or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Anyone have kids 5 or more years apart?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Anyone have kids 5 or more years apart? - Page 2

post #21 of 50
Mine are 12 years apart and it's working out just fine.
post #22 of 50
I am so loving this thread. My DD is almost 3 and I have felt very much the oddball among my peers. Most of them have 2 under age 2.5. They are always asking when we're having #2... and I'm like, "probably when you have your third!" I just don't think I could do it. I have a friend who had her baby when her son was 5 and it seems to be a seamless transition for them. It is totally more what I have in mind when I think of having more than one kid.
post #23 of 50
My siblings are 6-12 years older than I am. They LOVED having a baby sister when they were old enough not to see it as "competition" and I loved having siblings that were old enough to do really fun stuff with me.

A good friend has kids who are 5 years apart and their relationship is wonderful. The older girl just has a natural, "mommying' personality and she is so sweet with her little brother! (The parents also talk about how much easier it is for the older child to be fairly rational and independent by the time another little comes along.)
post #24 of 50
I have a sibling 5 years younger, and a 5.5 year gap between my oldest and second child, a 26 mo gap between the youngest.

I *much* prefer the longer gap There are so many good things about it, and I found the shorter gap sooo hard.

Good luck!
post #25 of 50
my half siblings are 15 years older and i despised it and still do. I am on my first baby and they are having grandkids. By the time I could comprehend things they were out of the house and starting lives and had no time for a baby sister. I have no relationship with them what so ever. Even in my baby book my mom predicted I wouldn't and apologized. Because of the gap I am absolutely an only child and will never have a sibling bond with those people. They are in a totally different part of their lives now. I was always VERY hurt and didn't understand why they would go skiiing and do fun things and I had to stay at home. I had thought it was because I didn't have any money but in reality it was because I was a burden and too little. hate it hate it hate it.

5 years is nothing like 15 though. She'll be old enough to remember them living with you and spending time there.
post #26 of 50
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by babygirlie View Post
my half siblings are 15 years older and i despised it and still do. I am on my first baby and they are having grandkids. By the time I could comprehend things they were out of the house and starting lives and had no time for a baby sister. I have no relationship with them what so ever. Even in my baby book my mom predicted I wouldn't and apologized. Because of the gap I am absolutely an only child and will never have a sibling bond with those people. They are in a totally different part of their lives now. I was always VERY hurt and didn't understand why they would go skiiing and do fun things and I had to stay at home. I had thought it was because I didn't have any money but in reality it was because I was a burden and too little. hate it hate it hate it.

5 years is nothing like 15 though. She'll be old enough to remember them living with you and spending time there.
Aw, I'm sorry you grew up hurting. My son does have three half-siblings who are MUCH (17, 15 and 12 years) older than he is, but they weren't over that much to begin with (and the two oldest are off to college now) so I don't think he's having the same kind of experience. They're more like uncles I think.

And yes, five years is not the same thing...hopefully it's close enough that he'll still have that sibling relationship with him/her.

FTR, I have siblings that are 12, 10 and 6 years older than I am, and I was always closest to the sister who is 10 years older (and still am).
post #27 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sewchris2642 View Post
The gap between kids will be an advantage or a disadvantage more because of the kid's personalities and the individual family dynamics than any specific age span.
Totally agree!!

Our kids are 8.5 years apart and we love it

I never wanted a small age gap, we were aiming for 4-5 years but got 8.5 ... I can't imagine it any other way! Having DD for support and to help out saved my sanity many times.

So far we haven't had any sibling issues, they play together, fight together, look after each other ...

The one thing that bothered me (more so than DD I think) was that DD kinda suffered in the social aspect. She is very involved in after school and evening activities and we had to cut back a bit for the first couple of years because of DS napping and having early bedtime and DH's shift work sched ... I just couldn't do the running around. We're back to running around with DD daily (DS is 3).

