Strategy for having multiple children as an older lower energy FTM

[Anonymous]

Is “low energy” a self diagnosis? Did you imagine your child would be playing quietly in the corner somewhere? Buck up OP, kids are demanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why everyone is saying stick with one. I am a introverted SAHM, but when we had two my husband worked in big law. One kid was much more draining with one than two as a sahm. With two there was a playmate, to distract, but still one bath, one dinner to prepare, one hour at the playground, one hour book time. Even now when they are older, I still find it easier. I don’t have to do every puzzle, board game, etc with just the one. Easier for the introvert in me I think

Two is still more physical work, especially when the 2nd is a baby. You have to prepare food for 2, laundry for 2, try to run errands with 2, get 2 kids into their car seats instead of 1. They may have different bed and nap schedules. When I had a baby and pre-schooler, most of the time my DH and I had to both do bedtime (split up for each kid). There were times that both kids would wake up at the same time in the night (when DH was out of town) and I had to split my time trying to get them both to go back to sleep.

Now that my kids are elementary aged, it's easier in some ways because they entertain each other. It's still a lot more work now that I have to drive them to separate activities and playdates, keep track of 2 sets of homework and teacher emails, plan birthday parties for 2 kids, get holiday gifts for 2 kids.

The people I know with 3 or more kids are almost always overwhelmed, even those that have a lot of resources and help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 3 and my husband is a big law partner. I had my first at almost 34.
I think 2 is 3x as hard as 1 (2 kids to manage plus the interaction between them.). I think 3 kids is 6x as hard as 1. (Again, more interpersonal dynamics to manage.). Mine are each 2.5 years apart so they are never really in the same phase.

What I did not anticipate is how much work they are as tweens and younger teens. Even if they only do rec sports that’s 2 practices a week (each) plus a game or two on weekends. They probably will have at least one more activity—music or a club at school.

No one wants to work for you when you have middle school kids — the nannies all want cute little kids that they can mold to their own system of doing things.

Plus you need to monitor their school work somewhat, which is really challenging, and make a lot of decisions about other issues — how down is depressed and you need to find a therapist? Are these grades bad enough you need to think about a tutor? Or maybe there’s an online program that will help them understand algebra 2 because God knows I’ve forgotten it. It takes more time to shop for them because they all have their own odd preferences. Etc. etc. Thank God my husband has sort of an atypical firm life and can leave early regularly to help manage the sports stuff. It would be physically impossible for me to do it all. And the older they get the less likely you can carpool because while little kids just do activities with their friends, tweens and teens are unlikely to make the same teams or whatever that their friends do, and the other kids in the activities may not live anywhere near you.

Im saying all this because when I was your age I was focused on the slog of parenting babies and what I could handle at 35. I was not at all thinking about how exhausted I’d be at 50 with all the work that these kids generate.

Teens generate way more laundry than babies because they sweat like Teamsters and there’s all the workout clothes, multiple towels for showers, etc.

And they eat so much! And who is going to stay up to pick them up at parties that end at 11 or 12?

I’m not telling you not to do it, but I’m just saying the babies are the least of it. I would take three babies in a heartbeat!

that's why you teach your kids to do their own laundry by age 10 - my parents never touched my laundry (except to complain if I haden't taken it out of the dryer in a timely manner) when i was a teen. Plus I cooked dinner some days as a teen. Some work is self created and not inherently part of having teenage children.

This is us too. Three kids. They all do their own laundry and cook/make their own breakfasts and lunches. If they don’t like what we’re having for dinner or if thyey need to eat early because of evening sports or activities, then they make their own dinners. We taught them how to shop for groceries and bag them at age 9 or 10 and they help now as teens. It’s not always a slog when they’re older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 3 and my husband is a big law partner. I had my first at almost 34.
I think 2 is 3x as hard as 1 (2 kids to manage plus the interaction between them.). I think 3 kids is 6x as hard as 1. (Again, more interpersonal dynamics to manage.). Mine are each 2.5 years apart so they are never really in the same phase.

What I did not anticipate is how much work they are as tweens and younger teens. Even if they only do rec sports that’s 2 practices a week (each) plus a game or two on weekends. They probably will have at least one more activity—music or a club at school.

No one wants to work for you when you have middle school kids — the nannies all want cute little kids that they can mold to their own system of doing things.

Plus you need to monitor their school work somewhat, which is really challenging, and make a lot of decisions about other issues — how down is depressed and you need to find a therapist? Are these grades bad enough you need to think about a tutor? Or maybe there’s an online program that will help them understand algebra 2 because God knows I’ve forgotten it. It takes more time to shop for them because they all have their own odd preferences. Etc. etc. Thank God my husband has sort of an atypical firm life and can leave early regularly to help manage the sports stuff. It would be physically impossible for me to do it all. And the older they get the less likely you can carpool because while little kids just do activities with their friends, tweens and teens are unlikely to make the same teams or whatever that their friends do, and the other kids in the activities may not live anywhere near you.

