Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Other subjects

Flip

Original poster

Going from 2 - 3 (I know it's been discussed before but...)

21 replies

Crunchie · 27/02/2004 12:28

Ok here goes, I have two wonderful little girls, aged 5 and 3 (in a couple of weeks) and I am in a quandry.

One minute I feel my family is complete, the next minute I am not sure. Both dh and I feel the same, so I am not going behind his back, we are both confused.

To give you more background, that may help/hinder. I am the main breadwinner, dh is an actor and at the moment he is in work locally, which we hope will continue for another year at least. He has said that in a year or so's time he might be prepared to be a SAHD, and just work when the kids are in school etc, or not if we had a baby. We can live off my salary so that isn't an issue, unless we need to pay for childcare. His salary pays for this.

In some ways I think if my 2nd child had been a boy I might not feel this way, also I was one of three (youngest and only girl) as was DH (oldest of 2 boys and girl) and we had always discussed having three.

But there are so many practical reasons not to have three, not least of all the car, the house, the money (or lack of), holidays, going out when a 'family' ticket is 2 + 2 etc etc.

One thought is to wait until the others are both in school (Jan 2006) then we would only have childcare during the day for one if DH is working. Working back from this date, taking into account 4 - 6 months Maternity leave and 9 months of pregnancy means about 15 months, so we could start trying in about 6 or 7 months. I know you can't work it out exactly, but I have always fallen pg with 3 months of trying or simply not using contraception (even when only having sex once that month!!) So I am reasonably confident that it could happen quickly. But this means the third would be at least 4 1/2 yrs younger than DD2, is this good as the others are very close? Also can we cope? There is going back to the sleepless nights again, having to get up in the morning and no lie-ins for years (just as we are starting to be able to do this on a sunday morning). Sometimes I already feel stressed and can barely cope with 2, let alone 3. On the other hand if DD2 is how DD1 is now (a really lovely 5 yr old MOST of the time) it would be easier surely??

So dilemma, do we have a third, or not??

Honest opinions wanted from those who thought about it and then decided not to, also those who have a third and especially those with the 5 year gap before having the third.

HELP PLEASE O ORACLE OF MUMSNET

OP posts:

dinosaur · 27/02/2004 12:40

I wish I could help, but after having gone through many of the same thought processes that you're wrestling with, third baby due in August - so I don't know yet whether it's a good idea or a really bad one...

I just felt that somehow my family was incomplete with two and I was worried that if I didn't have another one, I would always regret it.

Original poster

Crunchie · 27/02/2004 12:48

Dinasaur that is what I am worried about!!

OP posts:

Agy · 27/02/2004 13:01

We had an 8 year gap between DD2 and DS and that works surprisingly well. Girls enjoy helping. You could take your time with your decision, see how you feel in a year or two. Also with a later baby didn't seem to mind sleepless nights etc quite so much. You tend to enjoy it more knowing its the last one).

dinosaur · 27/02/2004 13:02

Crunchie - what propelled me towards deciding was that I am now 38 and I felt I didn't have the luxury of time to think about it for much longer.

pamina3 · 27/02/2004 13:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

emmatmg · 27/02/2004 13:37

3rd Ds is 5 months and he's the best decision we've ever made!

ponygirl · 27/02/2004 13:41

I've got 3 (5, 3 and 1) and it's lovely. The middle one is very close to both, the baby adores both and the eldest adores the baby (they're the two boys so ds1 is desperate for ds2 to catch up so they can play!). Two was definitely incomplete for me, and for dh and now we feel like a proper family, it's noisy and busy and there's not much money to spare, but there's a lot of love going in all directions. I would definitely have regretted not having a third. Go on, do it, you know you want to!

