To ruin the dynamic with a third child

[Mygardenisaswamp]

We currently have a nearly three year old and a nearly one year old. I would like a third, but I'm concerned that having four years (assuming I get pregnant immediately like with the other two, it might be longer) between DC1 and DC3 will mean they won't play or be interested in the same things. Also concerned that as they get older we won't have enough time for a variety of hobbies and interests. Oh, and also concerned we'll be stretched too thin regarding emotional support and energy.
If relevant, I'm currently a sahm. Partner works 7.30am till 6pm. No family help.
Are we insane to consider ruining our happy little family by having a third? Anyone one of three and can give their opinion on how their childhood was (particularly if close age gaps)? Any thoughts?!

I am one of 3. My brother is 5 years older and my sister 4 years younger than me.

Me and my brother always got on very well and have always been close. I haven't ever got on with my sister.

To be honest, like some others on here, three was just too much for my parents to manage. They were over stretched time wise and financially. My sister was a difficult child and very difficult teen. She is still very difficult as an adult and has caused my parents huge amounts of stress.

I only have one. I couldn't imagine trying to support another child but I appreciate others are different.

I would advise you think very, very carefully before adding a third into the mix!

This is really interesting. Though sorry for those difficult experiences, it makes me grateful for my own parents.

We just had two. We're pretty well off and have quite a lot of energy. With the baby it's hard going. The 5 year age gap is lovely though. I really think it was the right time for a sibling. But if someone said would you have a third, I think that depends on how the elder two are getting on. Our eldest is wonderful, intelligent and thoughtful. But he's very energetic and full on. I think support in his teenage years will make a big difference to outcomes. Others might be different though. My own mum is a really well balanced person despite receiving minimal support through her own childhood.

Don’t overthink it

I think this is good advice for most situations in life, but not when it comes to having children. I think, if anything, more people should think long and hard about the possible outcomes, good and not so good, when deciding whether or not to add to their family. There are few decisions in life that can't be taken back or changed in some way, but this is one of them. I work with a lot of families who seem to take the "don't overthink it" approach to having more children, and end up struggling financially, emotionally, with balancing work and childcare or to give their older children the time and support they need.

OP, you mentioned additional needs. We always thought we'd have 3 children. But then we had 2 with SEND. They are wonderful and I wouldn't change them for anything, but life is not always easy, there is a surprising amount of admin involved and we have to parent very differently to our friends with NT children. Our eldest wasn't diagnosed until 7 and our youngest at 4. I am forever grateful that we didn't make the decision to have a third child before we really knew what we were dealing with in terms of their needs, which have become more apparent as they've gotten older and the gap between them and their peers has become more obvious. Financially, it would have been doable but we may not have had the options for private therapies, assessments etc that we have sourced for our DC without having to sacrifice things like holidays, days out and other fun stuff. In terms of our relationship and mental health, I think a 3rd would be a disaster.

Even if you have 3 easy children with no additional needs, adding more children is inevitably going to mean less time, less money and less energy to devote to the children you have now so I think you're right to be giving it serious consideration. I would ask yourself, what are you going to get from a 3rd child that the 2 you have now don't give you?

We stuck at two.
We both considered a third at different stages. Our first two were under 18 months apart, so DH was keen when DC2 was about 6 months old. I really wasn't!

Then when the youngest was about 18 months old I felt broody, and DH really didn't.
We stuck it out.

DC are teens now and I am so glad we stuck at two. They're good kids generally. Life is tricky for a huge number of reasons though, so two for us was the right decision.

Thanks, @Pumpkinseeds22

They weren’t blaming anything on having three children as such, just more that my SAHP (who was, in general, a wonderful loving parent) was needing to spread themselves far too thin and often quite distracted - generally because my much-older sibling was quite needy and at a crucial stage of education. They simultaneously had a child doing A-Levels and a child learning to read!

