Two or Three Year Age Gap?

[Anonymous]

I have 3 kids and both 2 and 3 difference among them (2 years between #1 and #2 and 3+ years between #2 and #3).

Honestly it is easier with a larger age gap at the beginning because a 2 year old is a lot if work (more than a 3 year old). 3 year olds are more independents and can entertain themselves a lot more.

As time goes by though, I think the smaller age gap is better because they play more, have similar interests and abilities, can play with the same friends, are in the same school (longer), etc.

My kids are now 8, 6 and 2.5 and I wish I had my third a year earlier…

Overall, I would say a 2 year age gap is easier in the long run

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it matters that much. I think whether they play together or get along will depend much more on their personalities than on age gap.

I had a 3.5 age gap (I was aiming for 2.5 but two miscarriages killed that plan). I didn't think they would play together but they did, quite a bit. When they did not, I attribute mostly to them being different genders and having very different interests. They get along great and almost never fight -- but again, just luck of the draw and not much to do with spacing.

For you, I think 3 will be easier in the beginning because your older will be a little more independent. But later on life, 2 may be easier because there will more years they will be in the same school and they will generally be i the same stage of childhood at the same time.

+1. This is so true! My kids are 2 years apart and it’s great because they like a lot of the same things and play together well. But I think this is more due to their personalities and interests than their age gap. However, it was REALLY hard early on, for the first year or so of our 2nd child’s life we were just surviving but having a 2 year old and newborn is not easy! I think it would’ve been easier to have a 3 year old and newborn bc at age 3 our son was at least potty trained, very verbal, going to preschool a couple days per week, could do a few things for himself whereas at age 2 he was kind of still a baby himself (in diapers, in a crib, using a pacifier, etc. so it felt like we had 2 babies early on which was tough.

Anyway, I think either age gap is fine and having 2 kids is great but hard no matter the age gap.

[Anonymous]

2 years. It’s so, so hard in the beginning but has been fantastic as they get older. They play together all the time and sometimes I don’t hear from either for hours. They go to the same school now at the same time! Even as boy/girl, they can easily play and have the same friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2 years. It’s so, so hard in the beginning but has been fantastic as they get older. They play together all the time and sometimes I don’t hear from either for hours. They go to the same school now at the same time! Even as boy/girl, they can easily play and have the same friends.

[Anonymous]

DS and DD are exactly two years apart and it’s great now. It helped that DS was potty trained at 22 months and pretty independent. He’s always been good about being able to entertain himself for short periods of time (long enough to bath or change the diaper on a newborn. But yeah, it’s still tough early on. But so worth it to see them now.

[Anonymous]

It really depends on the kids. My two closest are the oldest two, who are forty months apart. Then the youngest two, who are thirty three months aside. #3 and #4 are twenty six months apart and they’ll play together if no one else is around. That said, if you know you only want two then getting it done has its attractions. But a newborn with a 3yo is a lot easier than a newborn with a 2yo.

[Anonymous]

My boys are exactly 2 years apart. It was tiring for the first few years but it is great that they can play together. We have family friends where all kids play.

I have a friend with twin boys and they have very different interests. Also know boy girl twins who also are so different.

It may take you a while to get pregnant as well. Know lots of women who had secondary infertility.

I have a big gap between my second and third child. I love love love our ages but most other families have the kids closer together.

[Anonymous]

Don't overthink it. It only seems super important in the very beginning. If parents' age is at all an issue, consider a 2 year gap. If age is not an issue, aim for 2-3 and see what happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, don't try to optimize this. Thank your lucky stars, whenever.

+1

Mom of three (first two, two years apart, second and third, 2.5 years apart)

[Anonymous]

I have multiple kids with different age differences. 3 yr gap was perfect. Older one is out of diapers, interested in sibling, can walk unsupported, sleeps well, etc. 2 years or less is hard. 2 year old wants to explore but still needs help for safety. It’s hard running after with baby, especially if baby doesn’t like carrier or is fussy, etc. 2 in diapers is hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it matters that much. I think whether they play together or get along will depend much more on their personalities than on age gap.

I had a 3.5 age gap (I was aiming for 2.5 but two miscarriages killed that plan). I didn't think they would play together but they did, quite a bit. When they did not, I attribute mostly to them being different genders and having very different interests. They get along great and almost never fight -- but again, just luck of the draw and not much to do with spacing.

For you, I think 3 will be easier in the beginning because your older will be a little more independent. But later on life, 2 may be easier because there will more years they will be in the same school and they will generally be i the same stage of childhood at the same time.

OP here. I shoulda have been more specific. I’m not asking in the sense that they get along and play together. I’m asking if they think a 2 or 3 year age gap is easier? Some have said a 2 year gap is easier because oldest is still young and you can get through all the baby phases quicker, and others have said it’s hard because you oldest isn’t super independent and it’s hard to care for both of them. Some have said the 3 year age gap is good because oldest child is older and more aware and independent, and others have said the child being older means more rejection for baby and it can make for a tougher transition.

But whether they play together is part of the answer. My kids are almost exactly 2 years apart. While it may initially have been easier if my older kid had been 3 before we had his sibling (and I have my doubts about that- I think you may be overestimating the "independence" of a 3 year old), it makes my life a lot easier when my kids can entertain each other. As someone else noted, the period of time when I had a 2 year old and newborn was way shorter than the years my kids were 4-9 (they are now 9 and 7).

I have kids with a 3 year age gap (4 and 7 now). To help OP, when people talk about the increased “independence” of a 3 year old vs a 2 year old, it’s not like the 3 year old is making dinner by herself. But for me, it was really critical that my older child could do things like climb into her car seat by herself without me lifting her, go potty on her own so I didn’t have to change two sets of diapers, be able to pay attention to a movie or TV show for a bit if I needed her to be quiet while I put the baby down, and the ability to play or draw for 15-20 minutes by herself. With these things, a 3 year gap was much easier in the first year than a 2 year gap would have been. Now that they’re older, I can see that some things would be easier if they were closer in ages/stages. They do play together well, but it would be nice to have more time when they are in the same elementary school, etc.

[Anonymous]

3 or more year gap is easier. A 2 yo is still a baby themselves. Having 2 at once is hard. Also, I’ll never understand why people want to get the baby phase “over with.” If you’re going to have kids, take the time to enjoy each phase.

[Anonymous]

Is your 2 yo in daycare or at home? I think that makes a big difference. It's at least helpful to have the older child in a half day preschool, which if they're at home is usually closer to 3.

And yes, having your older child potty trained, sleeping well, able to do some things like put on jackets and shoes, is all very helpful.

[Anonymous]

Additional thought is age gap isn't always the same as school-year gap. Mine are 26 months apart but 3 years apart in school. Sometimes that's how the chips fall.

[Anonymous]

Mine are exactly two years apart. 2 years may be harder at first but if they play well together, its a great age gap later on. Even in the early days, I found it easier to cart them around because a 2 yo is more likely to stay in a stroller and you can either get a double stroller or wear the baby. My kids always entertain one other and they are close enough in age that when one has a friend over, they all play together. At our school, a two-grade gap is really common so many of my older DS's friends have siblings in younger DS's class so it works out great. I also like the fact that they are in the same school for longer--if you want easy, one school is so much easier than 2.

However, you also have to think about costs. If you are going to be paying for daycare/pre-school, spreading the kids out will be less of a financial strain. I have a few friends who spread their kids out by 3-4 years for that reason.