What do you think is the best spacing between children? - Page 2

[berry987]

I voted 2 years because my kids are two years apart (except the last two, who are 3 years apart) - 8, 6, 4 and 1 - and that's what I know. But honestly, it's hard. I love how close they all are, how they go outside together and plan games and build forts and share secrets. But they all are still so young and require so much of us and it is exhausting. I am sandwiched 18 months between my two sisters and we were very close as kids and still are...best friends, really. I wanted that for my kids too. So I guess it depends on your priorities. There are some intense years with kids so close in age but there are big positives too.

[ilovemygirl]

I voted other. I think this is going to vary greatly for each individual family. It depends on the parents, the kids, genders, personalities, etc. The idea that kids will be close just because they are close in age has no merit in my book. I have a brother who is just a year older than me. We were not close as kids, rarely played together and we never speak now. I have a sister who is six years younger than me and we weren't really close as kids either but are close now. 

There will be a big gap between my dd and my twins. I didn't plan it that way but I'm kind of happy it turned out like that. The years we have spent together as a family of three have been amazing and very special. I couldn't imagine not having that for any of us. 

[owlhowl]

I voted 2 years, because my kids are all two years apart. I can apprecitate families who have a larger gap! It's sometimes a challenge, especially with a newborn and a 2 year old. Now that the kids are older (2, 4 & almost 6) it's awesome and their dynamic is great! After DS3 was born though, I said if we did want #4, I would need a larger gap...3 pregnancies "in a row" was a challenge on my body.

[kittyhead]

i know a bunch of families with kids two years apart, and it is nice that the kids are close in age.  but mine are three years and a few months apart, and they play together well...

we waited until the first was two to start trying for a second because it was important to us that our first son be able to nurse for two years at least, and it was good that i did because my pregnancy cause him to wean.  plus the first was out of diapers before the second was born, i cant imagine having two in diapers!

[proudMoMmy2634]

I think 2 but I'm making it 4...lol.. DH is not with us(working with us), so it will really help if DD can already be count on / or can understand before having a new one.

[meowmix]

Originally Posted by sparklefairy 

At least an arm's length apart. Further if either is holding something that can reach the other, including as a projectile.

That cracked me up! 

My oldest and middle child are almost exactly two years apart.  My middle and youngest are 18 months apart.  I like the 2 year thereabouts spacing.  I'm sure part of it is personality, but they all get along wonderfully.  But really, it wasn't like I planned on that spacing.  It just worked out that way. 

[meowmix]

Originally Posted by owlhowl 

I voted 2 years, because my kids are all two years apart. I can apprecitate families who have a larger gap! It's sometimes a challenge, especially with a newborn and a 2 year old. Now that the kids are older (2, 4 & almost 6) it's awesome and their dynamic is great! After DS3 was born though, I said if we did want #4, I would need a larger gap...3 pregnancies "in a row" was a challenge on my body.

I love this!  For a while, when there were 3 kids under 5, that was exhausting!  But now that they are 11, 9 and 8, it is really fantastic.  Their dynamic together rocks.  I wonder how much of it has to do with spacing and how much is inherent personality.  We stopped after 3 and now I think 8 years is too big a gap for me to think about a 4th.  It would totally reset that "when all the kids are out of the house" clock.