We had ours a little over 2 years apart. I was 30 and 32. The reason for the spacing was because we just suddenly wanted a second child and got pregnant immediately. This supports the idea that at 17 months our first was easier and we were ready for a second.

Anonymous wrote:Not sure. My kids are 4 years apart, though. The bigger age gap is awesome for us. I've gotten to really enjoy/focus on each one''s babyhood, and when I get babied-out with the little one, I can spend big-kid time with the big one.

I had the first at 33 and second at 37, so I had age somewhat on my side...I didn't feel desperate to have the second. Also, I wasn't sure I wanted a second for a long time...not until after the first turned 3.

I would have felt so old having my first kid at 33.

Anonymous wrote:Because 15 month old children are adorable and no longer horribly exhausting to care for in the way that an infant is. Suddenly it seems perfectly reasonable to have another.

Yeah, that falls apart when you're pregnant and throwing up and your adorable 15-month-old has turned into a horrible 18-month-old.

Anonymous wrote:Mine are 3 1/3 years apart. I had been reading a lot of literature about "0 - 3" development when we were planning our children. I was hoping to avoid sibling rivalry and didn't want any of my kids to feel "replaced" when their next sibling came along. Well, it didn't work out that way. They still fight. I might as well have had Irish twins like my husband and his brother (13 months apart in age). As adults, they are not only brothers but good friends.

LOL, I love how people think they can control this stuff!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 year is too soon, 3 years is too long.

Basically this.

See, this is why it's totally individual. I think 3 years is PERFECT and 2 years may drive me crazy. To each her own.

Anonymous wrote:1 year is too soon, 3 years is too long.

Basically this.

I struggled with IF before having DD, and we knew we wanted to have more than one kid. We were already many years later having kids than we had hoped to be, and I was late 30s. But 18 mos was about as early as I could contemplate jumping back on the IF treatment rollercoaster (or really being pregnant again at all). I had a chemical pregnancy when DD was 19mos, and then got pregnant a few months later resulting in a 2.5 year spacing. In our case, it was entirely driven by when I was ready and able to have another rather than by any plan around their spacing.

It's the healthiest for the mom to wait 2 years, so that's what a lot of women do.

I paid a lot of attention to my friends and their siblings and the ones that were 2 years apart were much closer than those 4+ years apart. My sister and I are 10 years apart and we're like a whole different generation apart. DH and his sister are 4 years apart and never paid any attention to each other whatsoever. They weren't ever in high school at the same time and never had any similar aged interests.

I have an 18 month old now and we are going back for our first FET next month. Agree with the PP about 16-18 month olds being super cute. We are finally like oh wow! having a kid is so fun! You're awesome! . . . Until (from what I hear) they reach 2.5

My first two kids are just under 2 years apart. My first child became easy to manage and was just so cute around a year old. We got pregnant with #2 quickly.

Baby #3 will be just under 4 years younger than my second kid. Now that my first two kids are 3 and 4, they're finally getting easier to manage again.

Bc at the 16-18 mo age mark the kids are super cute, parents are confidentlly it the swing of things, they're arguably "easier" to handle, and so folks start to try for #2...bam, 9 mo later kid #2 comes along

Mine are exactly 2.5 years apart. There were several factors - DD was breastfed for 1 year and by the time she was 1.5 years I was ready to work on the 2nd one. With IVF, it took a bit longer. We are an older couple so waiting much longer than 2.5 years wasn't really an option. Plus the kids are close in age where they can play and have a lot in common.

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of people wean at 1 year and their cycle finally starts up again and they get pregnant.
It's not magic, just biology.

This. I EBFed/pumped through a year. Then cut the pumping once cow's milk was an option, so I no longer cared about maintaining supply and BFing was just for if/when my kid wanted it in person. Period came back 3 months later. Got pregnant one cycle later. Kids 25 months apart.

1 year is too soon, 3 years is too long.

Mine are 3 1/3 years apart. I had been reading a lot of literature about "0 - 3" development when we were planning our children. I was hoping to avoid sibling rivalry and didn't want any of my kids to feel "replaced" when their next sibling came along. Well, it didn't work out that way. They still fight. I might as well have had Irish twins like my husband and his brother (13 months apart in age). As adults, they are not only brothers but good friends.