7 and 5 year old. Would you have another one in my situation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are you and DH?

Yeah, everything else sounds fine for going for a third, but your ages are a big factor here.

I'm the pp who is 39 (husband is 6 months younger so basically same age). Out of curiosity what would you think would be the cutoff? I feel like we are on the brink (not having another for other additional reasons).

I would avoid being AMA. I would still get pregnant at 34 and deliver at 35, but I can't imagine going beyond that. That's just me, though, I know a lot of people feel differently.

I hear that the day you turn 35, your uterus either spontaneously explodes OR if you're lucky enough that doesn't happen, you give birth to an exploding baby.

Very, very dangerous situation. Avoid at all costs.

It's fine if you're comfortable with being AMA and having kids in college when you become eligible for Medicare - I am not.

A person would need to have a baby at 44 to have a child in college when he/she became eligible for Medicare.

[Anonymous]

No, think about the planet for god's sake.

[Anonymous]

Well, if you want to, go for it. I can't imagine. I am so excited for the day when my kids are out of baby stage. I think you may have forgotten what hell it is. Anyway, I wouldn't do it unless I was pretty wealthy because 3 is such huge burden in terms of college costs and traveling. I feel like you have 3 if you are a homebody and have no interest in raising kids who travel--or you are really rich and can afford to travel with 3 and save 100s of thousands for their colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are you and DH?

Yeah, everything else sounds fine for going for a third, but your ages are a big factor here.

I'm the pp who is 39 (husband is 6 months younger so basically same age). Out of curiosity what would you think would be the cutoff? I feel like we are on the brink (not having another for other additional reasons).

I would avoid being AMA. I would still get pregnant at 34 and deliver at 35, but I can't imagine going beyond that. That's just me, though, I know a lot of people feel differently.

I hear that the day you turn 35, your uterus either spontaneously explodes OR if you're lucky enough that doesn't happen, you give birth to an exploding baby.

Very, very dangerous situation. Avoid at all costs.

It's fine if you're comfortable with being AMA and having kids in college when you become eligible for Medicare - I am not.

A person would need to have a baby at 44 to have a child in college when he/she became eligible for Medicare.

why is this so bad again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are you and DH?

Yeah, everything else sounds fine for going for a third, but your ages are a big factor here.

I'm the pp who is 39 (husband is 6 months younger so basically same age). Out of curiosity what would you think would be the cutoff? I feel like we are on the brink (not having another for other additional reasons).

I would avoid being AMA. I would still get pregnant at 34 and deliver at 35, but I can't imagine going beyond that. That's just me, though, I know a lot of people feel differently.

I hear that the day you turn 35, your uterus either spontaneously explodes OR if you're lucky enough that doesn't happen, you give birth to an exploding baby.

Very, very dangerous situation. Avoid at all costs.

It's fine if you're comfortable with being AMA and having kids in college when you become eligible for Medicare - I am not.

A person would need to have a baby at 44 to have a child in college when he/she became eligible for Medicare.

why is this so bad again?

I'm sure it's fine for some folks to be nearly 60 with teenagers. It just isn't for me. Not assigning a global value to it - just saying that wasn't what I wanted for myself. So I had kids earlier, and the odds are I'll get to enjoy them for longer since I had them at 28, 30, and 32, than if I had waited until 37, 39, and 41.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So we have two boys who are 5 and 7. My husband and I have a great marriage. We are financially stable. Part of me is so glad to be out of the baby/toddler stage but the other part of me can't shake he feeling that we need one more.

I was looking forward to making some bigger trips in the next couple years as a family (maybe Europe) but obviously we couldn't do that type of stuff with a baby.

This feeling just won't go away and I feel like if we don't have one we are going to regret it.

For the record, my husband wants another one even more than me I think.

I just really don't know if I can do the baby stage again. My children were terrible sleepers and didn't sleep through the night until around two years old.

Thoughts? Is it too large of an age gap?

For me personally, I have 2 which is more than enough (SO has 3--his 1st born + our 2).