Im saying all this because when I was your age I was focused on the slog of parenting babies and what I could handle at 35. I was not at all thinking about how exhausted I’d be at 50 with all the work that these kids generate.

Teens generate way more laundry than babies because they sweat like Teamsters and there’s all the workout clothes, multiple towels for showers, etc.

And they eat so much! And who is going to stay up to pick them up at parties that end at 11 or 12?

I’m not telling you not to do it, but I’m just saying the babies are the least of it. I would take three babies in a heartbeat!

that's why you teach your kids to do their own laundry by age 10 - my parents never touched my laundry (except to complain if I haden't taken it out of the dryer in a timely manner) when i was a teen. Plus I cooked dinner some days as a teen. Some work is self created and not inherently part of having teenage children.

This is us too. Three kids. They all do their own laundry and cook/make their own breakfasts and lunches. If they don’t like what we’re having for dinner or if thyey need to eat early because of evening sports or activities, then they make their own dinners. We taught them how to shop for groceries and bag them at age 9 or 10 and they help now as teens. It’s not always a slog when they’re older.

Yeah but a self described “low energy” OP doesn’t have the energy to put all of this work in for 10-15 years (to get the youngest one to tween self sufficiency). Different families and lifestyles work for different people, but there’s a big difference between what someone “should” do and what they are realistically capable of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 3 and my husband is a big law partner. I had my first at almost 34.
I think 2 is 3x as hard as 1 (2 kids to manage plus the interaction between them.). I think 3 kids is 6x as hard as 1. (Again, more interpersonal dynamics to manage.). Mine are each 2.5 years apart so they are never really in the same phase.

What I did not anticipate is how much work they are as tweens and younger teens. Even if they only do rec sports that’s 2 practices a week (each) plus a game or two on weekends. They probably will have at least one more activity—music or a club at school.

No one wants to work for you when you have middle school kids — the nannies all want cute little kids that they can mold to their own system of doing things.

Plus you need to monitor their school work somewhat, which is really challenging, and make a lot of decisions about other issues — how down is depressed and you need to find a therapist? Are these grades bad enough you need to think about a tutor? Or maybe there’s an online program that will help them understand algebra 2 because God knows I’ve forgotten it. It takes more time to shop for them because they all have their own odd preferences. Etc. etc. Thank God my husband has sort of an atypical firm life and can leave early regularly to help manage the sports stuff. It would be physically impossible for me to do it all. And the older they get the less likely you can carpool because while little kids just do activities with their friends, tweens and teens are unlikely to make the same teams or whatever that their friends do, and the other kids in the activities may not live anywhere near you.

Im saying all this because when I was your age I was focused on the slog of parenting babies and what I could handle at 35. I was not at all thinking about how exhausted I’d be at 50 with all the work that these kids generate.

Teens generate way more laundry than babies because they sweat like Teamsters and there’s all the workout clothes, multiple towels for showers, etc.

And they eat so much! And who is going to stay up to pick them up at parties that end at 11 or 12?

I’m not telling you not to do it, but I’m just saying the babies are the least of it. I would take three babies in a heartbeat!

that's why you teach your kids to do their own laundry by age 10 - my parents never touched my laundry (except to complain if I haden't taken it out of the dryer in a timely manner) when i was a teen. Plus I cooked dinner some days as a teen. Some work is self created and not inherently part of having teenage children.

This is us too. Three kids. They all do their own laundry and cook/make their own breakfasts and lunches. If they don’t like what we’re having for dinner or if thyey need to eat early because of evening sports or activities, then they make their own dinners. We taught them how to shop for groceries and bag them at age 9 or 10 and they help now as teens. It’s not always a slog when they’re older.

DP with three kids, who also do their laundry and get meals as needed, etc: you and I both know it’s a lot of work to get them to this independent place. It’s not a slog when they’re older IF you put in the time and effort when they’re younger - and are fortunate to have kids who can learn these tasks without a ton of ongoing supports.

[Anonymous]

I'm a low-energy introvert with 3 -- Kid 1 at 33, Kid 2 at 35, Kid 3 at 39. Honestly, whether it will work for you really depends on your children's temperaments, and you won't have that knowledge until they're here. My Kid 1 was a colicky baby, who cried so much, but he slept through the night early, so at least I got a reasonable amount of sleep. And he was a wonderful toddler. I kept waiting for the Terrible 2s and the Troublesome 3s, and they never arrived. Kid 2 was a dream baby; he didn't sleep through the night as quickly as his older brother, but he was an efficient eater, so again, I got a reasonable amount of sleep. But Kid 2 was a terrible toddler. Due to my age, I started trying to get pregnant with Kid 3 while Kid 2 was in the midst of terrible toddlerhood. When I told my mom I was pregnant with Kid 3, her first words were "What if you have twins and they're just like Kid 2?" I think I started crying.

