Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 21:47     Subject: Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Depends on the kid. In our case, the baby phase was fine and 2 was fine and 3 was fine, but 4 has been HELL. It's hard to "nip things in the bud" early when the things literally didn't emerge till age 4.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 21:30     Subject: Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Anonymous wrote:I did think age 3 was way worse than 2. My son rarely threw tantrums and overall I enjoyed the two's, but 3 was tough. Lots of talking back, power struggles and discipline issues.

With that my kids are just under 3 years apart and it was a great age gap for us. I felt that the benefit to having them 3 years apart was that my son handled the new baby really well. Unlike some kids who are 2 when a sibling is born, my son could communicate better and help more with the new baby. I also think that having a baby made him feel more like a big kid versus feeling like he lost his status as the baby of the family. He was old enough to move into a big kid bed versus being kicked out of his crib for the baby and so on.

All that said, the truth is that a new baby no matter the age difference brings challenges. If kids are close in age you may not be dealing with the terrible 3s and a new baby, but you are dealing with a new baby and a active toddler and so one. There is no perfect timing.

Good luck!


Same here. Lots of challenges with 3--power struggles, limit testing, etc. but the good news is that he handled the addition of the baby amazingly well. He has never once in five months appeared anything but delighted to have a baby brother.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 21:03     Subject: Re:Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Three has been way worse than two for us (boy). It was the worst for a few weeks around his birthday and has improved somewhat since then, but he still has his moments. My second was born a couple of months before he turned two and I have loved the spacing. #1 is not potty trained and isn't the best listener, but it still has been great. Good luck!
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 21:00     Subject: Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
For me, there has been something challenging at every stage, and because the new challenges were always, well, new, they always seemed worse. My DS has had high and low moments every few months for the last four years. But all in all, I can't say that one year was any worse than the previous ones. I think you just have to adapt as new behaviors develop.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 20:14     Subject: Re:Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
It's just different. My kids are 3.5 years apart. When the baby was born, she was definitely in the midst of "terrible 3s": more frequent tantrums, saying no to many things, still in diapers. But it was still a good spacing because she (usually) slept through the night and could be trusted not to destroy the house if I had to leave her alone for 15 minutes to nurse the baby to sleep. I was much less frazzled than my friends with 2 under 2.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 19:55     Subject: Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Fuck no. Parts of 2 nearly killed me. Three was a delight.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 18:25     Subject: Re:Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Just enjoy the kids you have at whatever age they are because they grow up so fast.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 17:49     Subject: Re:Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's never the age, its you, and how you nip things. They get easier with tremendous consistency


It's also temperament. I have three kids. Two definitely had easier dispositions than the third.
Then the one that doesn't, you have to use different discipline,, but you have to use it


Did PP say they don't discipline? I didn't get that from PP's post.


Thank you. I'm the PP, and I do discipline. My kids are not carbon copies of each other. One has definitely been more work/challenging.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 17:46     Subject: Re:Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's never the age, its you, and how you nip things. They get easier with tremendous consistency


It's also temperament. I have three kids. Two definitely had easier dispositions than the third.
Then the one that doesn't, you have to use different discipline,, but you have to use it


Did PP say they don't discipline? I didn't get that from PP's post.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 17:33     Subject: Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
My DCs are three years apart and it has been great. The now 4 yr. old can help when needed and occupy herself with the now one year old is driving me insane! I have a lot of friends with two spaced to years apart and it's been a lot harder on them based upon us comparing stories. Bottomline, you'll be fine! It's difficult no matter how you space them, but three year apart gives you an advantage. Enjoy it!
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 17:32     Subject: Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Yes. I thought 2 was a breeze. Both kids got much more difficult at 3.
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 17:24     Subject: Re:Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's never the age, its you, and how you nip things. They get easier with tremendous consistency


It's also temperament. I have three kids. Two definitely had easier dispositions than the third.
Then the one that doesn't, you have to use different discipline,, but you have to use it
Anonymous
Post 09/12/2013 16:58     Subject: Is age 3 REALLY worse than 2?
There is a two-year gap between two of my kids and a three-year gap (and thus a five-year gap as well, I guess).

The gap between ages didn't make much of a difference as far as overall parenting went. But IME, three-year-olds were MUCH more challenging than two-year-olds.

It will be fine. Congratulations!

(And your coworker sounds a little assy.)