What is your experience with short time spacing between pregnancies?

fro9etb8j5qsl2

I know I've seen a thread here about it a while back but I can't seem to find it now Have any of ye gotten pregnant while already having a small baby (a few months old) and how difficult was it having 2 young children at the same time? I may be looking at it in a rose tinted spectacle way but I would think that it's easier to be pregnant and have a baby just beginning to get up and go rather than a toddler or small child tearing around the place? Also, wouldn't 2 children nearer in age be closer and better company for one another? I'm not totally oblivious, I know that it would be extremely hard and tiring but for those of ye who did it, how did ye fare?

lazygal

I have a 15 month gap.

The pros: I was still on maternity leave while pregnant the second time and this really helped. I was able to rest more than commuting to work. I was in the 'baby zone', nappies, feeding, toys about the place and all that jazz. I didn't have to relearn much, I went straight from one baby to another. We had loads of stuff ready to go so bought very little apart from a double buggy.

The cons: It can be very difficult being pregnant with a baby. Lifting, carrying and getting around with a bump and a baby is not easy. Luckily our older child was walking at 11 months. There can be medical risks to having two so close. I had a section both times and there was some internal scarring, but I don't know for sure if things would have been different with a larger spacing. When the newborn is crying it sets the other one off and vice versa. You don't get out as a couple as much when you've two to get settled in bed.

Bottom line is there is no right or wrong spacing. I don't think you can expect them to be great mates just because they're close in age. We knew we wanted at least two and some factors made us go again quickly and we were very lucky to conceive quickly the second time. I also felt if I got out of the baby zone totally I wouldn't ever want to get back into it. It is a challenge. We kept our older child in her childcare arrangements, luckily we were able to to that otherwise I wouldn't have coped as well. Personnally I feel I've given up a lot of myself with two so close in age. I've been pregnant and breastfeeding without a break for almost three years. I'm only now slowly getting back into my own space.

Big Bag of Chips

There's 18 months between No1 and No2. And 14 months between No2 and No3. I wouldn't do it differently at all!

It's busy at times obviously, and leaving the house was sometimes not worth the effort! No2 wasn't walking when No3 was born so a double buggy was a necessity. Even just popping into a shop, carrying 2 of them was fun

But, I loved it. They were all good sleepers though which helped. By 6 or 7 weeks we were getting a full nights sleep.

If you are going to have more children, I'd recommend going for it soon. It can be hard work at times, no doubt, but then again it would be hard work at times no matter what the age gap!

Wellyd

I don't have experience of this as a mother but as a child with a sibling very close in age. I'm the eldest and my sibling was born when I was 13 months old. It really drives me mad when people say it's nice for the children to have company so they won't be on their own. My sibling was an exceptionally boisterous child and was forever finding ways of testing my mother as a toddler. As a result of this I grew up quite quickly. My mother has said years later that having us so close together really set me as up as a very responsible and quiet person. She said I was always offering to do my own thing like playing by myself because I knew my sibling needed more attention which she regrets allowing to happen so much. I really do love my siblings but my parents do say I didn't really get long enough to develop my own personality before they became overwhelmed with baby number 2.

I know I sound really bitter but I'm not I wouldn't change a thing about either of them. Just think about how your attention would be split between both children especially if you were to have a difficult pregnancy or anything like that.

lazygal

I have a sibling close-ish in age and for many reasons they got a lot more attention than I did. That was one of the reasons I kept my older child in childcare when I had number two, i felt the younger one deserved that one on one time that their sibling got as an only child. Also having seen how my parents handled competing demands for different reasons we've definitely done a few things very differently.

Meath08

By coincidence my two are also 15 months apart. It has worked really well for us and if i could go back in time I wouldn't change it. They are really close and while they fight just like all siblings, they play together all the time. At 3 and 4 now they are great at entertaining themselves and I get time to myself. It's busy when they are smaller but you just get on with it. Second time around is soooooo much easier and I was much more relaxed.

Number 1 is so young when number 2 comes along that they adjust so quickly to having to share your time, they don't really remember there was a time when it was just them. One of my sisters waited an extra year before having her second child and she found that really challenging. She told me she should either have gone for the shorter gap like us or waited longer as her number 1 was at an age where she was so demanding that it was a nightmare trying to meet the demands of both. It didn't help that her number 1 waited until 22 months to walk!

Big Bag of Chips

Meath08 wrote: »

It didn't help that her number 1 waited until 22 months to walk!

Yep - my No2 was almost 2 before she walked. So that was fun!

