could clone myself for times when ds wants to nurse to sleep, and dd wants food/milk/xyz NOW. I think it taught her patience and that others have needs, too. I do get frustrated with some things about having two, but it is b/c I am lazy. Little things get to me, like having to buckle both into car seats, zip both of their coats, etc. but it is not bad. I am just lazy. I don't feel like it. I really believe that having the second GAVE more positive things in life to dd vs. taken attention away. She is a really sensitive and caring person. A lot of times I will be giving special attention to dd, and she will tell me to go nurse ds b/c he is looking tired or cranky.


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marylizah* 
I'm sorry that you think my opinion isn't a worthwhile one, since I haven't BTDT. But I have repeatedly said, the divided attention issue is one of the reasons *I* don't want closely spaced kids. If that isn't an issue for you, then why are you taking this so personally?

And to be totally honest here, the mamas I know IRL with closely spaced kids, well, I watch their kids constantly compete for mama's attention and time. There seems to be a lot of fighting, whining, crying and stress for everyone.

If this doesn't reflect YOUR reality, then that's great!

We're all trying to be good mamas here, why don't we stop feeling so defensive about *other people's choices and opinions*?

In any case, I think the OP has made her decision.

And I did also ask for perspectives from BOTH side- those with closely spaced kids, and those with kids further apart, and what reasoning they had behind it and what they enjoyed/ didn't enjoy.

It does seem to me that you're just stating a perspective, an opinion, and to me it doesn't sound as though you are criticizing anyone.

I believe I have made my decision, but part of me is still not 100% opposed to it either. I'm still sleeping well and babies really are so darn cute







I can't say I'd be all that upset if we had a surprise at some point.


----------



## Astraia (Jan 1, 2009)

On the shortchanging the older child issue-- I do wonder how much of it has to do with the older child's personality. I think if your older child was the jealous type, or high needs, demanding, etc then you would feel more like you were neglecting that child occasionally while caring for the younger child.

I also again think the mother's personality has a lot to do with. For example, my sister-in-laws sister is pregnant and has a 14 month old son, and she is terrified. She is the kind of mom who tries very hard to do everything perfectly, who has a 2 hr long bedtime routine, whose husband is an airline pilot and is gone 2 weeks or more at a time, and doesn't have family near by to help. She has a tense, perfectionistic, "need to be a perfect mom" mentality (not just about motherhood, but about everything I think). And I think based on her personality she'll have a lot more trouble than, say, my SIL who is laid back to a fault.

I'm not sure anyone is trying to say parents with close-together kids are harming their kids or short-changing their kids by doing so, but are saying that THEY personally would feel bad. And that's OK, that's why they didn't do it  And of course no one with only 1 child or with children 5 years apart can understand what happens in the daily lives of people with 2 kids under 2, just as it would be just as mysterious the other way around.

This is getting a little bit more tense than I had anticipated it being!


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife* 
No offense, but if you only have one or have a 5 yr age gap, you really don't have the experience to make blanket assumptions regarding sacrifice and how it could negatively impact the children's well-being.

I have a 6 year age gap







, but I wonder if some of these opinions and assumptions begin with the people we are and the children we have? I am a highly sensitive, easily frazzled woman with a highly sensitive, easily frazzled daugther (first born). I never even considered having a second child for a moment before my dd turned 3.5, and then dd start ttc until she was 4 (months of ttc + miscarriage = 6 year age gap). When I only had dd, I could not imagine adequately meeting two babies' needs, but my experience of "needs" might not be the same as another mother's, kwim? After having my second child, I have a completely new experience. I could easily have taken care of two babies like him at the same time.....but two like dd? Totally different story. (she is a really awesome kid, btw







)


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife* 
I think the best perspective honestly comes from mama's who have BTDT and have closely spaced children.

Well the OP did ask for both perspectives.









Quote:

For those of you with kids close together- did you do it on purpose? What are the benefits? What are the drawbacks? To those who waited longer between kids- I guess same questions? For comparison purposes.
There are good reasons to space children father apart just as there are good reasons to space close together. Only considering one side wouldn't paint a very balanced picture.

ETA - I had this sitting on my screen for a bit and didn't see that the OP already addressed this. Carry on.


