My brothers and I are exactly 3 years apart and I never felt really close to either of them. My kids are 15 months apart and are very close...hopefully they stay that way throught the teen years!
I just want to let you know wether you decide close or not, your most fertile time is within the year after giving birth, so it is a little easier to actually have kids that are 9 to 21 months apart.
2006-07-07 19:10:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ellen M 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
I have 3 children. My first two are 23 months apart. I did that on purpose so they could grow up together. Little did I know that marriage would end in divorce and I would remarry a few years later. I had my daughter (3rd child) with my second (and present) husband. We decided once she was born that we wanted one more and wanted them to grow up together, too so I am pregnant with baby #4. These two will be 16 months apart. My age was a big factor in deciding to have them this close. My first two are boys, now 11 and 9 years old and are so helpful with my daughter so that is a nice perk! And I know they will help with this one too.
I do believe in having kids close together mostly because my Mom didn't (my sister is 5 years older than me and my brother is 7 years younger). I have on relationship with my brother and sister and we were never close. But it has to be what is right for you and what works for you. It is more work to have two children under the age of two at the same time. But don't worry about the terrible 2's. 2's are nothing, 3's are rough because they are a 2 year old with a mouth! :) But, seriously, all ages are cute and wonderful. There was never a time I questioned having two so close together.
2006-07-08 08:49:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by aliza1999 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would say that three is a good round number. That way, your kids will always have a sibling in school with them somewhere and can always have things in common. My sister and I are 10 years apart. That means that whenever she would be going through a certain phase in life, I couldn't relate because I was too young. She has just started talking to be about certain stuff because I'm now old enough to understand. Being three years apart will ensure that your children will be close enough in age to be friends. I wish that I had that, but I wouldn't change my life around if I could.
Hope this helped!
2006-07-08 01:10:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mizz_Britz 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
NOT four years!!! Studies show that children born 2 or less years apart pretty much grow up together and are treated the same--they're almost like twins. And when children are born 6 or more years apart, the first is old enough to not feel jealous of the baby. 4 years apart is the worst time to have children, because the the four-year-old will be jealous of the baby, and this will cause massive sibling rivalry.
2006-07-08 01:08:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by Crys H. 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have 2 sisters and a brother and we are all about 2 years apart and it was nice growing up with that age difference...As far as myself I have a 6 month old daughter and I couldn't imagine having another until she was at least 2 or 3.
2006-07-08 01:07:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Kelly 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think 3 years apart is good because then the 3 year old will be a little more responsible like potty trained eat on their own so the parents can give good attention to the newborn
2006-07-08 01:06:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by kira 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think 2-3 years is good. My siblings and I are each 2 years apart and it's been nice that way :)
2006-07-08 01:05:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Shelley 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I went with 4 years so I wouldn't have 2 kids in college at the same time. Too expensive.
2006-07-08 01:08:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by notyou311 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
i don't think there is such a thing as the "proper" age space. i have 3 kids. they are 10,8 and 5 months! the eldest is my step son...so i waited 8yrs to have another baby ( not for lack of trying). i LIKE that my boys are older than their sister. they are both in school, so I'm not chasing after three toddlers, i can concentrate on my daughter. my boys are old enough to shower, get dressed, clean their rooms, even pack their own lunches with out much help from me....so i can take care of the little one. my son's are wonderful with their sister...no jealously at all! they were old enough to understand she wasn't a threat and thought she was "so cooool mommy!".....ha!
it just all depends on what YOU would prefer..not what your neighbor says..or you mother-in-law...or you best friend.
they are YOUR children, and your the one that will be taking care of them..so what can you handle ( or want to handle).
do you prefer two young kids close in age, or do you want a medium gap or large one?
its personal preference..and in the end that will win out, over any of this other advice.
Crys H.
I am four years older than my brother (3 older than my sister) and i LOVED him so much when he was a baby...i wasn't jealous of him at all, in fact my mother had to watch out for me cause i wanted to carry him around like he was mine! to this day, my bubba and i have the BEST relationship....so your theory is CRAP!
2006-07-08 07:16:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
my kids are 15 months apart and i think it's perfect. Other than they are both in diapers, but my daughter (22months ) loves her brother and they ( with help from me ) dance together and play chase and bathe and talk and eat ( my daughter likes to feed him ) together. But my friends kids are a little over 2 years apart and they are still close, i agree than anything over 3 years is to far apart if you want them to be close...
2006-07-08 02:27:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by manda 4
·
0⤊
0⤋