OP, different people will have different experiences. Like the sibling above, her parents wished they had given her more time before the "challenging" sibling was born. But that sibling could just as easily have been a placid quiet baby who slotted in. Or they could have waited a while longer. The first baby could have gotten used to the time and attention and then the 2nd more challenging one would arrive and upset the apple cart, regardless!

It really is down to personal choice. There are no guarantees. You could get two children who gel, regardless of age gap. Or you could get 2 entirely different personalities who will cause mayhem regardless of age gap!

Although I have heard it say that the first 6 months is the dangerous time for the "rose-tinted glasses", as you say! I had to have great will power not to go again after No3!!

Moonbeam

I have January 2009,2011 and 2013 babies and an April 2014 baby.
The 2 year gap is perfect,you only have 2 in nappies for a few months,only 1 lot of bottles,the older one can walk and talk and can fetch nappies and wipes etc for you.
The 15 month gap has its good and bad points,2 in nappies (ughh)in my case the 16 month old is only deciding to walk now so 2 that can not walk properly and 2 that can not talk fluently.

Do I regret it? no way.
#1 and #2 play together and entertain each other,#3 loves joining in but mostly destroys their lego and steals their toys.

CelticRambler

18, 20 and 20 months between our four. Pregnancy & labour No.2 was the best one for my wife, and even though SonNo.1 was mad jealous at first, he got over it quickly and those two are closer to each other now than any other combination. From a practical point of view, the nappies thing is unpredicable, so I wouldn't make any decision based on that, but we did a lot of walking and whether it was with a child in a pram or a backpack, lighter was definitely better! By the time the third arrived, it made no difference as our routine and the house and the car were all geared up for "under 3s" so we could have had another two or three without any bother (sometimes did, on loan).

A decade and a half later, we still see the benefits of having four so close together, because they're all going through the same stage - whatever it is - at near enough the same time. No.4 (14 next week) is thinking of her career options with the benefit of No.1 (18.75) actually setting foot in the workplace. I look at our friends who "spread them out" and they (especially the mothers) seem to be a lot more worn out by being in baby mode for ten years longer than us.

How Strange

I've got 2 years 3 months between ours and for me that was/is the perfect gap. My son was a very difficult baby and although he was generally much happier and content after his first year he was quite a handful. By the time no.2 came along he could articulate his feelings so we could talk to him and deal with his understandable jealousy. We'd gotten over the worst of the tantrums as his speech was amazing.

I think he'd have been a terror if I'd have had a baby sooner as he was very possessive of me.

I found it all a lot easier than I expected and have to say my son was largely fantastic about his new sister taking the limelight.

But as others said, it's very personal. I think I'd have gone crazy if I'd have been pregnant with a year of having my son. My daughter is a much easier, more content baby by comparison. She'll probably be a terror as a teenager!

As for siblings, there's 2 years between my sister and I and we're not close at all. I'm very close to my brothers with a gap of 4 years and 17! So there's no guarantees about how siblings will get on.

eviltwin

I can't speak from personal experience as there is a large gap between my children but do you have much support? I'd know a few people who had irish twins and the ones who sailed through it were the ones with a good support network of family and friends who could help out especially in the early days with babysitting, cooking etc. I think if you have people who you can call on you'll be grand, if you don't have that its a lot harder. Good luck!

January

I've a 14 month gap, a 20 month gap and a 2 and a half year gap. While being pregnant with a small baby is hard (as lazygal said, carrying and lifting in the late stages is tough), it was grand once the new baby was here because looking after two babies was as easy as looking after one (for me anyway!), number 2 was a handful in that she was bad with lactose intolerance and suffered for the first month or two while we tried to figure out a routine for that but we got there.

Now, they play together, sing together, want to cuddle up at night time etc and number 3 is even joining in with this now.

fro9etb8j5qsl2

Thanks everyone, it's great to hear opinions from both parents who had babies close together and also people who had siblings close in age I agree that it's a personal thing but it's good to hear that it is possible to do without going completely insane There are pros and cons on both sides of the coin and it all depends on personal circumstances at the end of the day. To me, I think that the worst part with a larger age gap would be getting past all the bottles/nappies/walking/talking with no 1 and just as life is getting a bit less hectic, no 2 would come along and the whole cycle would start from the beginning again. But I suppose that's what parenthood is all about!

looksee

My first two were 18 months apart, they were both very easy children which was good as I did not have much of a support network (a lovely neighbour with a bunch of her own), otherwise I was 100 miles from a hospital or doctor and half a world away from my family! I think the main thing was that I was young (22/24) and was not aware that there were supposed to be problems or difficulties, so I just got on with it.