pamina3 · 27/02/2004 13:41

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

elliott · 27/02/2004 13:43

Crunchie - don't know if this will help but I am also the youngest of three (and only girl) - I am 4.5 and 6 years younger than my brothers and never felt this was a problem - in fact I think it worked in my favour. (though I did spend a lot of my childhood wishing I had a baby sister). I've now got two boys 2 years apart, and I think it would be lovely to have number 3 with a bigger age gap - personally I think it would be a complete doddle. I am not finding the nights nearly so bad this time around as with no 1 - something about perspective I think!! Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately!) we are unlikely to be able to conceive no 3, so at least I can leave it to fate without havoign to endlesssly ponder whether or not it is a 'sensible ' decision (of course not, for all the reasons you outline - and I'm also the main breadwinner) - but since when was having children really in the parent's best interests?? WE'd all be a lot richer and less tired if we hadn't bothered, after all

emmatmg · 27/02/2004 13:52

ponygirl, your 3 sound EXACTLY like mine in how they are with eachother.......it's lovely isn't it

dinosaur · 27/02/2004 13:53

ponygirl and emmatmg - you're really getting my hopes up here!

Sid · 27/02/2004 13:54

We went through the same debates and did have a third and I love it. In fact, I always thought that once I had three, that would be it, but now I can't stop thinking about wanting a fourth...It's a slippery slope, you see! Alas, dh is much more sober minded and worries about money. Unless I can acquire £100,000 from somewhere, I'm not allowed any more.

Luckymum · 27/02/2004 14:07

Crunchie.....I have three, they were 5,3,and baby. It was hard work especially as baby was very poorly for most of the first year but its well worth the effort. I got my little girl after having two boys although that wasn't why I had another, it was always 'unfinished business' IYKWIM. I didn't sell any of the baby stuff after the second as I had always wanted three. Our house isn't big enough (the boys share), I'm dreading uni fees but I'm glad I had the third. Go for it

emmatmg · 27/02/2004 14:18

Ponygirl, Your age differences are the same too, just a bit younger here. 4.10 yrs, 2.8yrs amd 5 months.

Come on girls just do it....it's fantastic

Original poster

Crunchie · 27/02/2004 14:21

These are great, I feel my family is complete at times, but I don't want to regret not having anothr. I am 34 now, and if I had another I would be about 36, so I don't want to leave it any later. We do have the space in the house (sort of) as my girls share a room anyway. In a way I just wish I could gaurentee a boy! Doesn't that sound bad

Keep them coming, I need someone to put me off too!

OP posts:

MrsWobble · 27/02/2004 14:23

I've got three girls now aged 9,7 and 4. I knew from the minute no2 arrived that I wanted another and also from the minute no3 arrived that that was it - even though I'm one of 4 and had always believed in the "2 or 4" to avoid a middle one theory.

My girls are really good company for each other and, particularly now they're no longer babies, they are much less work as they keep each other entertained. Whilst there are practical drawbacks to three, none of these really matter if you are a happy family - you find you own way to muddle through.

Good luck with the decision.

Mum2Ela · 27/02/2004 14:25

I only have one DD but I am one child of 5. Our ages now are 25, 24(me), 17, 16 and 9.

All I can say is that it was fab. There was always someone to play (fight?) with and I am sure my mum and dad found it hard, but whilst we were young they still amanged to live their own lives (they set up a v successful company together) and they are still young enough now (mum is 47, dad is 48) to have their own lives, even with 3 children still at home.

I have very fond memories of Summer holidays - like the time we went abroad and took 26 (yes, count 'em) pieces of luggage. Must have been a nightmare.

My advice is, if you feel your family is not complete, have another one. If you waited a couple of years, imagine how different (and more grown up) your DD's would be then. My mum always says, well, you just manage.

tallulah · 27/02/2004 17:36

The biggest upheaval (after 1 to 2 ) is 3 to 4. Then you HAVE to buy a people carrier, & the bedroom sharing is a nightmare. The 3rd one just slots in....

lou33 · 27/02/2004 17:40

I found going from three to four the hardest, after having the first. One to two, and two to three just fitted in.

nutcracker · 27/02/2004 18:18

I have 3 kids aged 6, 4 and 14mths. I found it hardest to go from 1 to 2. I think i was shell shocked for at least the first 6 months. Going from 2 to 3 was relativly easy i thought. That may be though because my 2nd baby was a nightmare, and number three was so well behaved. I would love to have a 4th (mad i know), but if i do, i will be leaving it until my ds is 31/2 at least.

motherinferior · 28/02/2004 11:39

Well, if I had a bit more time/cash and wasn't so very ancient I'd go for it.

Flip