----------



## hempmama (Dec 16, 2004)

I think it has a lot to do with the personalities involved! I have posted in a few of these threads, and there are a few people on here who are serious advocates for long age gaps. It always seems lopsided, but to me that's an awfully personal and situation specific thing to be blanket "advocating" for. Watching my older two (17 months apart) develop their truly amazing, close relationship has been one of the greatest joys of my life thusfar, and is absolutely in large part owed to their close age gap. They could be peers from a very young age, before the oldest could ever remember the younger not being there. I can imagine plenty of scenarios where it would have gone poorly, but I can imagine the same for a 4 year age gap. The two kids I know who have had to seek psychological help from having trouble with a sibling adjustment had a 3.5-4 year age gap, but who knows if that's chicken or egg (those parents waited because they had a harder firstborn, or they had become so used to only childhood that they couldn't deal with the shift?).

I will say that for one of the common concerns in this thread- whether a 15-17 month old has a harder time waiting than an older child, generally I found it easier with the small age gap. The needs of the 17 month old were quicker to deal with, more able to be dealt with with a baby in hand(they needed cheese or a song sung, not an extended game of Candyland, and were not offended if the baby was there the way I often see 3 and 4 year olds jealous over their parents full physical and mental attention), and on those very rare occasions when she did have to wait, she didn't take it personally the way my 3 year old can now (my third is 2.75 years younger than my second). Generally it has seemed to me with transitions like this the older the child is, the harder it is for them to adjust. Nonetheless, we are adjusting, and it's certainly true that a larger age gap is physically easier for the mom, in terms of carrying, buckling in, etc.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Well the OP did ask for both perspectives.











oh, I know. What I meant was that the best perspective on the logistics of closely spaced children, comes from parents that have BTDT. That is what the OP originally was asking. She was considering possibly getting pregnant as soon as 6 mos PP. She didn't start out saying she was leaning towards a 4 yr age gap and wanted thoughts, though, I do imagine she has found all viewpoints and experiences helpful.


----------



## weliveintheforest (Sep 3, 2005)

I probably can't add anything new, but here is my 2 cents anyway









My children are 26 months apart, and in some ways I love it, in others, not so much. I plan to have my next baby when my son is 3 or 4 and here is why:

- I don't want to mess with my breastmilk supply before he is old enough to wean
- Having mine so close together was very hard in the early days when I was recovering from the birth. You never know what can happen in a birth, and I was in a lot of pain for months after mine, making everything more difficult.
- Both children will be old enough to understand what is going on
- I want a break from pregnancy and nursing so I can really build up my nutrition and health. Some people have disagreed with me on this, but I really believe it can deplete your body.
- I don't want to have two children who need constant carrying, or diaper changing.
- I want to really enjoy my kids, not be burned out

eta one more!
- If I am blessed with a surprise like twins, I will be glad not to have a toddler as well I think.


----------



## mama_ani (Aug 2, 2007)

I have these spaces:

*13 months apart* -- exhausting but my favourite

*17 months apart* -- still exhausting but a very close second favourite

*8 years apart* -- do NOT like it at all and didn't plan it that way

*2 years 1 month apart* -- I don't really like it at all

I could give all my reasons for my likes/dislikes of each space but I'm sure it's been covered in other posts in this thread! I'm going to read through now and will add any of my own opinions if I don't see them elsewhere!


----------



## prothyraia (Feb 12, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
I wonder if some of these opinions and assumptions begin with the people we are and the children we have?(snip) I could easily have taken care of two babies like him at the same time.....but two like dd? Totally different story. (she is a really awesome kid, btw







)

Yes to this.
Three of my second son would be easier to take care of than one of my first was. No exaggeration.


