Why does everyone have their kids two years apart?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure. My kids are 4 years apart, though. The bigger age gap is awesome for us. I've gotten to really enjoy/focus on each one''s babyhood, and when I get babied-out with the little one, I can spend big-kid time with the big one.

I had the first at 33 and second at 37, so I had age somewhat on my side...I didn't feel desperate to have the second. Also, I wasn't sure I wanted a second for a long time...not until after the first turned 3.

I would have felt so old having my first kid at 33.

Is your peer group fairly uneducated? Not one of my friends had a baby before 30 due to advanced degrees and careers.

+1.

I have a law degree and am a practicing lawyer. Ivy-educated. First kid at 29, third (and last) at 33. Sorry to disappoint.

Being so well educated, seems like you would have known it's not healthy to have kids so close together.

Sounds like they were all two years apart. Isn't that what WHO recommends?

Nope. The recommendation is to wait two year after the birth of a child to begin trying for another pregnancy. So even if you were to get pregnant right away, the kids would be close to three years apart.

I am baffled at the. Number of people who can't seem to figure this guidance out. The PP is right, children should be spaced a minimum or 2 years 9 months apart for optimal health.

Are you really that anxious that you plan the spacing based on this?
What's really going to happen if you space them 24 months apart? It's probably 0.001% better to wait an additional 9 months. Lol
Not screwing up the spacing for something so negligible.

What do you mean by screwing up the spacing? So it's "wrong" to have kids 3 years apart? If you knew anything about psychology, you would know it's actually better for the children to have 3-4 years between them. People assume kids who are very close in age will be "best friends " and they can just lump them all into the same activities and interests, which is really harmful in the long run. Kids need individual attention from their parents, and they need to be allowed to form relationships with friends and siblings based on their own interests and personalities, not just lumped in together because their parents wanted to "get it all over with."

And yes, I would space children farther than 2 years apart based on the very real evidence of better optimal health and developmental outcomes, lower risk of autism and developmental disorders, and better psychological outcomes for the child. Call me crazy, but I want to maximum the chances of best outcomes for my offspring.

[Anonymous]

My boys are 2 years apart.
They are 18 and 16 and are absolutely best friends. That wouldn't be the case with a bigger gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My boys are 2 years apart.
They are 18 and 16 and are absolutely best friends. That wouldn't be the case with a bigger gap.

How would you possibly know that? My boys are 13 and 9 and also absolutely best friends. The thing is, everyone only knows their own experience. You can't say how a different experience would be since you haven't actually experienced it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holy hell. Now we're saying 33 is old to have a first child?

NP here, I wouldn't say old but definitely not young.
That poster said she felt she has time on her side, I think that's crazy,

I think 33 is oldish to have a first child. I wouldn't want to wait that long. Obviously lots of women do and it often is fine, but I would feel old af having my first kid at that age.

It's often fine at 40 and 19, and many other ages too. In fact it's usually fine. Not everyone has the luxury of perfectly timing when they start their families. But I guess people like you will smugly look down their noses at anyone who made a different choice than you. What's it like to live with that level of insecurity on a regular basis?

[Anonymous]

I am baffled at the. Number of people who can't seem to figure this guidance out. The PP is right, children should be spaced a minimum or 2 years 9 months apart for optimal health.

Are you really that anxious that you plan the spacing based on this?
What's really going to happen if you space them 24 months apart? It's probably 0.001% better to wait an additional 9 months. Lol
Not screwing up the spacing for something so negligible.

What do you mean by screwing up the spacing? So it's "wrong" to have kids 3 years apart? If you knew anything about psychology, you would know it's actually better for the children to have 3-4 years between them. People assume kids who are very close in age will be "best friends " and they can just lump them all into the same activities and interests, which is really harmful in the long run. Kids need individual attention from their parents, and they need to be allowed to form relationships with friends and siblings based on their own interests and personalities, not just lumped in together because their parents wanted to "get it all over with."

