Talk to your OB. He will be the one to tell you when it is safe to have another. A woman’s body take a while to get back to normal and stabilize itself after pregnancy. If the body did not yet recover from precious pregnancy there could be complications with the other pregnancy. I asked my OB about this and it’s what he said. It usually takes about 1 year to recover completely, but every woman is different. Other than that I think that the perfect time to have another baby is when you feel that both of you are ready and you will be able to support him/her. My husband and his brother are only 11 month apart. Their mother did have a hard time with two newborns, one got jealous of the other, looking out for them and caring for the newborn, and things like that, but now she says that she would not change a thing. Good luck.
2007-03-02 14:27:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by Natalia D 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think it depends on you, your family and how you think you can handle closely spaced kids. We have three kids under three. I wouldn't have it any other way because it has been awesome, although I will admit that it has been tough,. I think that closely spaced kids are a joy. The first two are boys (14 months apart) and are now becoming the best of friends. They are completely sweet with the baby girl (19 months after #2), and I feel that they will be really close. There is a lot of love between them. It is great too, because those tough stages like potty training, terrible twos, and sleepless nights, will be over before we know it. I will say that pregnancy takes a toll on the body and I was really tired during the last pregnancy (#3). If I decide to have the fourth (probably not), I will definitely wait until my body has had time to recover so that I am not so pooped. Good luck to you.
2007-03-02 22:54:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by pbs3 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some people like having one right after the other.
I have 4 kids and the first 3 are spaced approximately 4 yrs apart. The last 2 are only 2 years apart and it was tuff. Having a toddler and an infant can really be trying. I preferred the 4 year spacing because it gave me time to concentrate on each one more individually,,,#1 went to school when #2 was a year old so we had the whole day to play and explore.
The waiting period is entirely up to what you and your wife want.
2007-03-02 22:26:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by pamomof4 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
My children are two years apart. Personally, I think I would have waited longer, but things happen. The reason I would have waited is because while I was pregnant, my first was still only about 15 months old. She was 23m going on 2 years by the time our 2nd was born. But, during pregnancy it was difficult because she didn't understand why Mommy couldn't carry her as much, etc.
So, my personal experience would say wait until the first is actually 2 years old to start trying for the 2nd. Also, general OB/GYN opinion is that 2 years should be the minimum amount of time between pregnancies to allow the woman to heal fully, etc. Yes, 6 weeks and women go back for their "checkups" and are healed, etc., but the internal "trauma" as they refer to it takes a while to heal and the uterus to get back to being at it's "best" I guess you could say.
Good luck!
2007-03-02 23:39:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mommy of 2 Girls 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would personally wait till the 1st child is 2 y/o, out of diapers/pull ups, and a little easier to keep up with before trying for the 2nd one. It's hard having 2 children in diapers, drinking bottles. I have 2 sons who are only 18 months apart. It's ok now, but when they were babies....WOW!! I really had my hands full.
I wish you both the very best of luck in whatever you decide to do.
2007-03-02 22:24:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by Crystal 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
My daughter was 18 months when I got pregnant with number 2. My second daughter was born four weeks early, so my oldest was only 27 months old when I brought home my second daughter. It is very rough dealing with a toddler and an infant. I wish that I had a couple of more months in between.
The oldest being three and then having the newborn I think is perfect timing.
2007-03-02 22:20:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by tmreiber 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
i think it all depends on your first child's development if u think your child is ready for a baby to come in the world then that's the right time for u i mean i have left it a 4year age gap between myn cause then u get the full benefits of them both i mean when the baby's born my other one will be going to school so he wont fill pushed out he will be all grown up cause lets face it when u have a newborn they need all the attention so the other one is feeling left out and if u have them to close together the eldest is always the one that gets falsed to grow up good luck
2007-03-06 20:25:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Helen P 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
My sister and I are 18 months apart. That means I was about 9 months old when my mom decided she wanted another baby.
We were frequently mistaken for twins and were best friends growing up and are best friends now.
I think it's less about the age and the spacing and more about how you raise them.
Plus, sibblings are gonna have some rivalry no matter how old they are.
Good luck!
2007-03-02 22:25:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Angel 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
It is different for everyone. I believe that it is best to start when the first one is about a year or two. You don't want to have them to far apart but you don't want them to close together either. The best advice is to do it when you both feel that it is the right time for both of you.
2007-03-02 22:25:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Tabitha G 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you nuts? The worst hasn't even started yet. Give yourselves a break and your poor wife's body. It has only been six months!!! To have a close in age family I suggest you space them roughly two years or more apart.
2007-03-02 22:22:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by noitall 4
·
0⤊
0⤋