Mamas of twins, I need your input please:-) - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 13 Old 02-23-2005, 02:04 PM - Thread Starter
 
ssmeest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hey Mamas,

I'm faced with a situation and I need some words of wisdom from some experienced mamas. We have DD who will be 4 in July. We are in the process of adopting another child/ren. Now here's the situation:

We have the option of adopting 2 infants the same age so they would be "twins" or adopting 2 babies 10 - 12 mo apart. We want to adopt 2 more but have a time limit to do so, so wainting 2 - 3 years between babies is not an option.

So what do you think? Would adopting 2 infants the same age be suicide? They would be about 6 months old when we brought them home. What about problems I'd encounter? The benefits of 2 the same age?

Thanks for your input Mamas,
Sandra
ssmeest is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 13 Old 02-23-2005, 04:21 PM
 
Irishmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with heartmama
Posts: 45,457
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Moving this to Parenting Multiples...
Irishmommy is offline  
#3 of 13 Old 02-24-2005, 11:03 AM
 
Proudmomoftwinsplusone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hi Sandra!

Here are the benefits of two the same age- mine nap at the same time everyday for two hours, they eat the same food (so i dont have to prepare different meals), wear the same clothes so i dont have to hunt around for the right size clothing. Also, I can tell they are going to be such good friends-they always play together. I think that having two babies a year apart in age might be a little more difficult, but i dont have an experience with that so lets hear what others have to say.
Proudmomoftwinsplusone is offline  
#4 of 13 Old 02-24-2005, 11:33 AM
 
sweetpeas's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 629
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Having 2 babies the same age is HARD! Not something I would have chosen. But I also knew I didn't want 2 close together in age. I haven't experienced a 1 yr age gap but I think in many ways that would be just as hard or harder. A 1 yr old is still a baby, so you'd still have two "babies" but they'd be hitting different milestones which could be more challenging. 7-12 months was a relatively easy phase w/ my twins. They were fun, starting to interact w/ us & with each other (it is just priceless to watch them discover each other) but not yet mobile & independent enough to be a challenge to keep track of two.

So, I think either option is going to be a LOT of work (but of course, lots of rewards too). I think I'd choose 2 the same age given your two options (but yes, given a choice I'd choose a larger age gap LOL).
sweetpeas is offline  
#5 of 13 Old 02-24-2005, 12:14 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd much rather have twins than to have them a year apart. You do the same thing, just more of it at once. For me that's easier than 2 totally different things- feeding, sleeping, clothing, playing, schooling, entertaining. For me, the first 4-6 mos was definitely the hardest.
amnesiac is offline  
#6 of 13 Old 02-24-2005, 06:07 PM
 
gotmilkmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh...I have to say that is a toughy for me. I have twin girls who have a brother a little less than 18 mos older. With all 3 of them I sometimes want to jump out the window. :LOL When my ds is off with Daddy or napping and I just have the girls I think - oh this is so much easier. But when one girl is napping and I'm playing with just the other and my son I also think - ah this is so much easier. I suppose If I had 4 kids and one was napping then I'd think that my 3 were easy to handle! I'm no help am I?

I really think it's easier if there is some space btwn kiddos. An infant takes alot of mommys time and care. An infant depends totally on you. A 12 mos old depends on you too but not 100%. A 12 mos old can drink from cup/bottle, can play and get to toys, can eat snacks if hungry, etc. So with 2 infants you have all that dependability and time x2. KWIM?

With 2 the same age you can knock out feedings, naps, diaper changes, etc at the same time. But that's if they are on the same schedule. For me that is a battle. They are individuals and sometimes as hard as I try one needs more sleep or the other needs more nursing or whatever.

Also think about holding two at a time. A newborn wants/needs to be held more than a 12 mos old. Yes you'll be holding both no matter what. But typically the 12 mos old will want down to explore or play with toys. Infants don't ever want to be put down (mine anyway :LOL ).