And yes, I would space children farther than 2 years apart based on the very real evidence of better optimal health and developmental outcomes, lower risk of autism and developmental disorders, and better psychological outcomes for the child. Call me crazy, but I want to maximum the chances of best outcomes for my offspring.

NP. I take your point about wanting to give your kids the best odds. But I think there is a danger of putting too much stock in some very long odds. For example, if it works better for your career, or if there are other considerations (your age/health/whatever), you shouldn't push those aside to make sure you wait exactly 2yr 9 mo. Statistically, there's just not a big difference between 2 yrs 9 mo and 2 yrs 4 months (and so on). The same is true with regards to the attention you can pay to your kids. The advice is good, and worth mentioning, but I don't think it should be the only consideration in assessing what works best for one's family.

[Anonymous]

We dealt with infertility so spacing wasn't our choice unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Mine are 2yr 3mo apart. We are the only family in a daycare class of 10 kids with a 2nd child. This is a class of 2yr olds.

About half the babies in my son's infant room are younger siblings. Their older sibling is in preschool, so closer to a 3yr gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure. My kids are 4 years apart, though. The bigger age gap is awesome for us. I've gotten to really enjoy/focus on each one''s babyhood, and when I get babied-out with the little one, I can spend big-kid time with the big one.

I had the first at 33 and second at 37, so I had age somewhat on my side...I didn't feel desperate to have the second. Also, I wasn't sure I wanted a second for a long time...not until after the first turned 3.

I would have felt so old having my first kid at 33.

Is your peer group fairly uneducated? Not one of my friends had a baby before 30 due to advanced degrees and careers.

+1.

I have a law degree and am a practicing lawyer. Ivy-educated. First kid at 29, third (and last) at 33. Sorry to disappoint.

Being so well educated, seems like you would have known it's not healthy to have kids so close together.

...and you should know it's not healthy to have a first pregnancy at 38, right?

Of course. Who said anything about 38? That comment seems out of nowhere - what does spacing kids in a healthier way have to do with having a first kid at 38? Random.

I had my first pregnancy at 38. What exactly was unhealthy about it? Do tell me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 year is too soon, 3 years is too long.

This
And I also refuse to have my kids be anything where there is a .5. For example, I wouldn't be cool with a 1.5. 2.5 etc age gap.
I like when birthdays are around the same time.

That is bizarre.

Not really. Maybe I'm OCD. But I hate how my one sister is 7 years older than me half the year and 8 years older the other half.
Then you get kids who are 2.5 years apart but three grades apart. I like things neater than that.
Plus, I refused to give my kids birthdays in Nov-March. Those suck.

You have many weird issues.

a) You really are OCD. You do you, but know you sound a little crazy, lady.
b) Not all of us conceive on the first or second shot. As much as I'd like certain birth months, I'll take what I can get.
c) Per above, my kid's January birthday has been just fine. I was a little bummed at first, but was more just happy and relieved we finally got pregnant. DH has a December birthday, so we know to be conscience not to let the holidays overshadow the birthday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure. My kids are 4 years apart, though. The bigger age gap is awesome for us. I've gotten to really enjoy/focus on each one''s babyhood, and when I get babied-out with the little one, I can spend big-kid time with the big one.

I had the first at 33 and second at 37, so I had age somewhat on my side...I didn't feel desperate to have the second. Also, I wasn't sure I wanted a second for a long time...not until after the first turned 3.

I would have felt so old having my first kid at 33.

Is your peer group fairly uneducated? Not one of my friends had a baby before 30 due to advanced degrees and careers.

+1.

I have a law degree and am a practicing lawyer. Ivy-educated. First kid at 29, third (and last) at 33. Sorry to disappoint.

Being so well educated, seems like you would have known it's not healthy to have kids so close together.

...and you should know it's not healthy to have a first pregnancy at 38, right?

Of course. Who said anything about 38? That comment seems out of nowhere - what does spacing kids in a healthier way have to do with having a first kid at 38? Random.

I had my first pregnancy at 38. What exactly was unhealthy about it? Do tell me.

