 | | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by Vip
| | Posting
1
 | | I can't decide whether or not to think about child number two.
On the one hand, I grew up with a brother so feel that having a sibling is the 'normal' thing, but my husband was an only child and he was quite happy by himself.
I hated being pregnant and the thought of going through all that again (not to mention the actual birth and then the nightmare that is newborn 'sleep'). It's a year of my life again - is it worth it?
While Mr Vip is more than happy to stop at one, if I want to go for two that's not a problem either, so at least there isn't a conflict between us or anything like that.
What number did you stop at? If you had more than one, do you sometimes regret it (although I'm sure you love number 2+ dearly!)?
Don't worry, I'm not going to base a life-choice like this on the comments of my fellow internet weirdos  but I am curious as to what others think.
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by Z
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
3
 | | Er, how important would it be to have them close together in age, so 1 and 2 within a couple of years at school, able to go out drinking and pulling girls/boys together? If you want two within a few years then it's probably a good idea to start right away... but if you're ok with more of a gap then why not just think about it a bit?
|
|  |
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by SiliconDioxide
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
5
| | We avoided the decision about a second child by having twins. We have three boys now, we would have been happy with four too. All the small numbers have their own dynamic. Only children tend to grow up in a particular way, as do twins. When three children cause strife it is generally because one of them wants to play a two-handed game and the third is left to rattle and disrupt, so I would put in a vote for even numbers. It does depend on age difference and gender though, so I can't offer you a useful, universal rule.
We have vague regrets about number four, but largely because we ran out of time and health; three is sometimes too many and sometimes too few. Parents who start with twins often don't go on to add to them, they come as a bit of a shock. We are glad to have three, even if at times the third seems to be more trouble than the twins ever were.
With children it is good to be able to enjoy what you have, as nature has a way of making its own mind up on these issues. Enjoy your decision.
|
| |
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by U94986
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
6
| | I stopped at one. Well that hurt like you wouldn't believe, and sleep deprivation and WHY IS HE CRYING!? WHY DO I HAVE TO STAND UP? Why does he wake up if I try to put him in his bed? Why is he projectile vomiting? Why won't the doctor help me? Why doesn't he talk? Why do I have to pick him up early from playgroup? Why don't they make schools for children of perfectly normal intelligence but with a social and communication disorder?
So never happening again. I spent the next 11 years waiting for my GP to okay the op so it never, ever happened again. Perhaps if I'd staye with his dad, but I didn't want to ruin the toddler years (my favourite age for kiddies) with a baby taking me away from J. I really didn't know if I'd have any love left over for another one. Although now I've got so many dogs, I guess it just grows to cover them all!?
I don't regret it. J's had my full attention, he's had the benefit of what money I've had - I've never had to weigh up a pair of shoes or a day out with the school. We get to go out, I get to treat him to things he wants for Christmas and birthday. I do sometimes wonder if I will have grandchildren, or if he'll ever move the hell out, which might have been more likely with another child as well.
But one was enough for me!
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by Mu Beta
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
8
| | As difficult as it is, take a step back and remember there's a big hormone train involved. Lots of women want to go back and do it all again straight away. I know one rather sad case of a friend who was pretty much told by the doctors she would knacker her hips for life if she had a third child, and risk losing the baby, but she still lacked the self-control to continue trying. Thankfully, I don't think she was ever successful.
You're still young - throw your energies at #1 for now and re-evaluate on a yearly basis rather than a monthly one.
B
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by  sprout
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
9
| | One can be lonely (for the child) - it depends a bit on parents lifestyle, hours worked, availability of other family and friends.
I have two currently, which is great, and would like one more and then stop there. For medical reasons, this will be via adoption, which is a whole other story.
Two is more work though, but they do start to amuse themselves a bit. It depends a bit on gender as to whether they fight or not - my sons do, certainly. Second children are generally a bit more turbulent (they have to compete to survive...)There are efficiencies of scale though, you already know about schools, drs, clubs etc.)
You might want to think about the gap - a slight gap (older child at three when next one born) is not bad, the older child handles it better, and you are less exhausted and not dealing with the same issues at the same time.
Too big a gap and they won't play together.
Good luck on the decision!
sprout
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by Vip
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
10
| | Thanks everyone. It certainly isn't something I will be rushing into next week, but it's nice to hear of other stories and experiences.
I don't feel a particular urge to have another - hormones are most concentrated on food production right now - but it's something to consider when I'm thinking about work.
|
| |
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by You can call me TC - Ready for Reims - June 15th? Pas de panique! A87780612 A33659210
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
11
| | Sorry, VIP - this is a very personal decision for you and no amount of advice or reports of experience from any of us will help you. If one child has taken all the stuffing out of you and you can't manage another, then don't.
You will know to give them plenty of opportunity to play with kids of the same age to make up for lack of siblings, if and when you think they are ready.
Having said that, children who grow up in the company more of adults than children have also been known to be more calm and concentrated and less easily distracted: a trait that we should all nurture in these fast-moving times.
If you do go for more than the one - as a rule of thumb, I would say an even number is preferable.
Warning: Generalisation!!! Second children are usually more impetuous and emotion-driven, meaning that they are pretty active babies and very vociferous. This will drive you mad for the first few years, not to mention wear you out, but this is made up for by their showing their affection demonstratively and making you laugh a lot.
