Any Good Reasons To Have a Third Kid?

[Anonymous]

I've never heard a mom said she regretted having a 3rd child.

But I do hear a lot of moms regretting they didn't have "just one more".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've never heard a mom said she regretted having a 3rd child.

I agree it would be rare to hear someone admit that. After all, its barely the sort of thing you can bear to *think* to yourself, much less admit. That's why it's important to give it a lot of thought, and not go by "gut instinct" or "the desire to complete the set".

[Anonymous]

Well, rationally, it doesn't make sense to have ANY kids. They are permanent handicaps to your lifestyle, pregnancy ruins your body, they are expensive, they strain a marriage, etc...

Don't most of us have children because we want them? That's purely primal (as a prior PP mentioned) or "gut instinct." Believe me, there's nothing rational about having children. It's emotional and beautiful and difficult. So, if you don't want to add to the difficulty of your life then fine -- don't have one (or another). But you can't say that one shouldn't use "gut instinct." You either want a child or you don't.

[Anonymous]

This is your DNA speaking, yes, do have a third child. And another and another until the earth is covered with humans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Listen to your heart. I am one of 4. I loved having a brother and sisters. It was so nice having both. Saying this, we plan on having 4 kids. We have a boy, we have a girl due at the end of the year and we would like to adopt a boy and a girl. It seems like the perfect family for us.

I am also one of 4 and loved coming from a large family (even if it was all brothers). We are also planning on 4 of our own. There will always be reasons not to do something, and yours are valid. Personally I can't imagine regretting having a child, but I can see regretting NOT.

[Anonymous]

16:12 here: I meant to add "There will always be reasons not to do something, and yours are valid" but that doesnt mean you shouldn't go for it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are big travelers a third child could be a deal breaker for so many logistical reasons.

Our two are old enought to travel without gear and we are still young enough to go with relatively young kids without being worn out. We went on some of our first big vacations (cross country, out of country, etc.) this summer since firstborn was a baby. Second child is 3.5, oldest is 6.

If we had a third there would be no more big vacations for pain in the a**/logisitcal reasons--baby gear, baby naptimes (killer for sightseeing, etc), baby exhaustion for many, many years. Love being relatively footless and fancy-free and no desire to go back to babies. This, of course, isn't the prime reason for not having a third...prime reason is DH and I both can only take a certain level of chaos and both require a certain degree of alone time. This, coupled with the fact the two we have get along so great, is the reaon we are stopping while ahead. We are bucking the recent trend of 3+ kids in our area.

This is the exact reason we are stopping with two. Half my family lives an 18hr flight away so there will be lots of international travel in our future. I like the 1:1 ratio - one kid per adult to keep track of

[Anonymous]

Think about how you feel at different times. When they are all under 5, I expect to find having 3 very hard. We don't have the 3rd yet. When they are all adults, I will love having three. The in-between years may be in between but I expect to love having three before adulthood too.

We are going for three because the years of "love it!" are much longer than the years of "so hard!"

[Anonymous]

Think about how you feel at different times. When they are all under 5, I expect to find having 3 very hard. We don't have the 3rd yet. When they are all adults, I will love having three. The in-between years may be in between but I expect to love having three before adulthood too.

We are going for three because the years of "love it!" are much longer than the years of "so hard!"

This is us too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No.

+1

[Anonymous]

We were planning on two and ended up with three (had twins earlier this year). I am the oldest of three, and initially didn't want 3 kids because I remember feeling that my youngest sister kind of ruined things when she arrived (I know... terrible, selfish, immature thought, but I was 10 at the time). Tables for 5 are require a longer wait at restaurants, flights are more expensive, it's tougher to squeeze into hotel rooms, harder to pick outings that appeal to everyone, unlikely your family comfortably fits into a cool car, etc. In retrospect, I think it the big age difference was the culprit for most of the sibling angst. My 3 kids are 15 months apart and, now that they are here, I couldn't imagine our family being complete without each of them. Yes, we had to move out of the city to a larger house in VA, and we bought a minivan, and childcare for this year basically equals my after-tax salary. But the chaos makes life interesting, and I am happy to have a lively household for years to come.

When the twins first arrived, I definitely couldn't give them as much attention as I gave my older son when he was first born (augmented by the fact that they were twins!), and I felt terrible for about a month, but especially now that I see them all starting to interact, it's totally amazing and I don't think any of my children are missing out on account of having a sibling.

Whether you decide on a third or not, it sounds like you have a happy & healthy family, which is something to enjoy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We were planning on two and ended up with three (had twins earlier this year). I am the oldest of three, and initially didn't want 3 kids because I remember feeling that my youngest sister kind of ruined things when she arrived (I know... terrible, selfish, immature thought, but I was 10 at the time). Tables for 5 are require a longer wait at restaurants, flights are more expensive, it's tougher to squeeze into hotel rooms, harder to pick outings that appeal to everyone, unlikely your family comfortably fits into a cool car, etc. In retrospect, I think it the big age difference was the culprit for most of the sibling angst. My 3 kids are 15 months apart and, now that they are here, I couldn't imagine our family being complete without each of them. Yes, we had to move out of the city to a larger house in VA, and we bought a minivan, and childcare for this year basically equals my after-tax salary. But the chaos makes life interesting, and I am happy to have a lively household for years to come.

When the twins first arrived, I definitely couldn't give them as much attention as I gave my older son when he was first born (augmented by the fact that they were twins!), and I felt terrible for about a month, but especially now that I see them all starting to interact, it's totally amazing and I don't think any of my children are missing out on account of having a sibling.

Whether you decide on a third or not, it sounds like you have a happy & healthy family, which is something to enjoy

Sorry, but this may be one of the dumbest reasons I've ever seen for not having a third kid...

[Anonymous]

Yes, definitely. You need the third to close the vicious circle. First kid is spoiled and indiferent to your needs,
second is always feeling inferior and inadequate by being second and the third helps the middle one to be
screwed even more by loosing all the short lasting attention and status of a baby of the family for which
he or she will ALWAYs hate the third one, and so now you need the third one to feel entirely optional,
unwanted and uneeded by the first two, being object of being pushed away as due to the age gap
they will just have nothing in common and the fights will be endless.. untill they grow up and see things
in proportion and through parents eyes if they will ever get to be parents.

So yes, definitely. I know so many families with three kids and the deeper you cut the more burnt parents
are and the more screwed further down the road kis are.

[Anonymous]

you need a third in case either the first two turn out to be screw ups: drug addicts, criminals, crossdressers, dropouts, you name it. Or God forbid a tragedy happens. Always need a few spares. And you obviously need two. A world of only children is a world of no cousins, no uncles, no aunts. Just lame.

[Anonymous]

3 is the new 2. And where I live, I think there's a growing trend of 4 or more. We have 3 and so I understand the laundry list of new costs (we went to two minivans). But we feel like we're building a family that will hopefully love and support each other long after DH and I have passed on. We're actually contemplating trying for one more.