----------



## SweetPotato (Apr 29, 2006)

I haven't read all the posts, so this point might have been made. Our dd is 3yo and we still don't feel ready for another (she'll probably be an only, but we're reserving the right to change our minds about having another as she gets older, starts sleeping, stops nursing, etc.) As I've spent long visits (as in several days with overnights) with friends who have closely spaced kids, one thing that I've noticed is that the older child often seems to have higher expectations placed on them than I think is always age-appropriate. I'm close with someone whose kids are 18 months apart, and while the younger child was still nursing and had minimal separation from mom at age 2, the older child at age 2 was fully weaned and dropped off at preschool five days a week (and expected sit still for long restaurant meals, soothe herself to sleep from a young age, and other things that I think can be a bit much for a child so young) My dd is the same age as the older, and it's always kind of bothered me to see that this little friend was sort of expected to grow up faster-- a 2yo should be allowed to act (and should be comforted) like a 2yo, whether or not there's a younger babe in the picture. I'm not saying that all families with close spacings have this dynamic (and it certainly may be unintentional), but it's something that I've observed a lot and which has definitely influenced my decision to not put my dd in that position.


----------



## AlpineMama (Aug 16, 2007)

The funny thing about age-appropriate expectations is that just because you're encouraging more maturity than is typical for an average 2 year old in our culture doesn't necessarily make it happen. With the example you've given about the restaurant meals, for example. And sometimes a kid will act as mature as you expect them to. Not all the time, of course. But if you have an expectation that they will behave well and are considerate of them, take them for a walk beforehand, bring a distraction, pay attention to them, absolutely a 2 year old can sit still for a meal in a restaurant. Even a hyper one (like my son).

And then there's the idea too that the expectations are culture specific. You wouldn't bat an eye at a 4-5 year old kid from a "tribal" situation taking care of younger kids... Whereas in the United States you would probably never let a 4-5 year old child babysit your infant. Right? Are the other kids somehow super-mature kids or do they lead miserable lives? Probably not. Their norms are just different.

My kiddo is already sharing better than average, he's helping out with stuff, he's learning to be more patient than a lot of his peers and is pretty gentle (especially if we remind him). I think that's because he has a little sister. I had to juggle their bedtime routines but in the past few weeks (knock on wood, please please) he has been pretty much putting himself to bed. My only regret is that I did have to put him to sleep in his own crib at around 10 months, in prep for baby sister's arrival, but for us this worked out because he actually slept better in his own room. Huh. And I still parented him at night. It was more exhausting FOR ME to get up and trudge over there when he made a noise, but he didn't suffer from it. It's not like I put him in the other room and said "sorry kid there's a new favorite in the house, deal with it." He's not THE baby of the family but he's still A baby and MY baby.









I guess what I don't understand is how a child who grows up in say, a very large family. Or a family with lots of pets. Or with a WAHM. Or any WOHM / preschool type situation. Or a busy mom with lots of chores to do. How are they going to get constant one on one attention? I don't think the average child gets all this attention placed on them, reading, crafts, projects, playgroups. Don't get me wrong, it's AWESOME for those kids that that their moms do so much for/with them. But I just don't think it's either typical or necessary for healthy development.


----------



## H & J's Mom (Jun 1, 2008)

We never wanted our kids close together for many reasons ... we had tried for a 4 year gap but ended up TTC for 4.5 years before DS.

DD and DS are 8.5 years apart.

I *love* our age gap and can't imagine it any other way







It seems like this is what most are saying no matter what the age gap. Probably once you have another precious LO in your arms you won't be able to image it any other way.


----------



## Marylizah (Jun 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AlpineMama* 
The funny thing about age-appropriate expectations is that just because you're encouraging more maturity than is typical for an average 2 year old in our culture doesn't necessarily make it happen. With the example you've given about the restaurant meals, for example. And sometimes a kid will act as mature as you expect them to. Not all the time, of course. But if you have an expectation that they will behave well and are considerate of them, take them for a walk beforehand, bring a distraction, pay attention to them, absolutely a 2 year old can sit still for a meal in a restaurant. Even a hyper one (like my son).

And then there's the idea too that the expectations are culture specific. You wouldn't bat an eye at a 4-5 year old kid from a "tribal" situation taking care of younger kids... Whereas in the United States you would probably never let a 4-5 year old child babysit your infant. Right? Are the other kids somehow super-mature kids or do they lead miserable lives? Probably not. Their norms are just different.