TC (mother of three, but that is not relevant here)
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by Vip
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
12
| | I have most of my stuffing still -  has been a fantastic baby so far. I think my main worry is that if I have another it won't be as easy. But we all get through it, don't we?
While yes, I hated being pregnant, I am someone who copes. I'm sure I can handle it as long as I think it will be worth it in the end.
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by clzoomer- mostly retired.
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
13
| | Five years between number one and two, two years between two and three. Number one just had a baby (seven months ago) and the mother instinct is strong in this one. It feels like she got that way by being the boss over her two younger sisters for so long. The youngest is the most independent and the middle child is a classic middle child- mildly rebelling and competitive.
I'm proud of all of them and happy with what they are and do. The fact that they still come to me for advice, recipes and company pleases me no end.
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 7, 2012 by Mol - on the little netbook
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
15
| | We wanted four (both being one of four) but stopped at three, because that's the maximum you can fit into a normal car (and our house). I enjoyed being pregnant (apart from all the bitchy comments from other women) and wanted a fairly small gap between the first two - it ended up at 22 months which was about what I wanted. There was a bigger gap between number 2 and number 3, mainly because two small children are exhausting. (This does get better.)
I could never understand why anybody stopped at just one, until my own Nod was about 18 months old (and I was already expecting Sic). But at that point, Nod was so lovely to spend time with, and our days were so nice, that I suddenly realised why people might not want to disrupt that by adding another child. Each child increases the number of relationships within the family and it does make life more complicated.
However, I can honestly say I've never regretted it. My own sibling relationships are hugely important to me and I'm glad that my own children also have that experience.
If neither are you are that fussed either way, there are probably more good reasons for stopping at one than there are for having another. You will all be much better off financially, family life will be simpler, and you're doing your bit to conserve the planet's resources. And for every person who wouldn't be without their sibling(s), and loves being with them, there's probably another who never speaks to theirs.
Mol
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 8, 2012 by Beatrice Backing Belgium
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
16
| | Always wanted 2, one for each hand
They are 2and a bit years apart which I found good - they were both into Disney movies, themeparks, and similar holidays at the same time. Plus the eldest is now finishing his Uni course while the youngest is just about to start - handy not to have 2 offspring requiring student finance at the same time.
I had 2 younger siblings, and yes an odd number can mean one child feels left out (not always the same one....)
Of my generation, my 2 sisters and all my cousins, we each have either 1 or 2 children, and of the only children, I think they are all reasonably well adjusted.
But, I enjoyed being pregnant.
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 8, 2012 by Vip
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
17
| | Who knows, I might enjoy being pregnant a lot more this time round - I gather it's a different spin of the Wheel of Bad Things each time.  Plus, there's a possibility that I can use my holiday and maternity leave and not have to go back at all... but that would be a) taking the p* a little and b) require some pretty exact timing. But whatever happens, I am definitely taking mat leave a lot earlier this time. It made life so much better once I finished work, and I did start to enjoy it then.
Good luck mini, I hope that all is healthy in there. At my scan I also kinda hoped there would be twins in there - that way I could have two (which is what I wanted at the time) but only have to be pregnant once. Now I've done it, I must admit the idea of actually giving birth to, and then looking after newborn twins is pretty daunting!
Thanks for your stories, everyone. It's nice to hear about others' experiences, regardless of what I end up doing.
|
| |
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 8, 2012 by quotes
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
18
| | We've got two, close enough in age to keep each other occupied. To start with, it's very hard work, what with all those nappies, car seats and sleeplessness, but after that, it's endlessly good. So IMO, go for at least two, if you're strong enough to withstand the first years. That initial hassle could be seen as a sound investment for the future.
|
| | | Subject: A question for parents
Posted May 8, 2012 by Pegasus ~A~
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
20
| | I don't think there's any way you can define the 'right' number of children. So much depends on your personal circumstances (which can always change, before or after having kids), the parents personalities and preferences and the children themselves.
Personally, I grew up feeling like an only child as my older sibling was so much older than me. This made me sure that I wanted number 2 to be close in age to number 1, so they would have that company that I felt I missed out on. But pregnancy/birth 1 was horrible, and if I hadn't had that motivation, maybe I wouldn't have been so keen to plan number 2 so soon (21 months age gap).
When they were both small and in nappies, it was very hard work, but they have always been good company for each other. Number 3 came with a gap of 4-5 years, and the experience was quite different. I felt I was able to give more attention to no.3 because 1 & 2 were at school, or more independent than as toddlers, but the age gap wasn't too much for them all to play together. I was older too and maybe slightly wiser as a parent. 
Throw practical considerations (like returning to work, planning finances, etc) out the window, as your situation can always change, and what seemed like the 'sensible option' may turn upside down in the future. Let your heart take the lead on this one. If you can't wait to have another baby, feel you've got plenty of energy to spare, or having a small age gap is important to you personally, then go ahead and plan number two. But if you're not sure just yet, then wait. You will know when/if the time is right and both you and your child(ren) will get the maximum enjoyment out of family life by listening to your heart rather than your head on this one.
|
|
