To wonder why so many people choose to have such a short age gap between their children?

[Lightningfast]

I hear of so many people with two children two years apart and can’t for the life of me understand why anyone would want

a. To be pregnant with a child of around only a year old
b. To have a newborn baby when the older one is still a toddler and therefore still needs support in so many really basic ways. Sure, they don’t need the same level of support as a new baby but still...

I’ve heard the ‘they will be close enough to be friends’ theory but in practice I have seen at least as many if not rather more siblings who are close in age but are not especially close emotionally and it feels a rather weak reason.
I see this happening so often, even with mothers who have really struggled with getting their first baby to feed, sleep etc. and yet seem hellbent on having another only a matter of months later. Just...why?

If this is you I’m not judging, just genuinely interested in what you are getting out of it.

For lots of reasons! Nappy baby stage over quicker all at once. Maternity leave all close together so mother can further her career (if she wants) without taking big gaps throughout. If you want more than one and enjoy them when they are older more than the baby stage it's over quicker. Not wanting to drag an older child around to baby activities. The friend ship thing. I have 4 and they are all 18 months to 2 years between each one. Now I have done it, I'm glad I made that decision. We wanted 4 and if I had more than 2 years between each one it would just never end and wouldn't be fair on the older ones. Plus dh is older and he didn't want to be an old dad.

I suppose the benefits are getting reuse clothes, pram, cribs etc and get the sleepless nights over and done with in fewer years.

I have a nearly 5 years gap between mine. It was good because I got to raise my son for 4 years with him getting all the attention. Then focusing on my daughter when she was born and my son was old enough to not need me as much. The negatives being that I got to enjoy a few years of sleep after my son then having to restart the sleepless nights over again. Also I ended up getting rid of most of my son's baby stuff as it was taking up space and we weren't sure when we would have a 2nd child. So had to rebuy pram, crib, cot, most clothes etc! So that wasn't great having to buy same things twice! Also, the age gap does mean that they enjoy different things. We have had a few holidays that are hotel and pools related, at the moment the kids both enjoy it, but worry as they get older the eldest will want to go to different places that my youngest wouldn't be interested in.

I still think a gap worked out better for us as it meant childcare costs were only for 1 child at a time. Not having to experience having two babies/toddlers at the same time. Also now that parents have to contribute towards university costs, I'm glad we have that 5 year gap so only needing to help one at a time if they go to uni.

Getting the suffering out of the way.

Me neither. Close together is much better, you can go on more age appropriate holidays, toddler proof the house then, get rid of everything. Have similar ages toys in. Hand down stuff more easily.

I can't imagine why you'd want a big gap.

As someone with twins, two at the same time (while not mentally ideal!) I can admit has been very financially beneficial. Only one mat leave loss of earnings, benefitted from sibling discount throughout the whole of childcare, twin charity membership has some brilliant discounts on so many things, etc.

I always knew I wanted three or four children. I didn't meet their dad until I was late 20s and didn't want to be an old mum. So I had them at 30, 32 and 35. I loved being on mat leave with my eldest three times in a row. It was wonderful to spend so much time with them all while they were little.

Dcs are 15 months apart. Totally planned. Meant getting the baby/ toddler stage done at one time. They're at the same stage, like many of the same things and we can go on trips and holidays without having to cater for different ages. Luckily they're incredibly close despite being opposite sex. Of course there are pros and cons for both, but choosing a bigger age gap was just not for me.

I didn't plan a 2 year gap but nature had other ideas! I was on the pill so was very shocked! But it was fine! Ds2 attended all of DS1s classes and it was nice to have more time with him!

Was knackered but was still very much in the knackered stage when I got pregnant as ds1 was only 15 months old!

They are 5 and 7 now and mostly get on quite well!

I don’t think close ahe always leads to good friendships. Seems to cause a lot more sibling rivalry. Depends on other things like personality and genders of course.
Same gender and/or close together in age seems to breed world war 3 situations in friends & family - grown ups and kids!
Seeing that & having that myself growing up put me off having 2 close together.
Some people will assume family life has to be mad, full of arguments, crying and combative but it doesn’t have to be at all if everyone gets enough “good attention” and aren’t too stretched to maintain respect and good modelling etc.
I know I’d be a worse parent if kids close together and more stretched but horses for courses, some people thrive on it.
Is why is a personal choice, except of course planning for babies isn’t always a choice

A 2-4 year age gap is pretty normal and doesn’t stop kids playing together and they learn from each other. Kids with a much bigger age gap play nicely too. Have friend with 2 under 2 who are full on competition for eachother ALL OF THE TIME. Like no let up. Competition with friends, parental attention, all the same classes - gymnastics, dancing etc etc. Daily meltdowns if one better than the other at anything. No chance to say “well you’ll be as good as X when you’re their age if you keep practising”.
count my blessing daily that I don’t have any of that!

It's not my favourite.

If I had left it 3-4+ years then I wouldn't have done it again because I wouldn't have wanted to go back into it.

