my three sons were all born within 22months. the first two are 10months apart and the second and third are 11 months apart.
the pros are they are very close
the cons are they are all in diapers and bottles (it like having triplets) your body poops out after a few.
my third and forth (due april 07) will be 4years and some change apart I can only hope that they bond as well as the first 3 did.
I'm 24 and my husband is 27. we were 18 and 21 when we got married and had our first. the pros to this is we will still be young when they are all out of the house!
2006-09-05 18:36:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by naightengale 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
My oldest is 6. My youngest is 3. They're three years apart. I'm expecting and by the time this one arrives my youngest will be 4 and my oldest almost 7.
The pros? They always have a buddy. They play together a lot. The cons--sometimes the youngest doesn't understand why he can't do some things we let the older one do. They're close and do most of the same things but now and then he just can't do what we allow the older to do. Also, as close as they are they have some really bad fights.
I'm 31. The first two we pretty much planned. We didn't think we wanted anymore then we decided that we did. We just waited a bit before coming to that conclusion. Otherwise we probably would have gone for the third one much sooner. Probably when our youngest was 2.
2006-09-06 01:39:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Amelia 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
My two sons are 16 months apart (older son is 2 1/2 years and younger son is 14 months). The pros are that now that they're both toddlers, they're becoming very close friends, playing together, entertaining each other, etc. The only cons that I can think of are that my second pregnancy was more exhausting. Not only was I exhausted just from being pregnant, but I had an infant to care for. (My older son was 6 months old when I conceived his little brother.) Also, the first several months were rough. I had a 16 month old son who was starting his terrible twos early, and on top of dealing with the tantrums, food throwing, not wanting to go to sleep, etc., I had a newborn to care for.
Ultimately, I'm glad we had them close together. It's working out for the best for us doing things this way. :)
I am now 30 (soon to be 31) and I had my first son when I was 28 and my second one when I was 29.
2006-09-06 11:45:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by brevejunkie 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, I only have one child currently and I am working on my second, thus so far, I have not been sucessful. My plan is to have my children 2 to 3 years apart, I just think it would be easier to do, because well, when my next child is born my little one will most likley be starting preschool and that will give me time to take care of the newborn and with the age diff they wont always want the same things... But thats my opinion I guess. I am currently 17 and I am the middle child in my family, my mother has 7 kids her youngest being almost five, I'm not sure what she was doing but our ages go like this, 24 21 19 17 15 13 and then 5 whiched just really confused me lol... But I think its best to have the babies at least 2 to 3 years apart cause right now my son is being potty train so when by time my next child is here he will be fully potty trained and I wont have to change 2 childrens diapers.
2006-09-06 01:39:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by Sarah T 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
My oldest daughter is 8 1/2. She'll be nine in January. My youngest daughter just turned 5 in August. They're almost 3 1/2 yrs. apart in their age.
In some ways I wish they were closer in age, but also the gap does have its upsides. My oldest is wonderful with her little sis. We had a little bit of a jealousy issue when the baby was born, but it didn't last long. One of the reasons I'm glad for the age difference is that my youngest has autism. I love her just they way she is, but it's been a bumpy ride at times and if they had been closer in age I think it would have been a lot harder dealing with things. The youngest has required a lot of extra attention which would have been a lot harder if they were closer in age. My oldest has a great bond with her sister. She can reach her and get into her world in ways the rest of us could only imagine.
I'm 32. I'll be 33 in January. I was 24 when my oldest was born and I was was 27 when my youngest was born. No my age didn't really have anything to do with it. I got divorced when my youngest was 10 mths. old. She was 2 1/2 when I got remarried. Her sister was born 13 mths. later. If I could have chosen, I would have had them maybe about a year closer together, but looking back I'm glad things turned out the way they did. Everything happens for a reason.
2006-09-06 02:06:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Child Of Thought 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have 2 girls 1 is 5 1/2 and the other is 8 months. My 5 year old is a huge help and love to teach her new things. Its great. The reason for the age gap is i became infertile and i ended up on fertility drugs have had 3 miscarriages in between.we stopped trying and then got pregnant go figure. I don't think age has anything to do with it. got married at 18 still with my high school sweetie.
2006-09-06 02:08:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by shaylee b 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
My first two are almost 3 years apart and the third was born 4 years later. I love their age spread. I don't know if I believe that age differences really have pros or cons. Families just run the gamut age gap-wise and can be so different with different parenting styles, lifestyles, etc. My kids are really close and also fight. The big girls help out their little brother a lot, and he really doesn't hassle them a lot. I know another family with the exact same age-spread and genders, but whose kids are 4 years older than mine, respectively, and I guess I do see a lot of the same traits in their kids.
2006-09-06 01:41:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by CAFEhonor 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Our children are 30 months apart. We plan on trying for our next in April 2007, which will make our youngest around the same age. That age difference has worked for us so far. The kids get along great, they play together fine. She was old enough that when her brother came along she knew that she couldnt hit the baby, she wasnt jealous, she tries to "help" out with him. Cons-I havent noticed any yet. Give me a little more time. LOL
I was 21 years old when our daughter was born and 24 when our son was born. If I get pregnant as planned next summer, I will be 26 when baby comes.
2006-09-06 05:51:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by ~ Amanda ~ 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
My kids are actually 8 years apart! Yes I did say 8! I am 41 and I have an 18, 10 and 2 year old. The 9 and 18 year old still find things to argue about but on the other hand they are there for each other to.
2006-09-06 07:12:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by musiclover 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
My son is six. my daughter is a newborn. I am 26 and was 19 when my son was born, so yeas, I would say that it mattered how old I was. my son was a pleasant surprise (NOT an accident) when I was young and my daughter was more or less planned with my husband. (Different fathers here). It's good because my son is old enough to help somewhat -- he can hold the baby, give her a bottle, etc., -- and because he is not jealous. I guess he's old enough to understand that babies need alot of attention, plus he already had all those years of being my one and only; now he's in first grade and mom's just not the center of the universe like she is with little kids. But I worry that they won't be close when they're older because of the age difference. my sister and I are 4 years apart and we're best friends.
2006-09-06 06:26:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by cb 3
·
0⤊
0⤋