I also think that with an older sibling, they have an easier time understanding the needs of a new baby ... DD also understood that for 8.5 years before DS she had it pretty good And she can see just how awesome DS is and how lucky we are to have him!!
post #28 of 50
i like this thread!

we are still expecting our first, but i am leaning more and more towards a larger age gap... i had originally anticipating having a second maybe 3 or 4 years down the road, but it's good to read about the positives of waiting 5 or more. for me it makes sense because of my career. i don't want to have a second until i have permanent position and am eligible for a year paid maternity leave... in my field and location, it will take at least a couple years of full time work before i'd get a job like that. and i don't think i'll even be ready to return to work full-time for at least a year, maybe longer.

it's nice to hear about the relationship between older and younger siblings too... i think my mom appreciated having us around to help out with my baby sister, and we certainly never resented her (although the toddler stage is rough no matter what... i certainly was not appreciative of having my stuff wrecked by a toddler... no matter how old i was at the time!!)

i guess the biggest negative i can think of is the age difference on the other end. my youngest sister is 7 years younger than the next in line (who is only 2 years younger than me) and if she'd been born earlier, my parents would have become independent a whole lot sooner than they are... she's 18 now, so not a little kid any more, but i can see the benefits of getting all your kids out on their own within a couple years of each other and being able to start the next stage of your life. it seems a little disconcerting to have two kids in university, but still going to PTA meetings and packing lunches.
post #29 of 50
I haven't read all the replies, but I wanted mention that throughout most of history and in most cultures, the average time between births has been 4-5 years.

I nursed DS until just after his 2nd birthday (not a drop of menstrual blood until 3 weeks after weaning--he nursed every 2 hours at night for 2 years straight, no exception, ever!) and am now doing a 1 year 'recovery' time (nothing wrong with me, just to build nutrient stores back and also just be alone in my body for a year!) That will put kids about 4 years apart. Seems as normal and natural as can be to me!

I'd have no problem with 5 or 6 even, if that's how it goes.

I'm astounded when people assume we're done or even having fertility problems just because our son is 2.75 and we haven't announced a pregnancy! I always bring up the historical 4-5 year interval.
post #30 of 50
quoting glitch. sorry.
post #31 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiztic View Post
I haven't read all the replies, but I wanted mention that throughout most of history and in most cultures, the average time between births has been 4-5 years.
There may be cultural and historical demographics you're including that I am unaware of, but this is SO not the case in my family's history. I am the family's unofficial genealogist, and have lists upon lists of nearly every family branch of mine dating back 120-150 years. Before WOHMs, birth control and formula feeding became widespread, *every* branch on both sides of the family had between 4-10 kids, ranging from as little as 10 months apart to no more than 3.5 years, almost without fail. Where larger gaps did occur, there was almost certainly a baby's death or miscarriage throwing off the timeline between the living. Breastfeeding didn't seem to hold the seed of lusty husbands at bay for too long! I can't imagine any woman wanting to have sex (much less being fertile while exclusively nursing!) a month or two after just having had a newborn, so guess who was making *those* decisions back in the day...

That being said, my DD is 3.5, and I was so hoping to have our second around her 4th birthday, but I miscarried in December. So it sure looks like there will be a 5 year age gap minimum whenever #2 does come along. I'm just glad to hear it has worked out really well for most.
post #32 of 50
Mine are 2yrs apart, then 4yrs, so my oldest is 6yrs older than the baby.

The hard part is having one in grade school, one in preschool all with different pick up and drop off times, then a baby. Getting the baby in and out the car so many times a day is killing me.

Both kids are good with the baby, but particularly the 6yr old, even if he's not actually playing with her, I can trust him for a few minutes to be the supervisor.

This is a lot harder than 2 and newborn was, but it would be less hard if I only had one older child and one schedule.
post #33 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by snguyen View Post
There may be cultural and historical demographics you're including that I am unaware of, but this is SO not the case in my family's history. I am the family's unofficial genealogist, and have lists upon lists of nearly every family branch of mine dating back 120-150 years.
Info from this book: http://www.amazon.com/Kids-Biology-C...5119308&sr=1-2

And she's talking about across all cultures AND, most importantly, across the 2-3 million years of humanity (meaning all homo species). We're talking biology here, not culture.

There are a number of cultures that consider it totally taboo to 'mate' before a previous child is 2 years old. Add that to ecological breastfeeding, and it would be nearly impossible to have spacing much less than 3 years (not sure what took it to 4-5). As for the man's desires, I really believe we were (biologically) meant for polygyny (well, not even marriage, just multiple mating partners for maximum procreation). Though our culture has changed a good bit since then, I'm not sure our biology has adapted quite so quickly.

The book also has a whole discussion of how apes are still spacing 5 years due to necessity, they can't care for their little ones and have another more quickly than that. The anthropological theory put forth (in Small's book) for our closer spacing (4 years) is that we developed a "childhood" somewhere way back in history that made us able to have independent (not nursing, not worn by mom) 'kids' (ages 2-7) that could be cared for by older children in the family/village while the mom could get pregnant again and care for the newborn. The apes don't/can't do this and care for their young (dependently/nursing) until later, therefore cannot handle another baby. This supports the idea that humans are more successful evolutionarily speaking. Its an interesting discussion.

