Having 3 close together - is this a bad idea?

[piggypeggy]

Hello, not sure if this is the right place to post but DH and I currently have 2 DC (2 and half year old and 8 month old).

DH and I would like another but not sure on age gap (assuming we have any control over this). We were thinking sooner rather than later.

I guess my question is... is having 3 kids under 4 years old really tough?

Erm yes. I currently have 3 under 4 and it's really really hard I won't lie. Lovely but messy and noisy and tiring and lonely and overwhelming and magical and did I mention messy and noisy?!

As above. Completely. 2 years between my eldest 2. 16m between my middle and youngest.. I wish it was closer to 2 years again as its hard work with those two more than my eldest.

I have 3 aged 10, 5 and almost 1... the age gaps were intentional as the next was born just as the previous sibling started school. The thought of more than 1 pre-school child at home at once is utterly anxiety inducing for me, never mind 3! 2 of my neighbours have had 3 under 4 and neither of them made it look even slightly enjoyable!

But there is the argument that it’ll ‘get it over with quicker’ (whatever ‘it’ is). The only thing I slightly regret about it is that they are all at such different stages that holidays/activities will always be more difficult as they can’t enjoy the same thing together... but I think that’s a small price to pay!

I had 3 under 4 and yes it was tough but now my youngest is 3 it’s lovely. They are all into the same things, we deffo don’t want anymore so we’ve done the baby stage and have 3 amazing kids. It’s a whirlwind but having them close was best for us!

I had 3 in 3 years & 6 weeks plus an older one. The only thing that was difficult was when one had undiagnosed silent reflux - hell on Earth!! That was my third, ''twas a miracle there was #4 tbh.

I loved having 3 close in age though no regrets.

3 aged 5 and under here. Now almost 6, 4 and 10 months old. Love them to bits but yes its been hard, sleep deprivation is the worst. Do you have support? We are lucky to have family very close by which has been a life saver, I don’t know if I could manage without that. Its definitely getting easier now as the older children are more independent to an extent. Echo pp, Not sure I could do 3 under 3 as the oldest being at school and nursery has been very important for my sanity!

Realise I sound quite negative. There are so many positives too - they love each other so much and we laugh a lot. Love the fact they are close in age and enjoying similar things. Just looking forward to a full nights sleep sometime in the not too distant future !

I have 3.
there is 19 months between DS1 and DD and then 28 months between DD and DS2.
They are now 10,12 and 14

Pros

• The length of time i needed to stay home (preschool years) and work part time evenings was less than if I waited for each one to go to school before having another.
• they have always generally been into the same sort of things eg all the right age for soft play, happy to watch the same film at the cinema
• play together, into similar toys etc
• similar bedtimes so bedtime routine was generally shorter than if they were years apart
• easier to find other families with similar age gaps for play dates/days out etc
• all in same school for a few years so easier for school run/activities/school plays/sports days etc

Cons

• couldn’t afford all in nursery so if you wanted to continue a career it would be expensive
• tiring - sleepless baby nights follow close together so merge into a few years (but then again you don’t have time to get used to sleep again before the next baby!!)
• harder to find a car that fits 3 car seats (but not impossible)
• harder to wrangle 3 small kids if out by yourself
• will have 2 in uni at any one time so more expensive on that front.

But on the whole I think I prefer having them close together. There is 10 years between DH and his sister and although they get on they have always been at different life stages. I also have friends that have a teenager and then small children and it’s much harder for them to find stuff that suits everyone - days out etc

Excellent idea.... all at school at same time. So no school run forever. My mum had 4 under fives at 27 years old. She loved it. We all grew up at same time. She was fairly free by 41 years old.

3 under 2 years 1 month. Surprise twins rather than planned. No sleep for 6 years but ready made playmates and lots of fun. I used to get lots of comments about hard work, rather you than me, you must be exhausted etc. Pros and cons as with many things.

I had 3 under 4. I found going from 2 to 3 much easier than going from 1 to 2 ( or 0 to 1). No. 3 just slotted in really, but he was a very easy baby. As others have said, it's nice to have them all at similar stages together and similar interests. It worked well for us

I had 3 under 4 and it wasn't the easiest but I didn't find it awful. They all slept well though from an early age which made things a lot easier I think. You need to have a good routine in place with 3 that close together.

Mine are now 8, 7 and 5 and they are just lovely together and so close. Wouldn't change it for anything.

Thanks all for your responses! Feel a bit more prepared for the slog - with the hope that it will get easier by the time the youngest is 3/4-ish?