I guess it was different times in terms of what ‘parenting’ was seen to entail (my WOHP was barely involved in day-to-day parenting), but sometimes I look back at times that we really should have gone to the GP or they really should have noticed a potentially serious problem (generally because my SAHP was caught up with supporting my older sibling’s A-Levels/year out/university exams - sense a theme?) and think: ‘What on earth were they thinking?’

what are you going to get from a 3rd child that the 2 you have now don't give you?

This is such a good way to sum it up. And I can't answer it really. I think I've just really enjoyed my two so far (bar the odd day obviously when it's all gone to hell in a handcart) and feel like I'd like to do it again. But that's from my point of view. And that's not as important as how it effects the lives of my children who will hopefully long outlive me.

I have the same age gap and would like a third but my husband is happy with two and not willing to risk going again. Main reasons are 1. My health (I've been very lucky with my pregnancies and births). 2. Potential baby's health (again we've been lucky so far, I don't think we'd cope with a child with additional needs). 3. Financial strain (we're comfortable in a 3 bed and don't want to move, kids are happy here, schools are great and we could both work PT if we wanted and afford the mortgage). It's a difficult decision but one I'm comfortable with. I'm the youngest of 3 and know I could make it work but I'm at peace and really counting my blessings.

I am one of three and I hated it. Vowed I would never have 3 children of my own.

In the future if one of you lost their job or became ill would you manage? Much easier to manage with 2 children than 3 and, obviously, you would only get help if the form of benefits for 2

We have 3 with similar age gaps to what you’re talking about. I’ve found that the dynamic is constantly shifting. At times the oldest and youngest have been very close but at the moment it’s the middle and youngest. Sometimes I wish we could have had 4 because I do often feel like one is left out of 3, but 3 was my limit in terms of energy and patience. And actually I don’t have as much of those as they deserve, not really.

I've also thought this - part of me thinks it would make sense to have four so that there isn't one left out, but that would be a whole new level of stretch and not something that I want to do.

Thank you everyone - at the moment I think the potential risks outweigh the benefits. If I could guarantee all of our health and a personality that fitted in I'd go for it, but that's not life!

No. Your children are still small so it's cheap the real expense I've found and I only have 1. Is around age 8 and upwards, bus fares to pay for, more expensive activities and they eat practically an adults size meal in a restaurant. Theme park tickets and holidays can you actually afford this OP?

Quality life is extremely important to me so 2 would of always been my limit no matter what.

Yes I see what you mean. That when there are more kids if a parent gets caught up in the biggest issue for one at that time they might not see a bigger priority with another child. That makes sense. Sorry that happened.

We had three - the oldest was 3.5 when no 3 arrived. Most of my friends also had three, so it was nothing unusual. It has its drawbacks for sure - none of us had spare money or lived the high-life, and still don't now that all three are through university and we finally have some spare cash. The kids, and their friends, are quite grounded, far from materialistic, thrive on each other's company and are extremely kind to each other. I may have let my eldest have music lessons had we had more money, but I didn't go back to work until she was 8 and having not worked for over six years, once I did go back I suddenly felt the richest person in the world, so we did a loft extension.

Mine are now 23, 25 and 26, live in different cities but still have a closeness. Looking back, obviously with rose-tinted spectacles, the lack of music lessons, foreign holidays, and other material goods was worth the sacrifice.

My mum is one of 3 girls. She's the oldest, and has always been closest with the youngest. There's 5 years between them.
They look very alike, and in their 20s/30s were often mistaken for identical twins. They have very similar personalities as well.
The middle one has always been a bit "the odd one out". Doesn't resemble them physically, and has a very different personality. Obviously, they all love each other, and are as close as most sisters are, but I think she knows the older and youngest one are the double-act.

I'm one of three and pregnant with our third.

There's objective cons to having more children especially if you don't have a lot of wealth.

Still, we decided to go for it. Hopefully it works out ok.

Our age gap will be almost 6.5yrs between youngest and eldest but I don't see that as a problem at all. I definitely couldn't have coped with three close together (or even two closer together, tbh!).