I don't mean to spark debate in here, please just take or leave this stuff as you will and continue the discussion on larger child spacing in your families! I do recommend the book, though! I loved "Our Babies, Ourselves" and this is the follow-up.
post #34 of 50
holiztic thanks for this info I find it very interesting.

my kids are 5 years and 7 years apart--13 yo, 8 yo, and 16 months. love it. would not plan another until the baby is at least 4. though my h probably doesn't want another. i do. i want one more biologically if we can squeeze it in bio clock wise (i'm 32--i'll be 36 by the time I'd be ready again..) and i'd like one or more through older child adoption. h is more open to that--outwardly bc of population concerns and also I think because secretly he is soooo afraid that a fetus might not make it thru a pregnancy, bc miscarrying is common, whereas a child joining the family over age five is out of the "under 5" vulnerable stage re: childhood illness, etc.

my 13 year old (late aged adoption at 5 yrs) recently independently suggested we adopt a large sib group. he found a photolisting of a group of 6sibs. i can't even imagine what that would look like in function. i broke it to him gently.

in any case i do think wide spacing is great, particularly if you (like me) aren't like the *best* at housekeeping, cooking, household organizing, etc, with a baby/toddler...at least with one at a time there are never two who need a diaper changed or whatnot at the same time.
post #35 of 50
Mine are a little over 5 years apart and it's great
They play a bit together now and DS can be a great help to me too with helping with his younger sis
Plus when they are adults there won't be an age difference per se. Now they have different needs and likes and dislikes, but when adults there won't be. Since DS is independent I can do a lot of stuff with DD that I feel I couldn't if he were much younger and I was chasing after the both of them! In turn, I can do activities that he enjoys one-on-one while DH is playing with DD, or while she's in bed or napping. I also like the fact that I had one-on-one time with DS for almost 5 years, so learned a lot about ages and stages so this time around it's easier. Go for it!
post #36 of 50
There are 9 years between my two DD's, and so far it's absolutely fantastic. DD1 is very independent, and also has a strong "mother hen" complex, so she loves taking care of her sister by herself-- diaper changes, dressing her, pushing her in the stroller, etc. Of course, we're only 2 months into our sibling adventure, so she may still grow weary of having a baby around.
post #37 of 50
Mine are almost 6 years apart. I love the age gap. My DS1 loves being a big brother. And I really get to enjoy all the wonderful baby moments!
post #38 of 50
I will have two sets with a 5 year span..

Oldest is 11, next is 6.. then my youngest will be 5 in a couple of days, and my new baby isn't due until June..

The good things I have noticed so far- my 11yo takes his education very seriously, and it gets my younger kids talking about what to expect with it.. they are already discussing what instruments to study in 6th grade because they see how their older brother loves and cares for his trumpet.. they are considering sports options since they see how their older brother looks forward to ski season..

My youngest (almost 5) is really excited about the baby.. yesterday he was singing "candy girl" to her.. I am waiting to see if this adoration of his will continue once the baby is born, and cries, and poops.
post #39 of 50
Not by choice here -- had to do IVF. There are pluses and minuses, but I'd do it again for a chance to have dd.
post #40 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by snguyen View Post
There may be cultural and historical demographics you're including that I am unaware of, but this is SO not the case in my family's history. I am the family's unofficial genealogist, and have lists upon lists of nearly every family branch of mine dating back 120-150 years. Before WOHMs, birth control and formula feeding became widespread, *every* branch on both sides of the family had between 4-10 kids, ranging from as little as 10 months apart to no more than 3.5 years, almost without fail. Where larger gaps did occur, there was almost certainly a baby's death or miscarriage throwing off the timeline between the living. Breastfeeding didn't seem to hold the seed of lusty husbands at bay for too long! I can't imagine any woman wanting to have sex (much less being fertile while exclusively nursing!) a month or two after just having had a newborn, so guess who was making *those* decisions back in the day...
.
There may have been wet nurses or homemade formula though, especially if they were either poor (working moms go way back among the lower classes) or rich (read the old Mary Poppins series for a look at how the British upper middle classes handed off the newborn to the nanny immediately around 1900 or so).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Anyone have kids 5 or more years apart?