3 children under 4

Petal765

Just looking for some advice, I have a 2 1/2 year old and a one year old and we are thinking of going for number 3 soon, am I crazy? I know from having 2 some days are crazy but it's so nice watching them play together and being so close, is three a game changer though? Anyone with a similar situation that can give some advice? Thank you

mordeith

Petal765 wrote: »

but it's so nice watching them play together and being so close,

Is this your sole reason? If so then I would say no. You have no idea how a third child will fit in. Sure, they could get along as famously as the current two (even though that can change quickly enough as they get older) but also could disturb the current balance

Petal765

mordeith wrote: »

Is this your sole reason? If so then I would say no. You have no idea how a third child will fit in. Sure, they could get along as famously as the current two (even though that can change quickly enough as they get older) but also could disturb the current balance

No definitely not my sole reason, and saying that it isn't very often that do play together and get along, most of the time I'm a referee between the 2 of them, I guess what I was trying to say was that they are both into the same things which makes it a bit easier but I totally understand what your saying about disturbing the current balance, this is my worry, that things are good now so why would I rock the boat with a third.

Big Bag of Chips

If you want 3, go for it. I had 3 under 3. It's busy, but it's contained! I have friends who had up to 6 year gaps between 3 or 4 children and THAT seemed like hardship to me!

Everyone is different, and everyone will have an opinion. Do what you feel is right, at the time, for your family.

mordeith

A friend of mine went for the third and ended up with twins! Just saying

Petal765

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

If you want 3, go for it. I had 3 under 3. It's busy, but it's contained! I have friends who had up to 6 year gaps between 3 or 4 children and THAT seemed like hardship to me!

Everyone is different, and everyone will have an opinion. Do what you feel is right, at the time, for your family.

Thanks, I think that's what I was trying to get at, I know both myself and my husband definitely want another child, there's no doubt in that, it's just a matter of when, like you said, I think I'd prefer to have it contained, but like that everyone's different, your advice of what is right at the time and for your family is definitely good advice, we'll have to have another chat about it and see where we are

Petal765

mordeith wrote: »

A friend of mine went for the third and ended up with twins! Just saying

Well that would be me done and dusted.... Serious admiration for anyone with twins, don't know how they manage,

sillysocks

I have three but the gaps between mine are larger - 2.5 years between first two, and then third was 3.5 years. However I did find the transition to three probably the easiest of each transition from having the first and then having two. One thing about bigger gaps is the older ones might have started school/playschool by time youngest is born which is a great help for a break during the day.

One thing to bear in mind is logistics. Esp when they'll all be quite young at the same time, e.g. Buggy for shop trips, fitting three in the car (amazing how few cars fit three seats across).

I can see the benefits in having kids so close but don't think I'm cut out for it! But would say the same when I only had one so that's not to put you off the third 🙂

Chocolate fiend

I had my 3rd the month after the oldest turned 4, so not quite 3 under 4 but close enough. She was and has been the easiest of the children and they are 5, 8 and 9 now. Three in our case means there is always one left out by the other two. The youngest picks her favourite based on the day of the week, and the other one is the one who suffers.

Going from zero to 1 was harder than any of the other transitions, and while 3 children is hard it is what we wanted. It is lovely on the days they all get on together, and logistically it works fine, it is just the fighting that gets me.

shesty

It will be me next year (all going well), approx two year gap between each.I am one of four myself so I can see how an even number is beneficial but that said even as four, there was a lot of fighting.(we will not be having four).I think it's just a function of having siblings.I know of families with two that fought like cats and dogs especially into the teenage years, so I don't think there's any easy way.Our house is chaotic, and we are constantly tired but we know it won't last forever.Thankfully both of ours are fairly good sleepers although that does mean they are chock full of energy during the day.....

From my own selfish point of view, I want to get the pregnancy and small child years over with close together, and try to put my life back together a bit, which is why I am not stretching it longer.

Day Lewin

Its very, very busy and exhausting and you're likely to be dead tired, unless they are all amazingly good sleepers - which would be unusual.
Agreed, kids are lovely and lovable: and babies are the best...they are also entitled to the best of your attention insofar as is reasonable. So if you are having another one I'd advise you to plan for some time off, now and again, and help with housework and minding, etc. Just to keep yourself calm and cheerful.
And of course, these things aren't all controllable: children are not takeaway pizza where you can order what you like, when you like.
They're always a gift. Best of luck to you with the exhilarating chaos that is family life!

Moonbeam

I was happier to have mine close together so I would say go for it.
I had a new baby a 15month,3 years and 3months and 5 years and 3 months at one stage.
it is fine, I think a big gap would have been far worse.
They are 8,6,4 and 3 now.

If you have babysitters and family nearby I would imagine it makes life alot easier too.