No. My second had a hard time adjusting when the third was born - she kind of wasn't sure of her place and took about a year to sort it out, but now she loves the crap out of 3 and they're very close.

No, it is a positive impact,

My kids might say yes. I have to say no more often.

But I don’t think saying yes to a young child all the time is actually in their best interest. Nor is allowing them to overschedule.

I’m the youngest of four. I hope not but who knows. My mother did tell me once when she was sick I was her favorite.

I can say as an adult who was third if four that my parents should have probably stopped at 2. Obviously I’m glad I existed, but my family had a very difficult time throughout my childhood and even now is spread too thin. My parents were from big families and wanted to repeat that. Their siblings mostly stopped at 1 or 2. My cousins had better childhoods, their parents have more money for retirement, they have less conflict, and they are closer to each other.

I think it’s possible to have 3+ kids and do it well, but I think it takes a special kind of parent and a lot of resources. I think it’s not something to just take the leap on. We stopped at 2 with zero regrets, and I think 1 would have worked well too.

Definitely. As adults they don’t have much of a relationship, and as kids #2 meant we had less bandwidth to drive #1 to activities, less money (private school tuition became daycare for #2), and less energy.

We had a second because I wanted one, not because I was under the impression it would make #1s life better.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone feel like subsequent kids ended up overall not being in the best interest of existing kid(s). why? there's of course pros and cons overall, just curious if anyone has felt like their existing kids ended up overall being negatively impacted long term by an additional child

It has overall had such a positive impact. My daughters, 14 and 16 are best friends and I am so happy they have each other. But, when DD2 was born I did kind of go through this stage where I felt guilty for having another because I had less time for DD1. I remember it really bothering me at times, and feeling sad about it. But I’m sure the postpartum hormones made it feel worse.

Our third is such a joyous addition to our family! There was no practical reason to have a third but we both wanted a thirs and are so happy we went for it.

At first, having a baby sibling probably was a net loss in terms of parental time and availability for our older, but after the initial year or two, I think it has been a net gain. They play together and support each other and are very close. Having two has also created perspective for us that I think helps us be more chill with each and approach them as individuals.

I have three and I think the oldest would prefer to be an only. But I’m not sure that would have been better for her overall.

This is one of those questions that can only be best answered by people whose kids are adults I think...because who can foretell the future? So far I'd without a doubt say no, the gift of siblings has been a godsend. More love, more company, more fun.

I think the best thing to happen to DS1 was the birth of DS2. It’s much easier to teach social skills and life lessons when you have constant opportunities among siblings.

No. Well, not yet, at least. DDs are 5 and 1.

Yes - we can do less now that we have more children and I have to say no a lot to my son who is very involved and sporty because of my other children.

Does anyone feel like subsequent kids ended up overall not being in the best interest of existing kid(s). why? there's of course pros and cons overall, just curious if anyone has felt like their existing kids ended up overall being negatively impacted long term by an additional child