I know it's not that large, but what's it like with three?!

[anotherbadnight]

We have two, aged 3 and 1, and I can't stop thinking about having another - or rather having an inner debate over it and discussing it with dh. Any pros and cons anyone would like to share would be great!

Its not worse, but it is harder work at the moment. I'm not sure if that's because I have four, or because DC4 is a baby IYSWIM. Babies are hard work whether you have 1 or 10 I think.

I predict it getting easier

I was wondering the same myself,have a 4 year old and 5 yr old (17 month gap),and am expecting no 3 in September.
I'm expecting it to be easier for sure than when i went from 1 to 2.My 5 yr old had only just come home 2 months before i had the 4 yr old due to serious health problems and she was quite behind for a while so it was like having twins.
I also had to tube feed her every 2 hours and was breast feeding the younger daughter it felt like i was non stop feeding and often both at the same time.
This time my 5 yr old has a tracheostomy but is way better health and development wise.DD2 also starts school full time in September so i will only have the baby for most of the day. It will be such a contrast that i can't see it seeming hard work .Let's hope i'm not wrong .
The only problem is i'm due the week after school starts and having all our windows and doors replaced the week after so things may start off a little chaotic!

Squatchette wow you had your hands full! I bet you will find it a piece of cake this time round

I had DD2 when DD1 was 5, and as DD2 had a lot of problems (NG fed, O2, apnoeas, fits etc etc) it was good that DD1 was semi-independent - at least she could get herself a drink and go to the loo alone if I was pumping/feeding. Also she had just started school which helped.

Then DD3 came along; easier in many ways but harder in others - much noisier, non-stop demand feeding then she got mobile! I had forgotten how hectic toddlers can be LOL!

no 1dilemma i was the same as you. my first gap was 13m to the day. i was cacking myself that i wouldnt be able to handle a just 1yo and a baby... and it turned out to be no big deal really. nowhere NEAR the shock to the system that you get with going from none to 1 imo!
so i was blase and chilled about no3... grumbled about my body not coping so well with 3rd pg in 3 yrs... and when no3 was born i had a 2.5yo and an 18mo... and it was REALLY feckin hard tbph!! i dont think i left the house for about 6m coz it was just the most almighty hassle to get 2 toddlers and a baby dressed, fed and out all at once. by the time we were ever ready to go anywhere i was shattered! all 3 in nappies, 2 running in dif directions while the baby couldnt be left, somebody always needing a drink or a nappy change or wailing about something.
BOY am i glad to be out of that stage.
i wanted lots, once i got started, but 3 cured me of that. HOW people cope with more i'll never know...

2 to 3 was a zillion times harder that 1 to 2 for me. I think the gap is the key - there was just a year between 2 and 3 and they were all pretty small. It was awful, and took me more than a year to feel I could cope, or even go out by myself with all of them without having a nervous breakdown. dc2 is still massively jealous of dc3 - I recommend thinking long and hard about the possible upset.

(MInd you, I'm still thinking about number 4!)

googly, nice to hear im not alone!

i have two lots of three

first time round it was hell

this time i am loving it - loving having lots of littles 5 2 and neonate may not last!

aw butterfly, thats lovely !

thank you for these - v interesting! lots of my most balanced friends come from (close) families of 3 siblings so i think it has to be good!

It is very hard but SO much fun. We've got a 3yo dd and 1yo twin dds. The only problem we've come across so far is sfinding a holiday for a tweenie and 2 babies.

Even if we'd only had 1 the second time, i'd be trying for a third now.

2-3 has been hardest for me but that is mostly because dd2[my no.3] is very demanding, much more so than ds or dd1 were even with dd1 being ill a lot. My lot are now 4,2 and 19mths and they do play well together although they also gang up on me and even if being shouted at think everything is a game..although cant be that bad as would ahppily have another tomorrow..

3 is all good. Mine are 5 and 4 years and 19 weeks .
Seriously considering No 4....