Higher risks for poor outcomes for mother and baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure. My kids are 4 years apart, though. The bigger age gap is awesome for us. I've gotten to really enjoy/focus on each one''s babyhood, and when I get babied-out with the little one, I can spend big-kid time with the big one.

I had the first at 33 and second at 37, so I had age somewhat on my side...I didn't feel desperate to have the second. Also, I wasn't sure I wanted a second for a long time...not until after the first turned 3.

I would have felt so old having my first kid at 33.

Is your peer group fairly uneducated? Not one of my friends had a baby before 30 due to advanced degrees and careers.

+1.

I have a law degree and am a practicing lawyer. Ivy-educated. First kid at 29, third (and last) at 33. Sorry to disappoint.

Being so well educated, seems like you would have known it's not healthy to have kids so close together.

...and you should know it's not healthy to have a first pregnancy at 38, right?

Of course. Who said anything about 38? That comment seems out of nowhere - what does spacing kids in a healthier way have to do with having a first kid at 38? Random.

I had my first pregnancy at 38. What exactly was unhealthy about it? Do tell me.

Higher risks for poor outcomes for mother and baby.

And yet we both turned out fine. Just because there's a chance of something bad happening doesn't mean it's unhealthy to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 year is too soon, 3 years is too long.

This
And I also refuse to have my kids be anything where there is a .5. For example, I wouldn't be cool with a 1.5. 2.5 etc age gap.
I like when birthdays are around the same time.

That is bizarre.

Not really. Maybe I'm OCD. But I hate how my one sister is 7 years older than me half the year and 8 years older the other half.
Then you get kids who are 2.5 years apart but three grades apart. I like things neater than that.
Plus, I refused to give my kids birthdays in Nov-March. Those suck.

You have many weird issues.

a) You really are OCD. You do you, but know you sound a little crazy, lady.
b) Not all of us conceive on the first or second shot. As much as I'd like certain birth months, I'll take what I can get.
c) Per above, my kid's January birthday has been just fine. I was a little bummed at first, but was more just happy and relieved we finally got pregnant. DH has a December birthday, so we know to be conscience not to let the holidays overshadow the birthday.

I was annoyed when I realized my kid would have late August birthday because she'll always be the toughest in her class or we'll have to decide to red shirt her. She starts prek this year 2 days after her 4th birthday. Still kinda annoying, but I wouldn't trade her for the world.

I'm concerned when you say you'd refuse to give your kids certain birthdays. Does that mean you'd abort or that you abstain during certain months?

[Anonymous]

Youngest. It remains to be seen if she's the toughest.

[Anonymous]

mine are 3 years and 3.5 years apart. Works for us. You do you, people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure. My kids are 4 years apart, though. The bigger age gap is awesome for us. I've gotten to really enjoy/focus on each one''s babyhood, and when I get babied-out with the little one, I can spend big-kid time with the big one.

I had the first at 33 and second at 37, so I had age somewhat on my side...I didn't feel desperate to have the second. Also, I wasn't sure I wanted a second for a long time...not until after the first turned 3.

I would have felt so old having my first kid at 33.

Is your peer group fairly uneducated? Not one of my friends had a baby before 30 due to advanced degrees and careers.

+1.

I have a law degree and am a practicing lawyer. Ivy-educated. First kid at 29, third (and last) at 33. Sorry to disappoint.

Being so well educated, seems like you would have known it's not healthy to have kids so close together.

Sounds like they were all two years apart. Isn't that what WHO recommends?

Nope. The recommendation is to wait two year after the birth of a child to begin trying for another pregnancy. So even if you were to get pregnant right away, the kids would be close to three years apart.

I am baffled at the. Number of people who can't seem to figure this guidance out. The PP is right, children should be spaced a minimum or 2 years 9 months apart for optimal health.

So, the WHO also recommends exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months and then continuing to breastfeed (supplementing with solids) up to 2 years - are you all following out his recommendation as well, or are you picking and choosing?