If you had two under two...

[Anonymous]

Did you go on to have a third? Or was that traumatic enough

[Anonymous]

Went on for a third. Had three just under four.

But I have been blessed with a great deal of outside help - both paid and family support. I couldn’t have done it alone.

[Anonymous]

I had two under two but waited two more years for number three. It was crazy but we survived and now they are all great friends.

[Anonymous]

First two were 13 mos apart then 24 months till the third. Grad school created a pause but otherwise I’m sure we’d have had a fourth. By the time that ended two years had passed and all were out of diapers a s I never looked back. They’re 13-10 now and it’s been awesome the whole way ??

[Anonymous]

Two under two was really hard. Waited until younger sibling was 2 1/2 to try for another.

[Anonymous]

We had two under two and did not have a third. We stopped at two not because it was traumatic (although those first 6 months were rough) but because we just felt our family was done and logistically it made sense.

[Anonymous]

It was traumatic enough that DH got snipped when #2 turned a year. No number 3 for sure!

[Anonymous]

We didn't have a third, but not because having 2 under 2 was particularly hard. A third would have been doable but I've always wanted to stop at 2 and I refuse to be pregnant again. Though our two are each extremely easy so our "not particularly hard" experience is not the norm.

[Anonymous]

Yes it was traumatic and hard. We did have a third but 5 yrs behind middle child. I have a husband that works insane hours and no family help, plus a move to a new city. It took me until they both were at least in preschool to catch a breath.

[Anonymous]

Traumatic? No way. My boys are now 4 and 2.5; they’re 18 months apart. It’s been far from traumatic. We haven’t added a third yet but we’ve started trying.

[Anonymous]

My first was 26 months when my second was born, so not quite two under two, but close. In our case, it was definitely traumatic. My oldest just turned 5 and it's finally starting to feel a bit easier, but we are also dealing with the terrible twos. It's actually been fun lately, but for awhile the misery outweighed the fun.

I think it largely depends on the temperaments of your kids. My first is a handful, and my second is more chill. We always say that if #2 had been our first (and thus, our only for awhile), we would have been on easy street.

[Anonymous]

First two are 19 months apart. We waited until #2 was 3 yrs old to start trying for #3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We had two under two and did not have a third. We stopped at two not because it was traumatic (although those first 6 months were rough) but because we just felt our family was done and logistically it made sense.

+1

[Anonymous]

They’re 3 and 1 now. We plan on waiting until 4 and 2 to start again. My youngest was harder and needs more attention whereas my oldest always wanted siblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did you go on to have a third? Or was that traumatic enough

traumatic? You chose this.