So getting it out of the way ASAP is what we're going with.

This happens so often. I’m sure it happens more than we know too since many will likely not want to share their private business.

Crikey, no, many people don't feel like that! I hated the baby year. Was bored, miserable and the time dragged on for ever. I regret not going back to work sooner
rather than sticking it out for an entire year. It's much more fun when they're older.

@Olinguita I've got a deliberate 4 year age gap for similar reasons (terrible, complicated HR/IUGR pregnancies, PNA/PPD, bonkers expensive nursery) and it is WONDERFUL. I'm always a bit baffled by the negativity/stigma on Mumsnet.

Still trying to work out what activities you can't do with both of them (does anyone want to enlighten me?!) or why they can't play together. DS is 4 and already plays with DD and she's only 8 months old.

Being on mat leave with DS started reception was also great. because we got a couple of months off paying for childcare, and I could also be around for the transition, which was pretty tricky. DD was still in the loaf baby stage, so while she required physical attention, I could dedicate a lot of emotional energy to helping DS settle in his new school.

Seriously considering a third with another 4 year gap because it's been so smooth. I'm seriously in awe of anyone who can do small age gaps, because I don't think I would be able to cope at all.

This!!! Absolutely agree! I simply cannot fathom why anyone would choose to do this!!

The activities thing is as they get older, so eg whilst your 4, 5 and 6 year old will still very much love soft play, your 8, 9 and 10 year old will like it less so (and likely too old for some places anyway).

Same for things like going to other indoor play places, farms, etc... Also likely won't want to see the same films at the cinema, theatre shows, your older one will be interested in particular museums and exhibitions that your younger one will be too young to enjoy...

And as they get older, it's unlikely a 10 year old boy will want to play very much with a six-year-old girl. They'll likely have very different interests.

@allfurcoatnoknickers when they’re 11 and 15, for example, there will be many things they won’t want to do together! Mine are 18 months apart and both girls so it’s been brilliant - they have the same friends, share clothes, holidays are so easy as they want to do all the same stuff. However my sister has a 15 and 11 year old and it’s totally different - the 15 year old wants to do teenage stuff, not hang out with her kid sister.

The gap only gets bigger IMO, til they get to adulthood, and then 4 years is nothing.

But wouldn’t it be boring if we all did the same thing!

🙋

Not a huge difference, but was aiming for around 2.5 years, ended up with 21.5 months. Took 12 months to conceive DC1; about 12 minutes to conceive DC2 🤣

But as PP says, they're 7 and 5 now and the best of friends. Would be completely lost without each other.

Nearly 4y between my two wasnt into close ages. But can see the pluses you get the baby stage out of the way.

@Bluearrivabus @Highabovethetrees I totally understand, but I don't know if there's a guarantee that they'd like the same stuff anyway? Even as a baby and a 4 year old they're very, very different people.

I'm an only child, but DH and his brother are 2.5 years apart and never liked any of the same things! So much so it's a running family joke to this day. BIL is a sensitive artistic type who was into ballet, dance, theater, museums etc. and DS is a sporty bull in a china shop type who couldn't sit still for more than 5 minutes and couldn't be trusted at the theater, museums etc., so their parents had to split up all the time anyway.

No, but there's more chance the closer they are in development stages.

My two are 22 months apart, different sexes, interests and temperaments, but we can still do a huge amount together. Eg they can understand and enjoy the same films, TV programmes... They are in the same age-range for outdoor events we go to; they enjoy playing together whether that's at the park, woods or beach or indoors with toys because they are developmentally within range of each other.

DC2 did go to a particular place with my DH over the Christmas holidays that DC1 absolutely wouldn't have been interested in, but that's probably the first time one has done a big event that the other wouldn't have got some enjoyment from.

Because we wanted another baby, also wanted children close in age who would play together. A 2 year old has very different needs to a newborn, my eldest was 2 when younger sibling was born and it was fine. I'd chat/read to eldest while i fed youngest.

Its been lovely, they are really close and play together really well.

Also when kids are 4 or 5 years plus apart their needs and interests are really different.

Eg a 2 year old and a 4 year old will both enjoy broadly similar days out, tv etc. They can do similar activities etc. If you have an 8 year old and a 3 year old its rubbish. 8 year old doesn't want to go to see the gruffalo at the theatre but gets dragged along for 3 year old. 3 year old isnt old enough for the things the 8 year old wants to do.

@Highabovethetrees @Benibidibici I think it's nice to do things individually with each child though? I took DS to the theater over Christmas without DD and DH and it was lovely to spend some time 1:1. I also took DD out to a baby opera a few weeks ago and DH and DS went out for tacos together and then to a toyshop. DH likes to spend time 1:1 with DD - I recently stopped breastfeeding her, so he's excited for more time with her solo now she doesn't need constant access to my boobs. I don't see taking time 1:1 with each kid as a negative.

I think it's nice to do things individually with each child though?

You can do that when they're close in age as well. But if they are years apart, it's challenging to find things to do together.