my kids are 5, 3, and 3 weeks. i would rather have them close together.they will go to school together and play well together it helps that they are all girls so they're all into the same stuff (or at least the baby will soon) not to mention they will all be leaving the house one right after the other and me and my husband will finally be alone!haha one bad thing about it is that when the oldest turns 18 and she thinks she can do whatever she wants(gotta know her) the middle one will be 16 and driving then the baby will be 13 that ought to be interesting. how about you just have fun and see what happens none of mine were planned but i wouldn't trade them for the world
2006-08-18 15:47:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by mommy_dearest 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
I had my children very close together actually. I got pregnant when my first was 11 months old. We didn't know until she was 13 months old as I was still breastfeeding and not having regular cycles anyway.
But here we are five years later and they are the best of friends. The younger one sticks up for the older one and loves her big sister more than anyone in the world (sometimes more than she loves us i think :) ) Yeah, of course they argue because they are sisters after all, but they have a fierce loyalty to each other.
I don't think I would change things if I were given a choice because we were done with diapers sooner and all the other baby stuff. We were still in the thick of it with our first when the second came along so it didn't seem like that big of a deal.
I'm very happy they are so close in age. We do get asked all the time if they are twins though, which is kind of funny to us, but its no big deal.
Just remember whenever you decide to have a second (or even third) child, it will be the right time because it was meant to be. Good luck!
2006-08-18 22:34:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by lolo 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
You have to weigh the pros and cons of having children close together; taking the first child's temperament into consideration of course. I am assuming the first child is not demanding and that is why you would want another.
With me I had a undemanding first child and wound up with an absolute handful with the second,(two years apart in age).
This also lent itself to my decision to wait to have our third much later, ( 4 years apart) and then my fourth two years from the third child.
It really is dependent on your first child's temperament and what you can handle as a parent if your second child would turn out to have any challenges, either physical or in temperament.
But ultimately all situations are different, just make sure you take all pros and cons into consideration before you decide.
2006-08-18 23:38:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Carmen B 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I waited 8 years...lol long time. I sometimes think that I should of had one earlier so my son had someone to play with other than my nephews...but the good thing is that I was able to give him all the attention he needed. Now I think differently cuz everything worked out so well. He is old enough to understand that the baby needs most of my attention now, he helps out, takes real good care of her - he is such a good big brother.
If you really want to have another baby - I would recommend you to have another one when your daughter is a little older - maybe 3 or 4. She will be a little bit more independent and you won't be going crazy with two babies around the house.
My sister had her first three back to back and I saw how she struggled with them when they were babies.
2006-08-19 00:18:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Chela 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
MMMMM, well.
With me, I had my son and 5 weeks later got pregnant with my daughter. They are 10 months apart. I have to admit it is a little hard at times but I love them being so close in age. They love each other and I hope they have a close relationship as they grow up. They get to enjoy everything together. It is really neat. If they were farther apart then they would be at different stages and wouldn't be able to enjoy the same things as they will be able to.
I think if you are able to raise them and handle the stressful times that WILL come then go for it and have them close.
2006-08-18 22:56:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by Tired-Mom 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
My daughter was born when my son was 31 months. It's definitely challenging, but I am happy we spaced them this close. I think the siblings will have a good bond, and are already becoming playmates (she's 10 months now).
No matter when you have your second child, it will work for you and your family. There are pros and cons to waiting or having them close together. I don't think that you can say one way is harder, they have their unique challenges, as does every family.
Good luck!
2006-08-19 00:38:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by ceemcee05 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
my daughter was a year and a half wjen i got pregnant with our second child. At first it was a little hard but you get used to it andi wouldn't have it any other way. They are not that far in age and now my oldest will be 3 in September and the little one will be 1 in November and they have a balst together. My oldest plays with the youngest one and teaches her so many things. I believe that since they are close in age they seem to have built a good bond with one another. It also gave my oldest child and i get closer since she wanted to help me with everything. I LOVE IT and i wouldn't have it any other way.
2006-08-18 22:43:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by mysteriouskisses12 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
My girls are 27 months apart. DH and his next oldest brother are 21 months apart. My brother and I are 2 years apart. I like having my kids 2 years apart as they have a chance to get to know one another as friends. My SIL's are just about 3 years apart. The big sister has bitten her younger brother pretty badly 2 now (once just recently). I think she was too used to being the "princess".
2006-08-19 02:13:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by SabrinaD 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
My children are 3 years apart almost to the day. I kept my son included during my second pregnancy and they are 11 and 14 now and still get along fairly well.(really! no lie)
Also, you have the first one potty trained by then and there isn't the abandoned feeling of going off to school with a baby at home. They get a couple of years together too.
Good Luck.
2006-08-18 22:54:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by mzduncan1999 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Between my first two children there is 21m - I fell pregnant on my 1st childs 1st birthday. I then planned to have a third with a similar gap. I fell pregnant and would have been due just after my 2nd childs 2nd b'day - unfortuantly I lost that one at 3m pregnancy. My (now) third is due just after my youngest turns 2.5yrs - slightly bigger gap than wanted, but cool!
2006-08-19 06:31:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