But, of course, I wouldn't do it any differently now. Baby- and toddler-hood is a really fleeting period of time, and I'd rather my children have siblings than feel a little less overwhelmed when they're little.

[Anonymous]

"Low energy" isn't really compatible with being a SAHM of multiple kids with a partner frequently at work/working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why everyone is saying stick with one. I am a introverted SAHM, but when we had two my husband worked in big law. One kid was much more draining with one than two as a sahm. With two there was a playmate, to distract, but still one bath, one dinner to prepare, one hour at the playground, one hour book time. Even now when they are older, I still find it easier. I don’t have to do every puzzle, board game, etc with just the one. Easier for the introvert in me I think

I agree with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 3 and my husband is a big law partner. I had my first at almost 34.
I think 2 is 3x as hard as 1 (2 kids to manage plus the interaction between them.). I think 3 kids is 6x as hard as 1. (Again, more interpersonal dynamics to manage.). Mine are each 2.5 years apart so they are never really in the same phase.

What I did not anticipate is how much work they are as tweens and younger teens. Even if they only do rec sports that’s 2 practices a week (each) plus a game or two on weekends. They probably will have at least one more activity—music or a club at school.

No one wants to work for you when you have middle school kids — the nannies all want cute little kids that they can mold to their own system of doing things.

Plus you need to monitor their school work somewhat, which is really challenging, and make a lot of decisions about other issues — how down is depressed and you need to find a therapist? Are these grades bad enough you need to think about a tutor? Or maybe there’s an online program that will help them understand algebra 2 because God knows I’ve forgotten it. It takes more time to shop for them because they all have their own odd preferences. Etc. etc. Thank God my husband has sort of an atypical firm life and can leave early regularly to help manage the sports stuff. It would be physically impossible for me to do it all. And the older they get the less likely you can carpool because while little kids just do activities with their friends, tweens and teens are unlikely to make the same teams or whatever that their friends do, and the other kids in the activities may not live anywhere near you.

Im saying all this because when I was your age I was focused on the slog of parenting babies and what I could handle at 35. I was not at all thinking about how exhausted I’d be at 50 with all the work that these kids generate.

Teens generate way more laundry than babies because they sweat like Teamsters and there’s all the workout clothes, multiple towels for showers, etc.

And they eat so much! And who is going to stay up to pick them up at parties that end at 11 or 12?

I’m not telling you not to do it, but I’m just saying the babies are the least of it. I would take three babies in a heartbeat!

that's why you teach your kids to do their own laundry by age 10 - my parents never touched my laundry (except to complain if I haden't taken it out of the dryer in a timely manner) when i was a teen. Plus I cooked dinner some days as a teen. Some work is self created and not inherently part of having teenage children.

This is us too. Three kids. They all do their own laundry and cook/make their own breakfasts and lunches. If they don’t like what we’re having for dinner or if thyey need to eat early because of evening sports or activities, then they make their own dinners. We taught them how to shop for groceries and bag them at age 9 or 10 and they help now as teens. It’s not always a slog when they’re older.

DP with three kids, who also do their laundry and get meals as needed, etc: you and I both know it’s a lot of work to get them to this independent place. It’s not a slog when they’re older IF you put in the time and effort when they’re younger - and are fortunate to have kids who can learn these tasks without a ton of ongoing supports.

Maybe not - depends. I’m pretty low energy and it has motivated me to help my kids be pretty independent. the 4 yo sets and clears the table (with some help) and mostly bathes the 1 yo (while I sat there). I have her help me make meals every day so she will learn that too. Cooking is a low energy and enjoyable activity so that doesn’t tax me to spend extra time on. Both kids do their own coats and shoes, and pick up toys more often than not. The 1 yo (almost 2) dust busters the floor and throws out trash. I’m always looking for whatever I can get them to learn next since my goal is very much to not have to do everything x3 or 4. They were also excellent sleepers and still are bc I didn’t run to their every cry. By contrast I see some (not all) of my higher energy friends overly cater to their kids and the kids are helpless.

There is a such thing as work smarter, not harder - although it depends on many factors, including personality and how your home is set up. And some days are still an exhausting disaster!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why everyone is saying stick with one. I am a introverted SAHM, but when we had two my husband worked in big law. One kid was much more draining with one than two as a sahm. With two there was a playmate, to distract, but still one bath, one dinner to prepare, one hour at the playground, one hour book time. Even now when they are older, I still find it easier. I don’t have to do every puzzle, board game, etc with just the one. Easier for the introvert in me I think

I agree with this.