My kiddo is already sharing better than average, he's helping out with stuff, he's learning to be more patient than a lot of his peers and is pretty gentle (especially if we remind him). I think that's because he has a little sister. I had to juggle their bedtime routines but in the past few weeks (knock on wood, please please) he has been pretty much putting himself to bed. My only regret is that I did have to put him to sleep in his own crib at around 10 months, in prep for baby sister's arrival, but for us this worked out because he actually slept better in his own room. Huh. And I still parented him at night. It was more exhausting FOR ME to get up and trudge over there when he made a noise, but he didn't suffer from it. It's not like I put him in the other room and said "sorry kid there's a new favorite in the house, deal with it." He's not THE baby of the family but he's still A baby and MY baby.









I guess what I don't understand is how a child who grows up in say, a very large family. Or a family with lots of pets. Or with a WAHM. Or any WOHM / preschool type situation. Or a busy mom with lots of chores to do. How are they going to get constant one on one attention? I don't think the average child gets all this attention placed on them, reading, crafts, projects, playgroups. Don't get me wrong, it's AWESOME for those kids that that their moms do so much for/with them. But I just don't think it's either typical or necessary for healthy development.

See, that wouldn't work in our house, which is why the "different parents, different kids" argument is really true. DS, while independent during the day, is extremely high-needs at night. There is no way, ever, that he could put himself to sleep at night right now. He's super sensitive-- when I cuddle him to sleep, if I turn my face away from him he cries. Asking him to put himself to sleep would automatically mean CIO in our house, which is totally unacceptable to me.

Also, my DS shares well, is gentle with other children, is patient, eats all meals with us and is great in restaurants. I tend to chalk it up to the fact that he doesn't have to compete for attention/resources all the time, so when we ask him to be "more mature" than the average 2.5 year old, he's able to pull it off. But in reality, our kids probably just have those personalities and it doesn't have much to do with a sibling or lack thereof.

Another misconception I'd like to address-- of course my DS doesn't get my constant, undivided attention. There are meals to make, laundry to do, errands to run, bills to pay, etc. Life is busy! For all of us. He has to play by himself and entertain himself on a regular basis, like all kids. But he does get a lot of our undivided attention, and I *do* think that is healthy for little ones. I think it's really nice that he doesn't have to compete with another little one for attention all the time. You may disagree, that's your prerogative.

Re: the maturity aspect-- I think most first children end up taking on more responsibility. I'm the eldest, and there's a 4 year gap between my sibling and myself and I think I was asked to do things that were really a lot considering my age. So, to me, that's a birth order issue as well as an age-gap issue-- I still think a 4 year old better understands WHY they have to wait or help or whatever than a 15 month old (for example).

One final thought-- my life is plenty full and stressful with my one child and my current circumstances. Our choice not to add another DC to the mix soon after DS' birth is in reaction to our capacity to manage what we currently have on our plates. Your (general you) circumstances are different, you make different choices. I think adding a new child automatically means more stress, something we just don't need right now.

Once again, YMMV.


----------



## SAHDS (Mar 28, 2008)

Wow, I left this thread and am now trying to catch back up.

For the people who think closely spaced children are lacking in attention or one of the kid's needs are being sacrificed... what about twins, triplets?

Also, my kids being close has let us spend more time together as a a family. They both like the same things, they're age appropriate for both, vacations/camping/movies/toys - they work for both kids. I don't have to worry about going somewhere and catering to single children because both of mine are on the same page.

They grew up (are growing up) together, nobody was the "oldest" or "the baby". Nobody has more/less responsibilities. Nobody is held more accountable. Bedtimes are the same, privileges are the same, expectations are the same.

I don't know, maybe I'm getting defensive, but I had a wonderful experience with my kids closely spaced.


----------



## Dahlea (May 15, 2008)

we are planning on having another asap-mine is 3 months. it took us 5 years to have him so we're really wanting to have more as quickly as we can.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SAHDS* 
For the people who think closely spaced children are lacking in attention or one of the kid's needs are being sacrificed... what about twins, triplets?

I'm not going to say that anyone's kids are lacking in attention, but I certainly think it would be a LOT more difficult to meet the needs of twins and triplets than of singletons! My hat is off to parents who manage it, that is for sure.

If I had had twins, that would be the hand I was dealt and I'd glory in all the blessings. But I personally (given my personality and the babies I've had) wouldn't choose closely spaced babies for my family.

My kids are spaced far apart (6 years). I've read lots of reasons that is not ideal, here on MDC and otherwise. But it works really well for our family, and I glory in the blessings of this spacing


----------

