to plan for 3 children with no family support

Go for 2 anyway. 2 close is easier than 2 apart (in the later years anyway).

Then you have time to see if 3 works. Don't decide your family from random experiences on MN.

We have four and have never had "family support". No overnights, no childcare (nor would I expect it) from anyone in our extended family.

Have children based on what you can cope with, not how much support you're likely to get from elsewhere

Well it’s hard to say when you have one. See how 2 works out.

We have 3 with no family support locally. 2 was soooooo easy. Like, boringly easy. Had 3 and it seems like double the work of 2. It’s lovely, DH and I say to each other every day how great it is, but it’s pretty hard too. I remember thinking I could have had a super happy satisfied life with just the 1. 2 was lovely. 3 is great. But a lot of work.

I'm pregnant with my 3rd. We have a bit of help but older grandparents (we started late) mean they'll have one kid at a time. Which is absolutely fine and I 100% understand.

Our choice to have them but it is hard and I do envy my colleagues and friends who started families younger and have lots of grandparent help, can't deny it and since I feel this way about having 2 I can imagine with 3 I'll feel it even more.

That said they were all planned and seeing my 5 and soon to be 3 year old playing together is amazing. The fighting and trying to kill each other on the other hand is tiring and some days soul destroying. It's a juxtaposition 😂

I conceived my second at age 36 when my first was 12 months old.

The age gap is actually great, they love each other so much.

I actually just got my first postpartum period since having my second (she's almost 2 but I'm still breastfeeding) which has given me a moment of, "Should we try for a third?"

But realistically and with slight regret (and barring any accidents) we will be stopping at two. Two is already full on, and I want them each to have their own room, enough time and attention from both their parents, and the possibility of doing activities and hobbies which we might not be able to facilitate if we had another child.

My nan used to say "never have more children than hands that need holding". So 3 is fine as long as you space them out - 3 four years apart, great , 3 under 5 not so much.

Go in to this considering the worst situations could you handle 3 If something happened and you ended up on your own either through divorce, sickness or accident could your DH?
Could you handle 3 If one of them had additional needs or one of the children had an accident or illness that made them require significantly more support?

Hopefully those things wouldn't happen but they do and they aren't that rare, at least in the case of divorce.

We have three with no family support. It’s manageable but often a struggle since we didn’t add neurodivergence or other elderly parent care into the mix.

I’d just see how things go. You are still a long way from having a third.

This is me, and had to lose the husband on the way.

Yes it is perfectly doable, but you have to be no nonsense, competent and resilient.

Yeah absolutely! It's all we've ever known tbh. I think we're lucky in that the kids get on very well, we have quite a small age gap so they're happy to do the same activities etc. We have quite a few friends in the area in a similar circumstance so we have a good network for after school hangs, occasional babysitting etc, but mostly we're independent. I think if I had more regular support I'd have loved a 3rd, but I was thinking ahead to if one gets into one sport and the other something else then who takes the 3rd to their thing etc. Lots of other things, that's just the one that stands out. I had the luxury of time and space to think it all through. If i'd found myself pregnant we'd have worked it out (as many do) and I'm sure it would have been fine. But two feels like a really lovely balance. DH and I both take the kids away solo once a year so the other gets some time at home and it doesn't feel like too much. He was recently at a friends house who has 3 (1 and then twins) and wrote back that witnessing the chaos he was super glad we'd stopped at 2 😂 But she loves the chaos, and is considering #4! It's all so individual.

We had three with no family support (overseas/distant parents). Third was a bit of a surprise but tbh because we had such big gaps it was fine. You can make anything work, it might be hard work for a bit but if you get to the point of really wanting a third having managed two with no help you know you can do it. Ironically DS1 now is “one and done”. We have his child one day a week (and have had for four years) and other GPs also do a day. We both also do many overnights to give them a break. DS said recently that he doesn’t know how people cope without the level of family support they have. I guess you just get used to what you have.

I always say how many children do you think you'd be happy with if a single parent and plan accordingly.

Can't speak from experience as in your situation we decided to stop at 2. But friends had a whoopsababy #3. They own their own business and work extremely flexibly, which is how it works. But honestly watching her trying to field client calls whilst keeping one hand on the crawling child and settling spats between the other 2 looks hard!!! The business means he is away a lot so she is a seriously busy woman. They're doing pretty well for themselves, went on some nice holidays last year (3 under 5 on a plane for 9 hours!!) The kids are bloody lush and all 5 of them seem to be enjoying life, which is what counts.

Have them one at a time and see how you're getting on...

I think it’s a bit dependant on flexibility at work, if one of you is term time only then you’ll be ok, or if you never take leave together, you’ll be ok but if you will be using playschemes and nurseries then you need to do the maths really

Are you both working FT?

Oops sorry I meant 2.

Maybe have one first and see how you cope!

See how you get on with 2 and then decide?

2 is quite different to 1.