Your opinion: ideal age gap?

[Anonymous]

My kids are all adults now and were spaced four years apart (now 26, 30, 34). I really liked the spacing overall.

Pros: Only one kid in diapers at a time, only one baby/toddler at home at a time, no rivalries between them, each got their "own" HS experience, could play together or on their own, help with driving, babysitting, etc. built in. All three are very good friends now that they are adults.

Cons: 12 straight years of playing for college was...a slog to say the least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people think that smaller age gap is harder/worse for the first few years and that it’s easier later on when kids play together, go to same school, have same friends/activities/schedules, etc.

I have both a 2-year age gap and a 3.5-year age gap. While the baby years were easier the second time around (even though I already had 2 older kids), now that kids are 8, 6 and 3, it would have been much easier had they been 8, 6 and 4.

.

Can you say more about how it would be easier if it were all 2 years apart now? I see this said a lot but few people give concrete examples beyond same school, same friends etc.

NP but closer the age gap more likely that they’ll have overlap in lots of areas: same school, same friends, same activities, same interests, same sleep schedules. Once your youngest is out of the toddler stage, you can really do a lot more—outings, vacations, everyone watching a movie together or playing a board game together, etc—as a family. The bigger the age gap, the less likely they will be to match up like that. It makes family life a lot easier in my opinion to have kids who can do more together and move through the various stages of childhood more in sync with each other.

Of course it’s also possible to have a larger gap and still have that closeness/overlap and also possible to have a small age gap and NOT have them match up as well as how they interact is largely based on their personalities. But in my experience w my own kids and other families I know, the closer in age kids do typically have more in common and it is easier for the families once kids get older. The younger years are definitely hard w small age gaps between kids, though.

Another NP and this matches my experience. There is only so much a 2 yo and a 9 yo want to/can do together - they would prefer different museums/parks/outings/shows, etc.

DP and same.

One drawback I see is that many parents with this spacing--mostly with two girls--is that they treat the kids as a package deal, and that gets annoying. I have G,B,B and while the older two are 23 months apart and that carries many of the benefits described above, I don't necessarily always want the younger sister of one of DD's friends at my house with every playdate.

So, yes, ~2 years apart, but know that keeping them together for *everything* gets old.

[Anonymous]

I love this question, for some reason I find peoples different perspectives on age gaps fascinating.

My ideal spacing are 17-20 months. My kids are 23 months apart, so i missed the mark a bit, and i am still weirdly upset about those 3 months, but that's me just being crazy oh well.

I prefer the closer age gap bc i like the idea of them having similar interests and being able to plan things to do together without too much fuss (like you can generally take both a 4 and 6 year old to the playground, that might be harder with a 4 and 8/9 year old) Also, even though I like the baby stage, the idea of getting that all over with at one time is better to me, a rough couple years and then it gets easier. Starting over again when you have gotten through all the diapers and tantrums and the sleeping and the toddler crazy just doesn't jive as much with me. And then you can get rid of all the accumulated random baby stuff!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love everything about exactly two years apart except their birthdays being days apart. I love how well they play together and can be on the same wake/sleep schedule. They’re both in the same school (preschool thru 6th) which is also easy.

I could have written this. I really like the 2-year gap. My sibling and I are 12 months apart--I'm sure it wasn't so great for my mom (and I was a surprise, to say the least) but we were close growing up and still are.

[Anonymous]

You gotta ask yourself how long you want to be actively parenting. First one you are in for 18 and then the gap just adds on from there. Some ppl may be up for 20 years others gladly sign on to 25 or 30 years of it. Consider the end game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Twins, but it was brutal for the first couple of years.

How many years? Heard at 1 they get a little easier because they have a playmate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love everything about exactly two years apart except their birthdays being days apart. I love how well they play together and can be on the same wake/sleep schedule. They’re both in the same school (preschool thru 6th) which is also easy.