HAving number 3 tipped the balalnce for us.

Ideally we would have had 2 1/2 children. 2 wasn't enough but 3 is hard.

I am in the same situation - do I go for 3 or take the easy option and stick with 2, decisions, decisions - do you go with your head or heart?

I have 3 (DD1 nearly 3, DD2 nearly 2 and 12 wk old) and yes it is hard work but also alot of fun. 1 to 2 was harder then 2 to 3. Routine is the key and the rest is easy. I would love more but DP is saying a firm no for now

I definately found 2 to 3 much harder than 1 to 2, but no3 is a very very busy little one. 3 just never quite seems to fit with everything. Wouldn't swap them , though...

Imnotmama - thats exactly how I felt 2 wasnt enough but now im pregnant i feel
watching this thread with interest

In some ways I found 1 to 2 easier than 2 to 3 but I think that is partly down to the sleep habits of dc2 and dc3. dc2 dropped off for naps no probs and would sleep through anything, dc3 (currently 11 weeks) is a nightmare to get off to sleep in the day and is easily disturbed.
In other ways I am probably more relaxed with 3 than I was with 2 - I know that everything gets easier with time, so whatever is proving difficult at this phase doesn't stress me as I know it will soon pass.
I also think different age gaps make a difference. I have gone for relatively close gaps (16 and 22 months). A lot of hard work in the short term but get it all over and done with that much quicker.

As earlier posters have said, I can imagine childcare becomes problematic with 3. Any thoughts about both parents WOHM and having 3 or more? I have heard that 3 is usually the final tipping point for one parent giving up work completely because the logistics become too complicated to be workable.

I had 3 in 3 years and 2 months- similar to RuffleTheAnimal.Mine are 4 1/2, 3 and 19 months. It is very hard work, especially if you have no or little family support. We never stop and it is becoming a real juggling act getting my DD to school and my DS to pre-school with a younger toddler in tow.

Three is a nice number of children as mine play together well and you get the baby/toddler stage over more quickly but it IS feckin hard work and you can't do things like relax when the baby is asleep, for example.

If I had my time again I would have a bigger age gap as having three so close has also left me with some nasty complications which means I require surgery next year.

I am SAHM although I would love to work part-time teaching but my wages would never cover the childcare costs and so we manage on one wage in London which is very hard. We could never manage the childcare issue with three. It would be completely unworkable unless I stayed at home.

At the moment, we never get a moment to ourselves and this can be quite depressing and a real strain on our marriage. Getting a babysitter for 3 is just not possible for more than a few hours. We go out together about once or twice a year if we're lucky.

I'm really looking forward to all of mine being school age simply because my DH and I are so exhausted. Like others on here, I am very house bound - it is an absolute mission to get them all ready to go out but if you stay in, they wreck the house, so you can't win!

I personally haven't found 2 to 3 easier than 1 to 2 as you're restricted in what you can do for so much longer with 3. The practicalities of having 2 toddlers and a young girl are difficult too- negotiating walking/sitting in the buggy, shopping, trips out and the cost of course! Not just in the short term but in the long run- is very expensive.

Ask me again in about 4-5 years if having three is beneficial! I'm sure I'll come out the other side and say 'yes'

If you have three, my advice would be have an age gap of at least two/three years between each one so you can pay them individual attention and not be so overwhelmed with the demands of early years childcare as we have been.

very hard would not recommend it

Just seen this thread. Me and DH are having exactly the same deliberations at the mo. Had 16 mth gap between first 2 and discussed trying for no 3 in the summer but decided not to then but now no 2 is 20 mnths, feel ready to start trying again. DH and I have decided to rediscuss in the NY.

Oh dear candyfluff. Why do you say that????

3 is a bad number in my experience, go for 4 or stick at two, I wish I had.

Demanding. Tiring. Hilarious. And when they are all in bed, all cosy and tucked up, delightful

Hard work but worth it, would still like a dc4.