I don't think you can generalise about it, it depends on yourself, your circumstances and what kind of children they are though of course you don't know that till its too late :-) If you think you should have another child, then go for it!

pwurple

My second pregnancy would have put 22 months between mine, but that was a MC. I found it tough going through that with a smallie if i'm honest. It was physically difficult.

I have been doing some reading on pregnancy spacing recently. The WHO recommend spacing of 3-5 years for maximising health of the babies and the mothers. That is based on a large scale african study, where infant mortality was doubled when the birth spacing was smaller... Not sure how that translates to ireland. You'd assume we have better nutrition and medical support.
Study sources are here:
http://www.rhcatalyst.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Programs_Birth_Spacing_Optimal_Interval

Intererstingly, a large gap also has an impact... More than 5 years between pregnancies also has an increased health risk for the mother.

Historically women have only been able to have children very close together since the industrial revolution, when food became plentiful and we all became so well fed. Recovery times were longer before the 1700's. women did not ovulate for some time after a pregnancy because we just didn't have the physical ability to do so.

Moonbeam

3-5 years between pregnancies would have killed me!! I always wanted 4 and wanted them quickly and the spacing just happened the way that it did.
I also think we are a lot more able for it younger,you need a lot of energy with 4 small kids especially 2 babies.
Personally I could not imagine having kids in my late 30's or later.

How Strange

Also historically when women had no choice but to breastfed (no such thing as formula and bottles) and continue to do so well into toddlerhood for nutrition reasons due to lack of other food the minimum spacing between children would've been 2 years.

This would've given the baby/toddler the greatest chance of survival. 1 child with exclusive access to the mother was more likely to thrive rather than two babies sharing.

lazygal

Ideally I'd have had all mine before 30. But life didn't work out like that hence our age gap. If we have more I don't think we'll wait too long, I don't want to be pregnant in my late 30s.

nikpmup

Oi, less of the late 30's bashing :P

I wanted children from early on, but life doesn't always go to plan the way you want it. My late husband was infertile, we tried for years, did IVF but no joy. He died when I was 34. I met my partner two years ago, we were only together a year when I got pregnant (thankfully we were both on the same page re having a family) I'm 38 now and would love at least one more, so I'm planning on getting cracking sooner rather than later. I would really have loved to have been pregnant heading back to work.

Two close together is hard, I'm sure, but childhood is only a few short years. I'd rather be shattered for four or five years and have my family complete than risk leaving it too late to conceive again.

Suucee

Theres 23 months between mine. No 1 was a fairly easy baby. Always wanted 2 year gap so id still be in the swing of things. Got bad spd with 2nd pregnancy . Had to use a crutch for a while. Also toddler was constantly getting ear infections and seemrd to be sick all the time. Dont know how i would have coped if it wasnt for my family.
When he was born i though spd was gone but again got a bad flare up and coping with a 2 year old who was only starting to find her words and a 1 month old while i was barely abke to walk was very difficult. But thankfully my sister was there again.
He is now 2 months (tomorrow, that flew) and things have really settled. I wouldnt change anything. (Well maybe the spd but physio is helping) 2 year old was never jeolous and seemed to forget there was a time when it was just her. We have our selves in a great routine and i even get some me time as they nap at the same time.
I dont know how i would have done it without family though as i was months out of work on sick leave with spd and OH had to work .

Also my sister is 2yrs 5months older and we get on ok. My other sister is 15 yrs older and we talk nearly every day and see each other prob twice a week. (Shes the one that helped) My brother is 13 yrs older and hardly see him.

pwurple

Moonbeam wrote: »

3-5 years between pregnancies would have killed me!! I always wanted 4 and wanted them quickly and the spacing just happened the way that it did.

Oh jeez yeah, sure starting at age 18... 4 kids, assuming no misses, each 5 years apart would take you 16 years to accomplish. That's some slog.

CelticRambler

Plan it right and you could be a granny at the same time!

I've remembered something my baby sister said a few years ago. I'm the eldest, she's the youngest, but still only eight years between us and she was/is my favourite sibling. But at the after-the-afters of my brothers wedding, which ended up as an ex-pats' reunion with all the cousins, we were swapping stories and my sister made the observation that she couldn't remember me ever being around when she was "young".

Obviously it didn't cause any long term emotional damage (to either of us ) - we get on fine and one of her children is my goddaughter - but it still felt a bit weird at the time to think that there were about ten years of her life when I didn't exist because I was in a different school, then off out doing teenage things and whatever.