Same, especially with the birthdays being days apart. My kids are 7 (boy) and 5 (girl) and get along so well, and can play with each others' friends, which is a nice perk. As difficult as it was at the time, they really became good friends during the first few months of Covid, when daycare was closed and they only had each other. The time between when my younger was 6 months and 18 months was the toughest for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Between 2.5 and 3 years.

This, 2.5/3 is what we had in my family (we were 3 kids): gap is big enough to give attention to baby when needed and older kid is potty train and more interested in exploring the word and other kids + able to enjoy being the big bro or big sis BUT still close enough in age to bond. Particularily relevant if you have more than 2 kis, so the first and last can still be somewhat playmates.

I was aiming for it but ended up with 22 months for my 2 kids. Which works great too. Just harder on parents and on the older kid in first year. My older daughter ended up being less "big sister" oriented in first 5 years, more like twins. Now she is good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people think that smaller age gap is harder/worse for the first few years and that it’s easier later on when kids play together, go to same school, have same friends/activities/schedules, etc.

I have both a 2-year age gap and a 3.5-year age gap. While the baby years were easier the second time around (even though I already had 2 older kids), now that kids are 8, 6 and 3, it would have been much easier had they been 8, 6 and 4.

.

Can you say more about how it would be easier if it were all 2 years apart now? I see this said a lot but few people give concrete examples beyond same school, same friends etc.

In my case with 3 kids it is not as obvious because even if my third was born 1.5 years earlier, he would still be 4 years younger than my first.
However, for families with 2 kids, having them close in age means that the kids are more likely to be on same developmental stage… especially since (like in my case) the second usually does everything earlier than the first did. My girls are 2 years apart and play together 24/7, they watch the same movies, they take the same swimming and tennis lesson, etc. Had they been 3 years apart, I doubt this would have been possible. Once kids are in elementary school, schedules get really crazy between school, sports, activities, play dates, birthday parties, etc. having the kids doing some of this together is a big help.

[Anonymous]

18mo-2yrs. Can be busy in those early years but its a lot of fun and they are into the same things around the same times as they get older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love everything about exactly two years apart except their birthdays being days apart. I love how well they play together and can be on the same wake/sleep schedule. They’re both in the same school (preschool thru 6th) which is also easy.

I could have written this. I really like the 2-year gap. My sibling and I are 12 months apart--I'm sure it wasn't so great for my mom (and I was a surprise, to say the least) but we were close growing up and still are.

+1. Around 2 years apart was my ideal. I have 3 kids with that spacing between them.

[Anonymous]

2.5 years and I thought this was good (2 school grades apart).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids are all adults now and were spaced four years apart (now 26, 30, 34). I really liked the spacing overall.

Pros: Only one kid in diapers at a time, only one baby/toddler at home at a time, no rivalries between them, each got their "own" HS experience, could play together or on their own, help with driving, babysitting, etc. built in. All three are very good friends now that they are adults.

Cons: 12 straight years of playing for college was...a slog to say the least.

Hahahaha, your con is great! I'm glad this worked so well for you, and your kids sound wonderful. For me this would be so much starting over and separate activities, it's really neat to see so many different perspectives!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Twins, but it was brutal for the first couple of years.

When does it get better?!? My twins are 3.5 and it seems like it it gets better one day and then we go back two steps the next

[Anonymous]

2.5 years has been great for our two, they get along really well most of the time, make up games to play, daycare/teachers tell us things like they look for each other on the playground at recess, hug, then go back to their peer groups, etc.

At times I do feel it's a challenge for our older DS as he has to "hold back" on physical play with younger DD, play easier-to-understand board games, and generally can't always do things at "his level" or with challenge, so we try to make sure he does get adequate opportunity for that via extracurriculars or 1:1 time with a parent.

DD is late-Sept BD so will have a decision to make soon about whether to have them 2 vs. 3 grades apart... curious if anyone with experience would share some pros/cons on that (in particular thinking ahead to the teen years).