As for if it's a large gap? I don't think so. DS's are 6 years apart (DS1: 6; DS2: 6wks). DSD is 5 years older than DS1 and 11 years older than DS2.

For us, we also want to do a lot of traveling and other big- and semi-big ticket items, so we're definitely done. My plan was one-and-done, but happy I have 2 and SO is happy with 3. Just went to my 6wk postpartum checkup and can't wait to get my IUD in 4 more weeks (Paragard which is supposed to last 12 years). We've also discussed SO getting a vasectomy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are you and DH?

Yeah, everything else sounds fine for going for a third, but your ages are a big factor here.

I'm the pp who is 39 (husband is 6 months younger so basically same age). Out of curiosity what would you think would be the cutoff? I feel like we are on the brink (not having another for other additional reasons).

I would avoid being AMA. I would still get pregnant at 34 and deliver at 35, but I can't imagine going beyond that. That's just me, though, I know a lot of people feel differently.

I hear that the day you turn 35, your uterus either spontaneously explodes OR if you're lucky enough that doesn't happen, you give birth to an exploding baby.

Very, very dangerous situation. Avoid at all costs.

It's fine if you're comfortable with being AMA and having kids in college when you become eligible for Medicare - I am not.

A person would need to have a baby at 44 to have a child in college when he/she became eligible for Medicare.

why is this so bad again?

I'm sure it's fine for some folks to be nearly 60 with teenagers. It just isn't for me. Not assigning a global value to it - just saying that wasn't what I wanted for myself. So I had kids earlier, and the odds are I'll get to enjoy them for longer since I had them at 28, 30, and 32, than if I had waited until 37, 39, and 41.

Honest question...how do you know it's not for you when you've never lived it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are you and DH?

Yeah, everything else sounds fine for going for a third, but your ages are a big factor here.

I'm the pp who is 39 (husband is 6 months younger so basically same age). Out of curiosity what would you think would be the cutoff? I feel like we are on the brink (not having another for other additional reasons).

I would avoid being AMA. I would still get pregnant at 34 and deliver at 35, but I can't imagine going beyond that. That's just me, though, I know a lot of people feel differently.

I hear that the day you turn 35, your uterus either spontaneously explodes OR if you're lucky enough that doesn't happen, you give birth to an exploding baby.

Very, very dangerous situation. Avoid at all costs.

It's fine if you're comfortable with being AMA and having kids in college when you become eligible for Medicare - I am not.

A person would need to have a baby at 44 to have a child in college when he/she became eligible for Medicare.

why is this so bad again?

I'm sure it's fine for some folks to be nearly 60 with teenagers. It just isn't for me. Not assigning a global value to it - just saying that wasn't what I wanted for myself. So I had kids earlier, and the odds are I'll get to enjoy them for longer since I had them at 28, 30, and 32, than if I had waited until 37, 39, and 41.

Honest question...how do you know it's not for you when you've never lived it?

Kind of like how I knew I didn't want to have kids at 16 and drop out of high school. Fine for some folks, not what I wanted for my life.

[Anonymous]

I know perspective isn't the same, but I am the stepmom of three older kids (G-G-B 16, 15, 12) and one bio child (2). I've been with the kids since they were 8, 7, and 3. The little one always made the logistics more challenging. he was just to little to enjoy what his sisters were doing, in age as well as gender. My DH and I always had to split up and do activities with them separately. Now that he's finally entering the teen years, it became easier, but the toddler is in the mix, so we often have to split up again. We try to port him around, but the big kids are big and active and want to do active stuff that isn't necessarily conducive to a 2 yo on a nap schedule, so we have to split up again. Obviously I love my toddler, and so do they, but he definitely complicates the logistics of our activities as a family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are you and DH?

Yeah, everything else sounds fine for going for a third, but your ages are a big factor here.

I'm the pp who is 39 (husband is 6 months younger so basically same age). Out of curiosity what would you think would be the cutoff? I feel like we are on the brink (not having another for other additional reasons).

