What is the obsession with 2 under 2?

[2under2blah]

I see so many threads where people are worried that they're going to have a 3/4/5 year age gap between their children.

Didn't this used to be normal?

Why is 2 under 2 seen as the only way to do it?

Looks absolutely intense to me!

There’s 5 years between me and my brothers and they have a 15 month age gap. The larger age gap made just meant we had nothing in common, we’re at completely different life stages at different times etc. It was quite tricky for my parents to sort holidays as a family as my brothers would want to do younger kids things whereas I’d want to do teenage things so I just stopped going on family holidays at 14 as I was so bored.
We get along fine now, but don’t have a close sibling relationship. Whereas my brothers are pretty close and go on holiday together as they actually grew up together.
I also think financially and work wise it makes sense to have kids close together. Plus myself and most of my friends didn’t start having kids until early 30’s so you feel you have limited time to have children if you don’t want to be in your 40’s with a toddler.

Could be personality rather than age gap. Your parents should have made sure you weren't bored on holiday too.

We had two under (20 months between them) and it's been great!

But I had no idea this was a 'thing' and we certainly hadn't specifically planned it - It just happened.

Well I had one at 33 and one at 40 - worked out just fine!!

Two under 2s is horrific in my view. You’re in survival mode - and the number of posts in here about the impact of a baby and toddler on a relationship suggests it’s not ideal. We couldn’t afford two lots of nursery fees at the same time. We didn’t intend to have a huge gap but we didn’t start trying for our second until DS1 was over 30 months. I’m 3 years older than DB and DH is 5 years older than his DB. It never occurred to us to have a small age gap between ours.

2 under 2 is top humble brag territory, for frazzledness. Only trumped by 2 under 1.

A 2 year gap is seen as a good gap to have . Like it's the expected gap, and we'll organised . It seems like rather an old fashioned way of thinking.

We had two under two because I had awful pregnancies and just wanted to get them over with.

It’s been perfect for us. They’ve always played together well, we got the hardest childcare bit over in one go and now they are best mates (who of course try to kill each other regularly also!). I didn’t find it some frazzled, stressful nightmare (weird people assume that when they haven’t experienced it, I don’t assume I know what a bigger age gap feels like).

Also - I have siblings ranging from 18 months older than me to 15 years younger than me. I have different relationships with all of them that having nothing to do with the age gaps, just the individuals!

21 months between my 2. I didn't start my family till I was in my mid-30s and didn't want to be changing nappies in my 40s. It IS exhausting now that they're both toddlers but it's also great watching their bond grow and seeing how close they are.

My observation would be that a small age gap is better for the kids and a large gap is better for the parents. We had both in my family and the large age gap kids just don’t have anything in common. This is also true of friends; my closest friend grew up with a 2.4 year gap with her brother and then 6 years between them and the older sister and their sister just never jelled with either of them, she’s close with her parents but politely distant from her siblings now.

It’s a tough first year with a small age gap, then the kids just tend to roll along together nicely. As a PP said, if you’re having kids for you then a big age gap is easier, if you’re hoping for close siblings go small gap and ride out the hard bit.

If time had been on our side I think a bigger age gap would have been much better. Older child could have pacified himself while running around with the younger. And cheaper for nursery, school fees etc. 2.5 years between mine.

I think the opposite and 2 under 2 isn't great for kids you'd only do it for logistical reasons for the parents!

I think aiming for 2.5 - 3.5 in an ideal world (where bodies comply and all that) is far better for the children. Less squabbling and fighting and sibling rivalry and still close enough to enjoy the same outings and trips.

I'm sure I was told by someone medical that health-wise it's best to leave at least 18 months between giving birth and getting pregnant. Which gives you a minimum 2.5 year age gap.

Financially, I think it depends on whether a parent is taking time off or putting both children in full time care. Lots of 2 full time parent families at my DC's nursery, and I see a lot of 3-4 yr age gaps, presumably so that you're getting free hours or eldest are at school before the next set of nursery fees. I can see it's different if a parent is staying home or going very part time - doing that for a shorter period is easier.

I definitely wouldn’t suit two under two! I’ve waited until mine would be in full time education until trying for a third. The practicalities didn’t make sense on a personal level. I couldn’t imagine how I’d manage another tiny one to EBF all day or fit on my lap or carry around. I’m ND and hypermobile with a good few issues in relation to Hypermobility. I take my hat off to those who feel they can choose it and I’m sure I’d end up finding ways to manage if it happened to me, but I’d never personally choose it.