LegacyUser

I'm surprised nobody mentioned money so far. The childcare costs for two babies would be crippling (for me anyways) - where I live it would be €1,200 a month for two full time. Add that to a monthly mortgage repayment of a similar amount and I'd never stop worrying. The other issue is that in years to come they would both be going to university at more of less the the same time, which again would be crippling financially.

I have 3.5 years between my two kids and I wouldn't change it. My body and mind had time to fully recover after the first pregnancy and we really got to enjoy our child. Now we only have a few months of paying for full time childcare for two as the eldest is about to take up the free pre-school year in September.

wolfpawnat

I have a 4 and a half year gap between my 2. I liked having the time to put into no1 before no2 arrived. He was in school and had his own little friends and everything a few weeks after his sister was born, though no doubt it was tough on him too adjusting to so much at once, but he is doing good.

With regards lifting and the like, even a 4yo has to be lifted a lot and I found that tough (I was high risk for a good part of the pregnancy).

I am 27 now and I told himself if there are to be anymore kids, I want to be talking seriously about it in about another year (giving the recommended 2 year rest between c-sections) Though I'd say we could be done, but me personally, I am not mad about close age gaps, I would be frightened of not being able to spread myself evenly, but that's just me.

wolfpawnat

I have a 4 and a half year gap between my 2. I liked having the time to put into no1 before no2 arrived. He was in school and had his own little friends and everything a few weeks after his sister was born, though no doubt it was tough on him too adjusting to so much at once, but he is doing good.

With regards lifting and the like, even a 4yo has to be lifted a lot and I found that tough (I was high risk for a good part of the pregnancy).

I am 27 now and I told himself if there are to be anymore kids, I want to be talking seriously about it in about another year (giving the recommended 2 year rest between c-sections) Though I'd say we could be done, but me personally, I am not mad about close age gaps, I would be frightened of not being able to spread myself evenly, but that's just me.

Moonbeam

Sasasa wrote: »

I'm surprised nobody mentioned money so far. The childcare costs for two babies would be crippling (for me anyways) - where I live it would be €1,200 a month for two full time. Add that to a monthly mortgage repayment of a similar amount and I'd never stop worrying. The other issue is that in years to come they would both be going to university at more of less the the same time, which again would be crippling financially.

I have 3.5 years between my two kids and I wouldn't change it. My body and mind had time to fully recover after the first pregnancy and we really got to enjoy our child. Now we only have a few months of paying for full time childcare for two as the eldest is about to take up the free pre-school year in September.

In Dublin it is nearly that for one ,2100 for 2. The crazy childcare expense is luckily only for the 1st few years .

Big Bag of Chips

I think if you're considering having kids close together, then you should have them close together! I know of people who have a bigger gap between them and when their babies were small having another never even crossed their minds. The ones who did have them close together were, obviously, the ones who thought about it and thought they could handle it at that point in their lives.

So if you're considering it, then it must mean you feel you can handle it. There's no right or wrong!

pwurple

That's a good point about them all being in college at the same time at some point in the future. At 24k per child at the moment it's probably only going to increase. I guess you could pick your favourite one and let them go!

CelticRambler

I don't have the figures immediately to hand, but I reckon we saved the equivalent of a typical degree course over 14-18 years by getting discounts for multiple children doing the same thing at the same time, as well as passing on clothes before they went out of fashion, or baby equipment before it just got old. Ditto on the child care point above - we didn't spend a penny on "childcare" because between the two of us being in a "new parent" frame of mind for 5 years, it was easier, cheaper and more satisfying to take time off than pay someone a silly amount to babysit. Plus we saved on mortgage costs by not needing "proper" bedrooms for the children for 8 years, at which time we changed lifestyle, upsized and down-mortgaged.

Chocolate fiend

Everyone is pretty much going to say that what they did is right and perfect, but, the thing is only you can decide what is right for your family, and of course our bodies don't always get the memo about us getting pregnant when we want to. If your baby is small then you might not have your cycle back yet and would it be worth weaning onto formula to get pregnant?

I have had 14 months, and almost 3 years. Both were perfect, I liked both. 14 months was harder in some ways, but, they are 6 and 5 now and both boys which is great for outings and activities. The 2 year old is a girl and they just worship her, so having her when they were 4 and almost 3 was really great.

We had pretty much zero family support, and well now we are in Australia so there is just the 5 of us, and we have a hectic and noisy life, but, I wouldn't change it. I am no more tired now than I was when the second guy was 2 iykwim? Now if only the 2 year old would sleep through the night then we could start to feel like we are leaving the baby phase behind forever :-)