I would avoid being AMA. I would still get pregnant at 34 and deliver at 35, but I can't imagine going beyond that. That's just me, though, I know a lot of people feel differently.

I hear that the day you turn 35, your uterus either spontaneously explodes OR if you're lucky enough that doesn't happen, you give birth to an exploding baby.

Very, very dangerous situation. Avoid at all costs.

It's fine if you're comfortable with being AMA and having kids in college when you become eligible for Medicare - I am not.

A person would need to have a baby at 44 to have a child in college when he/she became eligible for Medicare.

why is this so bad again?

I'm sure it's fine for some folks to be nearly 60 with teenagers. It just isn't for me. Not assigning a global value to it - just saying that wasn't what I wanted for myself. So I had kids earlier, and the odds are I'll get to enjoy them for longer since I had them at 28, 30, and 32, than if I had waited until 37, 39, and 41.

Honest question...how do you know it's not for you when you've never lived it?

Kind of like how I knew I didn't want to have kids at 16 and drop out of high school. Fine for some folks, not what I wanted for my life.

NP. You are a smug jerk.

[Anonymous]

Yes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are you and DH?

Yeah, everything else sounds fine for going for a third, but your ages are a big factor here.

I'm the pp who is 39 (husband is 6 months younger so basically same age). Out of curiosity what would you think would be the cutoff? I feel like we are on the brink (not having another for other additional reasons).

I would avoid being AMA. I would still get pregnant at 34 and deliver at 35, but I can't imagine going beyond that. That's just me, though, I know a lot of people feel differently.

I hear that the day you turn 35, your uterus either spontaneously explodes OR if you're lucky enough that doesn't happen, you give birth to an exploding baby.

Very, very dangerous situation. Avoid at all costs.

It's fine if you're comfortable with being AMA and having kids in college when you become eligible for Medicare - I am not.

A person would need to have a baby at 44 to have a child in college when he/she became eligible for Medicare.

why is this so bad again?

I'm sure it's fine for some folks to be nearly 60 with teenagers. It just isn't for me. Not assigning a global value to it - just saying that wasn't what I wanted for myself. So I had kids earlier, and the odds are I'll get to enjoy them for longer since I had them at 28, 30, and 32, than if I had waited until 37, 39, and 41.

Honest question...how do you know it's not for you when you've never lived it?

Kind of like how I knew I didn't want to have kids at 16 and drop out of high school. Fine for some folks, not what I wanted for my life.

NP. You are a smug jerk.

Honest question...how so?

[Anonymous]

OP, I went for #3. Right now my life is too stressful for me and my marriage has gone downhill. I don't feel like I can give enough quality time to each kid and also have some for myself. Every single day of my life is harder because I had that 3rd child.

However, if I had the choice again I still don't know what I would choose. The harder life (that I'm hoping someday will get easier) or the always wondering/wishing I had another.

Good luck with your decision!

[Anonymous]

I have a 8-yo and a 1-yo. I was nervous about the age difference but it has been great! We are trying for #3. We are both 32 and admittedly had DC1 too young and waited for DC2 until we were better off financially. I think we will be 3 and done but I feel like I am young enough and we are financially well off enough to maybe try for for 4... just gotta get DH on that. We love to travel and he thinks 3 will be the limit. Heck, sometimes he thinks 2 is the limit when we are going through airport security with car seats and strollers and diaper bags. I think it's fun, though!

[Anonymous]

I have 9yo, 6yo, and the baby is about to turn 1. She is such a wonderful addition to our family. It is more complicated for travel, forces the move to a minivan, and she's frequently forced to tag along to the boys' activities. It's back into paying through the nose for daycare plus saving for college for another.

But my boys love her so much and love cuddling with her and playing with her. She's really "go with the flow", which helps since she's frequently out and about with us. I do sometimes need to leave her at home with DH when my boys are having a playdate that I know is going to be Lego-heavy. She's already been to WDW once. After our next WDW trip we're switching to more international travel until she reaches the Disney age, then I'll probably do a couple mother/daughter trips with her.