3 kids in 4 years - bad idea?

[Anonymous]

I'm a few weeks out from delivering my 2nd and if we want a third (which we do generally but we're in survival mode right now so who knows) we need to decide by about 6mo pp so I can wean and start ovulating again and we can get to work on #3. There is a chance #3 will take several years or not be possible at all but there is also a chance we'll luck out right away and I'd get pregnant quickly (#1 took 5 years and lots of intervention, #2 happened in 3 months with no intervention which was shocking and great)

So I'm wondering how good or crazy it'd be to have 3 kids less than 4 years apart both in the little kid stage but also in the more middle / high school stage with all having activities and lives to juggle.

#1 and #2 are 21mo apart, #1 has been a very easy child since about 10 weeks (though I hear age 1-2 can be a fooler for a lot of kids), #2 is TBD in terms of temperament and needs

We both work (DH travels a lot for work, I have fairly reasonable hours) and have money for logistical / domestic help - so we can outsource things cleaning and meal prep as needed. It's very important to me though to have enough time for each child (eat dinner together, have time to read stories and play) so if the answer is the way to survive is hire more childcare, that wouldn't work for me

I'd love to hear the good and bad of 3 close together since I'll need to decide whether or not we could handle that before life has even really stabilized after 2. Thank you!

[Anonymous]

I am about to deliver my third, but mine are 5.5 and 3.5. This was by choice (got pregnant first try) because I could not even entratain the idea of a third until my second was 2.5 (she was a very difficult baby). If I were you I would wait a little bit, but also it sounds nice to have three kids all at similar stages in life (same school, same games, same schedules, etc.). We have this with my eldest, but this baby will obviously be at a very different stage in life for a while.

[Anonymous]

I would wait till #2 is here before devoting any time to thinking about this. You'll have a better sense one you know more about what #2 is like and how you feel about having more than one kid.

[Anonymous]

If you both work and your husband travels, how much time can you really devote to each kid. You either do numbers and hire help or they fend for themselves or you have fewer and each get more attention. Kids need you just as much or more as they get older, just in different ways.

[Anonymous]

My two have the same age difference as yours and I am absolutely exhausted. I have no time to myself. I can't imagine adding a third.

[Anonymous]

I had my three in under 4 years.

The early years were TOUGH.

But the youngest is now 6 and it is so awesome. We are an active family who loves to hike and ski and travel and it is nice that the youngest is old enough to keep up with our older two.

[Anonymous]

I have three, had them in 4.5 years (two years apart, then 2.5 years apart). You'd have to outsource a lot of childcare if your husband travels a lot. We both work and are hands on, but that's only because we both have a lot of flexibility and very little travel. I really love having three, but that's in large part because of the set up we have. It sounds much tougher with a frequently traveling spouse and the other working FT, too.

Kids do still need you as they get older, but in different ways. I don't agree for a second that they need you more, but they do need you differently. Less poop, more listening and attending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would wait till #2 is here before devoting any time to thinking about this. You'll have a better sense one you know more about what #2 is like and how you feel about having more than one kid.

#2 is here, we're just in the baby hell stage (I really don't enjoy the first 6mo) vs in the stabilized life with kids that generally sleep through the night stage. I feel like life gets dramatically better when a kid starts walking and being able to communicate a little and given my age and potential issues I'd like to start the process of #3 (which could quickly result in #3 or not...) before #2 gets to that age

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have three, had them in 4.5 years (two years apart, then 2.5 years apart). You'd have to outsource a lot of childcare if your husband travels a lot. We both work and are hands on, but that's only because we both have a lot of flexibility and very little travel. I really love having three, but that's in large part because of the set up we have. It sounds much tougher with a frequently traveling spouse and the other working FT, too.

Kids do still need you as they get older, but in different ways. I don't agree for a second that they need you more, but they do need you differently. Less poop, more listening and attending.

Do you feel like you need 2 set of adult hands on deck in morning and evenings? Like if DH is out of town it'd be miserable to do evening routine myself without an au pair or someone else really taking on one of the kids? I feel like the hours I get with my kids during the week is enough hours (generally 6am-730 in the morning and 5:30-7:30 in the evening when I can be really engaged with them) but don't have a good concept of when they are say 2/3/5 if I'd be able to enjoy that time like I have so far or whether it'll be hell trying to wrangle 3 kids with that age spread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had my three in under 4 years.

The early years were TOUGH.

But the youngest is now 6 and it is so awesome. We are an active family who loves to hike and ski and travel and it is nice that the youngest is old enough to keep up with our older two.

I'm imagining the awesomeness of getting to the stage your at! I'd love an active family that can all enjoy the same weekend things like hiking and skiing together. What does it take to juggle their needs at the ages you're at? Do you feel like one adult at a time can meet the needs during a week (home work help, activity carting, time for convo and fun) or does it really take 2 adults at a time to meet everyone's needs in the mornings and evening?

[Anonymous]

For my friend the glitch in the plan is when she found she was having twins for the third pregnancy. It was very hectic for a few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have three, had them in 4.5 years (two years apart, then 2.5 years apart). You'd have to outsource a lot of childcare if your husband travels a lot. We both work and are hands on, but that's only because we both have a lot of flexibility and very little travel. I really love having three, but that's in large part because of the set up we have. It sounds much tougher with a frequently traveling spouse and the other working FT, too.

Kids do still need you as they get older, but in different ways. I don't agree for a second that they need you more, but they do need you differently. Less poop, more listening and attending.

Do you feel like you need 2 set of adult hands on deck in morning and evenings? Like if DH is out of town it'd be miserable to do evening routine myself without an au pair or someone else really taking on one of the kids? I feel like the hours I get with my kids during the week is enough hours (generally 6am-730 in the morning and 5:30-7:30 in the evening when I can be really engaged with them) but don't have a good concept of when they are say 2/3/5 if I'd be able to enjoy that time like I have so far or whether it'll be hell trying to wrangle 3 kids with that age spread.

I don't feel like we need two adults every 365 days/year, but if my DH traveled frequently, it would be very hard. The few times he does travel, I have things planned almost to the minute and it is NOT easy. I don't enjoy that time with the kids, I'm focused instead on managing them and getting things done. At 2/3/5, it's still kind of a nightmare. We are at 3/5/7, and it's doable mostly because the oldest basically puts herself to bed with a book. But DH and I absolutely do bedtimes together. Mornings I do more, but I am still more relaxed than I would be if he's not here.

Bottom line: assuming kids within the normal range of kid difficulty (which mine are--none super easy but none with significant SN either), managing three solo is truly management, it's not mindfully engaging with them. Think Whac-A-Mole.

[Anonymous]

^^Mind you, I truly do love having three! Absolutely love it and I am grateful every day. But as I said, a huge part of our decision to have three and the reason I enjoy it is that we were lucky to have the chance to choose flexible positions that still pay reasonably well. We're not DCUM wealthy, but we're comfortable, and happy with what we have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For my friend the glitch in the plan is when she found she was having twins for the third pregnancy. It was very hectic for a few years.

Yikes - I can't imagine. Hectic seems like an understatement!

[Anonymous]

That's a huge toll on your body.