Gotta say, to me, you're living the dream, OP! My kids are 5 and 2, and I look forward to them being old enough to take on all day adventures places. Even now, I can't imagine starting over with a baby.

I read something recently that really clicked with me: Would I love more time with my littles ones as the babies they were? Yes. Do I want another baby? No.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't think that your age or the small house is a problem....
but your two are at wonderful ages.

For a family that loves travel you can finally do adventurous things: ziplining in Costa Rica, biking in the Loire Vallee,....
things that you cannot do with a baby.
I loved my kids as babies but 9 and 6 are golden ages and you only have a few years with them before they turn into teenagers... missing on these great years with your older kids would be sad.


I think that you'll never regret your third but might be better off without, hormones and the closing window feeling always make families err on the side of more kids.

++100

Travel is so fun with kids these ages. We really started feeling relaxed and everyone was so happy. Mine are 8.5 and 11 now--since youngest with 5 it's gotten. Witter and better. Savoring it now.

I have 3. I had my 3rd at 38. I went PT at work after my second though. Having 3 makes things much more chaotic around the house and of course it's more expensive. I wouldn't trade #3 for the world though. Our family didn't feel complete without him!

I'm a mom of three and work full-time. We had an Au Pair until our youngest reached Kindergarten. (We had the older two in daycare before that). To the OP, I think you will probably have to move eventually, right? I would suggest looking for places with bedroom & bathroom in the basement for it to work. I've known lots of working moms of 3+ kids who have or had Au Pairs. I personally think it works great this way. No worries about an infant catching all the daycare germs.

We stay in suites when we need to stay in a hotel. Some suites have two queen size beds and a sofa bed with max capacity of 6, so no problems fitting my crew in them. Sometimes we'll need a rollaway bed. FYI , hotels do not include infants in the room capacity. You can easily bring a pack n play for them.

Sure, I went without going water slides or roller coasters but that only lasted a few years. My youngest is probably the bravest of us all (zip lining at age 3), so having 3 kids never held anyone back in our family.

I don't think that your age or the small house is a problem....
but your two are at wonderful ages.

For a family that loves travel you can finally do adventurous things: ziplining in Costa Rica, biking in the Loire Vallee,....
things that you cannot do with a baby.
I loved my kids as babies but 9 and 6 are golden ages and you only have a few years with them before they turn into teenagers... missing on these great years with your older kids would be sad.


I think that you'll never regret your third but might be better off without, hormones and the closing window feeling always make families err on the side of more kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you had a really, really sweet, almost ideal set up with the first two. If you're looking to recapture that feeling, it's not going to happen.

You have two older children in school, and your DH will be working, so the toddler-focused family that you remember will not happen again.

If you want a third child in a more prosaic, normal situation (work, daycare, lots of exhaustion from being up all night and at work during the day, dragging the baby to older kid stuff) then go for it! We have four.

The third, especially if you're both working, is going to be harder than you expect. But they are also wonderful.

BTW, I had my first of the four at 37. Three more healthy pregnancies after that. My last one was probably the easiest, actually.

Almost no women I know that have 3 or more children work full-time. Very of them even few work part-time. If work is necessary or important for retirement/fulfillment--going for a third could set things off.

I have three and work FT, as does my husband. We both have a lot of flexibility and chose our jobs for that reason; FT also means 40 hours/week, not 60. It's not easy, but also completely doable. I think we could even have a fourth and both still work FT, but we're very happy with three.

I was in similar boat as you. I would have been 39 with third child. I am the third child myself--with the 4-year gap. I always feel like there is something I missed out on with my older brother and sister that are 19 months apart. It may be that I don't remember a lot of what they talk about because I was 3 when they were 7 and 8 years old. Not sure.

My two are boys. I think I always thought maybe I'd have 3 children like my mom and sister did. What changed my mind was how great my two boys get along. Seamlessly and harmoniously. I still have people tell me they have never seen two brothers that get along that well (they are 9 and 11.5 now). They rarely fight. They have really similar interests and are giggling non-stop. Many of their friends overlap. They share a room by choice. Life is easy. I was really afraid a third child would change that household dynamic and sibling bond.

My husband and I also have personalities that don't do well with too much chaos. We also travel a lot. The boys have each other on trips--built in friends. They pack and carry their own bags. The thought of going back to babies/toddlers and gear was enough to make me re-think my plan of 3 as well. We also find we need to split up a lot for weeknight practices and weekend games. With two parents--two kids--it's very easy to handle.

I don't think anyone ever regrets having a child. If you really would feel incomplete without the third--go for it. But--if you have lots of doubts and life is going great--I wouldn't do it.