ok a large family close together or spaced out?

[LilyLoo]

Just a thought we have couple of close friends both with four dc's one under ages of seven one under ages of five. Both mums ten years difference between them so not sure it's an age thing but wondering if having all your dc's close together means you may be thinking more about having a large family rather than spending time focusing on each individual child?

Sounds lovely Nemo, that's what makes it all worthwhile. Thanks for response (p.s seen your other thread have great hol !)Mog interested in your comments if you still around.

ohh took some the other day will just go and find the card thing..

Yes mine were planned, we both wanted small gaps. Me because I'd enjoyed that growing up, Dp because his siblings were a lot older than him and he felt he missed out on having sibling playmates.

I did feel quite guilty having the 3rd, I worried the other two, still both preschoolers, were missing out on my attention and energy. But they both adore their little sister and she fits in so well.

I can see why people want bigger gaps, it must be less tiring, but it's so gorgeous seeing them all playing together endlessly, and being so compatible in what they like doing.

Suppose the other side of the coin though Fennel is that it's actually more tiring the bigger the gap because you have become so use to having more me time, more sleep etc.

Hatrick I have just realised you said DD3

lol dont think Dh could handle that much hormones in the teenage years..pmsl

New pics now on

must admit when I have seen pictures of your DD2 she has the same cheeky grin and the wild blondey hair..lol

Less outside the home - things like I could never take all three swimming. Or didn't let my oldest go to things like ballet etc because it would have meant taking all three along and chasing toddlers around. Things are a lot easier now - I'm talking about having a 3,2 and 1 year old!!

lol hatrick thanks..when we had DD1 my neighbour said to me we had to keep having children as they are soo lovely we would be doing an injustice to stop...so see hatrick you and I are doing our bit for the world...pmsl

My DS has swimming lessons on a sat and I take both the girls with me to watch him. I didnt want any of them to miss out on things and he had been asking for swimming lessons for 3mths so 2mths ago he started them. So I suppose in that sense they still get to be individuals aswell. If the girls want to do something different then they will and probably end up taking all with me as DH works long days so isnt around until 8pm ish.

Can see what you mean Mog.I take DS to football but many parents there run ragged running around after toddlers.

I planned all of my pregnancies and I also had 3 children in 3 years (ds1 was 3.5 when ds3 came along).

I was probably influenced by my own childhood experience - I was one of 3 and there was just under 2 years between each of us. We had a ball - I loved my childhood, I never felt as though I lacked attention and even now, in adulthood, I'm close to my brothers and we are always helping each other out, getting together etc.

My children, all boys, adore each other and have a whale of a time. Almost anything we choose to do suits all of them. Watching them together is priceless. The younger ones learn so much from the older ones. Ds3 is so used to being around his brothers and his friends that he is pretty confident, outgoing and his language is excellent.

We are always out and about. Having 3 close together didn't stop me getting out. I don't find it a problem.

All of them get opportunities for one to one time but they don't seem to crave it or anything.

It's labour intensive in the early years - having 2 at a time in nappies and probably 2 that are quite dependent for getting drinks, feeding etc. It's only for a short time though and you get the stage where they are all dependent and off to school, much earlier than if you spread them out. Personally, I would not like to get right past the baby stage only to have to go back to it later.

My SIL has a dd of 5.5 and a dd of 1 - the older dd might as well still be an only child at the moment as she is so different from her sister that they do nothing together (I hope this changes as they get older). DD1 was 4.5 when dd2 arrived - she was at pre-school, just going in to reception, nappies were a long distant memory, going out was dead easy - then along comes a baby. Horses for courses but that wouldn't be my choice (I know there isn't always a choice).

As all things in life, there are pros and cons to how things work out but I'm more than happy with my close together boy gang and, more importantly, they seem ecstatically happyt too. I guess I did something right!

Gosh, I never stopped them doing any activities because I had to take the others. Younger ones have come everywhere with us and actually it's made their transition into the same environments much easier - starting swimming lessons, nursery, pre-school etc has been much easier for the younger ones as the people and places were already so familiar to them and they often had siblings already there.

I'm just reading "they f* you up your mum and dad" and apparently there is a lot of evidence to say that a less than 2 year gap is much more stressful for the older (displaced) sibling (much higher incidence of personality disorder/mental illness) and that similarly children in families of 5 or more are more likely to be disordered because of the difficulty in providing individual attention...

makes sense to me, but then I have no more than 2.4 yrs between mine and I stopped at 4 so it suits me to think it makes sense

apart from that, I'm finding it a completely fascinating read if you are interested

Um, I'm completely sane

To the OP - I don't think you are going to get a balanced view on this. As soon as mums wade in to say there wasn't any problems for them, no one else is going to feel comfortable coming on to say their children might have missed out.
I have found it hard and since I don't want to be supermummy, mine have had to be satisfied with less external activities.

pph, that's an interesting theory about the 2yr gap. Mine are 13 months and 15 months apart, and i found it worked fine because the older ones didn't have time to get established as an 'only child' and 'the baby' IYSWIM. Only time will tell. At the moment they are a happy, well-adjusted gang of 3.

Mog, it's not that. It's just that people are different and everyone's experience is different. People handle things differently. Some people find it hard going with small ones and some people don't, some people can be SAHM with them and some just can't do it.

So basically there is no answer to the question - it will work for some and not for others.

Think that the "quality time" is about the parents...when they are all little you get no me time...but for me being in the chaos of it all, with the fun frolics, etc was/is bliss...we do try and do 1:1s...as for the activity stuff - wouldnt stress about it ...if they are all close together...they can all go together when they are a bit older...keep it simple..all of these activities are abit of a con - rip off financially and the stress involved i getting one to a class - sometimes not worth it -- would prefermmine to miss out on a 1/2hr ballet class than not have close siblings 24/7 for the rest of their lives. ...we just do stuff that keeps everyone happy..walks in the park ..bike rides etc...