Because the people who say this really have no clue what their life would have been like if they had stopped at one and gotten through the early years. This has been rehashed to death already, but one elementary aged or older child is simpler and easier than you can understand unless you had a 5+ year age gap (in which case you wouldn’t really have a playmate). Parents of one keep quiet because it seems like bragging, we talk amongst ourselves about how much nicer and easier it is than compared to EVERY peer with 2 or more. We can just link other threads instead of debating it again if you really believe the amount of playtime a sibling can give is equal to the amount of extra energy it takes to raise an entirely additional human being.

[Anonymous]

If you are low-energy and are already overwhelmed, there is no reason to have any more.

Also, your husband's job, if he is in biglaw, will not get any easier.

[Anonymous]

I was like you, OP and we went for the 2nd child. My kids are 7 and 4 now and the last 3 years have been the hardest of my life. We have a full time nanny, plus a Sunday morning nanny from 8-2 (she takes our 4 yo out of the house that whole time). I work full time in a pretty flexible job and so does DH. My dad lives close by and helps with driving. My 2nd child has some mild SN, but initially we thought they would be profound SN.

We are so deeply struggling. I adore my 4 yo but i realize we REALLY should have stopped at one and I feel deeply jealous of families with onlies. I feel like I’ve lost my body, my marriage, and my sense of self almost entirely. It sucks. I’m on antidepressants. I do therapy. DH and I have done therapy.

One thing I just did not fully understand is how much of my life is consumed by mental logistics. Almost no one can handle both of our children at once, so anytime I want a break I have to arrange childcare separately for EACH of them. It’s so hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why everyone is saying stick with one. I am a introverted SAHM, but when we had two my husband worked in big law. One kid was much more draining with one than two as a sahm. With two there was a playmate, to distract, but still one bath, one dinner to prepare, one hour at the playground, one hour book time. Even now when they are older, I still find it easier. I don’t have to do every puzzle, board game, etc with just the one. Easier for the introvert in me I think

I agree with this.

Because the people who say this really have no clue what their life would have been like if they had stopped at one and gotten through the early years. This has been rehashed to death already, but one elementary aged or older child is simpler and easier than you can understand unless you had a 5+ year age gap (in which case you wouldn’t really have a playmate). Parents of one keep quiet because it seems like bragging, we talk amongst ourselves about how much nicer and easier it is than compared to EVERY peer with 2 or more. We can just link other threads instead of debating it again if you really believe the amount of playtime a sibling can give is equal to the amount of extra energy it takes to raise an entirely additional human being.

You do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why everyone is saying stick with one. I am a introverted SAHM, but when we had two my husband worked in big law. One kid was much more draining with one than two as a sahm. With two there was a playmate, to distract, but still one bath, one dinner to prepare, one hour at the playground, one hour book time. Even now when they are older, I still find it easier. I don’t have to do every puzzle, board game, etc with just the one. Easier for the introvert in me I think

This only works out if they get along. I have two and they do play together but it requires me to referee every 5-15 minutes and is not usually a “break” for more than a short time. If you are low energy and don’t expect your DH to contribute much (other than financially), you should definitely stick with one unless you are sure you will have the funds for 1 or more nannies and the ability to outsource a LOT for the foreseeable future. 2 kids is more than 2x the work because the added stress and trying to manage the needs (emotional, physical) of 2 kids at one time (as only one person). I would say it might be doable if the kids are spaced out by 5 or more years - but that doesn’t sound like that’s likely an option for you.

I’m low energy, have two elementary age kids, and a very involved DH and I’m still exhausted at the end of every day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why everyone is saying stick with one. I am a introverted SAHM, but when we had two my husband worked in big law. One kid was much more draining with one than two as a sahm. With two there was a playmate, to distract, but still one bath, one dinner to prepare, one hour at the playground, one hour book time. Even now when they are older, I still find it easier. I don’t have to do every puzzle, board game, etc with just the one. Easier for the introvert in me I think

I agree with this.

Because the people who say this really have no clue what their life would have been like if they had stopped at one and gotten through the early years. This has been rehashed to death already, but one elementary aged or older child is simpler and easier than you can understand unless you had a 5+ year age gap (in which case you wouldn’t really have a playmate). Parents of one keep quiet because it seems like bragging, we talk amongst ourselves about how much nicer and easier it is than compared to EVERY peer with 2 or more. We can just link other threads instead of debating it again if you really believe the amount of playtime a sibling can give is equal to the amount of extra energy it takes to raise an entirely additional human being.

Agree. I have two neurotypical, non-hyper, fairly compliant girls who do well in school and it would be laughable to say that its not any more work then having 1. And mine are now teens and while they are more self sufficient, they constantly need rides, and random school supplies and stuff for their EC’s and so on. It’s fine and we’re doing great but I do often wonder how parents of 3+ manage it.