We actively avoided 2 under 2 because we wanted siblings that were "close" to each other rather than in age and it's truly worked for us.

I remember the research at the time suggested this due to less direct competing for attention/toys and sibling rivalry in general.

Genuinely still surprised people would do it to make their kids "close" but like the previous nanny poster maybe they've not had much experience of kids!

Not that 2 under 2 is bad. At all. There's often so many reasons (and I'd say the opposite 2under 2 is usually for the parents to "get it out the way" ) but you still have those kids for a lot longer than the pre school years.

I know someone who wanted just a single year between her children and so she would start trying at six weeks postpartum, hoping to get pregnant by 12 weeks or so. It worked and she remarkably has four kids with a year (less than a year in one case, they were almost in the same school year 🤯) because she conceived early and he came a bit early. It makes me womb ache just thinking about it. Two were C-sections. I’m sure her doctors must have been despairing a bit.

Another friend was desperate for 18 months like her and her sister. Even the idea of being pregnant again with a nine month old make me a bit achy.

There’s three years between mine, though I did have a loss in there.

We had two under two, which was almost unexpected as I got pregnant straight away with DD2, having taken 6 months to get pregnant with DD1!

But I love it and would prefer that over a larger age gap - I have a similar age gap with my big brother and we've always got on well. I also wouldn't fancy having them in very different stages of life.

For us, it was also beneficial financially as I went back to work full time on paper between them, but actually used my accrued leave to be part time, then got my second mat leave on full pay, then went part time officially.

I've seen all sorts of age gaps work well and produce siblings who get on well, but from what I've seen about five to seven years seems toughest on the parents. (Bigger than that and you start to get a different dynamic again.)

Probably the pressures of having a perfect nuclear family with siblings close in age so they play together? Or maybe it’s having kids later so can’t afford to wait a long time between them?
I’ll have 8 years between mine, they won’t be close in age but at least my amazing firstborn is independent and means it won’t be as hard when I’ve got a newborn (:

Interesting. I didn't exactly think about it but more or less exactly first one turned one I became very broody and absolutely obsessed with giving her a sibling. Took a year as I had two miscarriages so they are 2.75 years apart.

It works well for us but I guess you make whatever set up you have work.

One thing I do wonder on these threads is difference between this generation and when we were parented. Like siblings that don't get along - I think previous generations just shrugged their shoulders and accepted it, I think we as parents would intervene and encourage them to find a way to connect. Or it could actually be perspective and all these kids people think adore their siblings are thinking resentful thoughts and will drift away in adulthood.

I think when it comes to siblings getting on well its down to personality rather than age gap. There’s 5 yrs between my brother and me and we’ve always been very close, I’d still consider him my best friend. My DC have a 3 yr age gap and are also close but don’t seem to have the friendship that my brother and I have always had.
DH has two brothers and they were ‘3 under 3’ - my MIL says this all the time - I think she’s still in shock. They aren’t close and only see each other when MIL arranges a family get together.

I have 2 years between all three of mine. Its the perfect age gap imo, they grow up similar in age and you get all the 'stages' out of the way sooner.

This was our reasoning..

As a middle to old mum who had fertility issues it was now or never.

Plus it would be too difficult to build up a career again after a longer gap and with less bulk years to build up. I didn't want to start getting a career of the ground to then stop again for a year. Also a bigger gap, i felt when the youngest was a teen i would be really old, i know many fit, energetic older ladies..but i highly doubt i would be lucky to be in that category 😅

If i was younger i would definitely had a bigger gap, i find it hardcore.

I didn't want to go on holiday etc until I had the second so the youngest didn't miss out on anything. I wanted them to be in school together etc and have the same experiences together. I'm a twin so that could be why.

The kids I know who get on well have 2 year gaps.
Its what I wanted but not what I was blessed with I ended up with 6years. Not to be recommended. They are at totally different stages but still fight especially when the oldest tries to parent the younger one.

Only trumped by 2 under 1.

There can't be many of those...!

There are 22 months between mine. I didn't know how long it would take to get pregnant the second time.

There are loads of kids in my eldest year whose siblings are in my youngest year.