On the other hand 2 the same age will make great friends and playmates as they get older. Although as they get older, 10- 12 mos apart isn't much so they will still make great friends and playmates.
gotmilkmama is offline  
#7 of 13 Old 02-25-2005, 12:33 AM
 
hotmamacita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,977
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
hotmamacita is offline  
#8 of 13 Old 02-25-2005, 02:09 PM
 
sweetpeas's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 629
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
gotmilkmama's answer just re-emphasizes that all kids are different LOL. Yes, mine both wanted to be held alot when they were babies, but holding 2 babies was doable & if anyone else was around (friends, grandparents, etc.) they were perfectly happy to be held by whoever. 12-18 months was a phase of wanting to be "up" all the time & being old enough to have preferences about WHO held them (usually me unless my mom's around, she STILL gets stuck holding them both alot LOL). And jealousy is just starting to be figured out . . . 12-18 mo was a really hard phase for me with two, I can't imagine going through it w/ one plus a newborn who would be even *more* needy.

So I think the answer is . . . either option would be hard, which would be harder depends on the personalities of the kids, which is impossible to know in advance. Not very helpful huh?
sweetpeas is offline  
#9 of 13 Old 02-25-2005, 02:17 PM
 
gotmilkmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just reread your post and I must of missed the part about them being about 6 mos whe you get them. Two 6 mos olds are a big difference from two newborns. Yes still lots of work but at 6 mos a bit less. (I think ).

Anyway I think it's great what you are doing...whichever way you decide!!!
gotmilkmama is offline  
#10 of 13 Old 02-26-2005, 02:08 AM
 
Tigerchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle Eastside
Posts: 4,737
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What kind of environment are these kids coming from? If they are coming from an institutional environment or foster care (one ff is one thing, but if they have been placed multiple times, it's another), then to be honest with you I think it's more fair to the child to at least have some "alone time" with them. Granted, it's not like you will be able to center your attention on them full time because of your daughter, but I think sometimes it's best to make sure that you have time and freedom to really develop that one on one bond--and that's going to be really difficult with three kids.

Add into that potential complications from their care situation (which hopefully is very stable and not a factor)...and, well, to be honest with you as a mother of twins and an adoptee herslef I just couldnt' do it. I wouldn't mind adopting 2 kids the same age with a little time stagger inbetween (I actually know 2 people who did this). But I think an older baby adoptive child especially should not have to compete for your attention with 2 other kids right from the start. If they're in an institutional setting, then they might be used to that, but you want them to bond with you and NOT feel like you're in an institutional setting. Which I certainly felt like a lot of the time when my boys were in their first year--there was just SO much nitty-gritty care that it took me longer to attach to my boys because A) there was their sister to deal with and meet her needs and B) there were two of them that I had to get to know and C) sorting out the dynamics/needs of the triad of siblings as well.

I'm going to assume these kids kind of "know" each other too? Because if they don't you need to factor in helping them get comfortable/at ease with each other too, plus your daughter both ways and back.

I dunno. It just seems like a lot to take on all at once.

Is there any way you can stagger the timeline so you can have some time with one first, get them established in your household, and then adopt again? I have seen people do that, it is tough, but they ironically seem to have an easier time than those people I know who have adopted blood-relative twin siblings into a household with older kids.

YMMV, and if you really want to do this, I'm sure you can make it work. But since you were asking for other's views, that's my own personal one.
Tigerchild is offline  
#11 of 13 Old 04-07-2005, 09:12 PM
 
monsies33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hi Sandra,
My husband and I are adopting from Guatemala and want to adopt a boy and a girl at the same time. They will be about 4 months old. We are just starting our home study and from what the lady at the agency says, they and the social workers highly discourage adopting two unrelated kids who are so young. She says this is because of "artificial twinning" and other factors. I was just wondering if that has come up with your agency at all, as I am starting to get the jitters about all of this. We have tried for two years with one miscarriage, so I am ready for two. Just curious if you've gotten any of that along the way from the agency people. We are going to still proceed with two as long as they approve us for it, and yes it will be a lot of work, but so rewarding. Everyone I have spoken to says it's much easier to have them the same age than have them a year or two apart.
Good luck!
Monica
monsies33 is offline  
#12 of 13 Old 06-11-2005, 03:55 PM
 
corriet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Leadville,CO
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
hi there! i am a mom of a 3+ and a 19 month old and i am expecting twins. i am doing a great job and i wouldn't have it any other way. it is kind of hard for me now because i am getting close to my due date. but all good things in all good time!! good luck to you in whatever you may choose. just remember that you can do it. women rock!! to all
corriet is offline  
#13 of 13 Old 06-22-2005, 06:45 PM
 
johub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,163
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had BOTH twins and children 1 year apart (16 months) (ok so I had my twins 16 months after my ds)
And I think that it was a little harder to have them on different schedules than to take care of two babies of the same age.
Joline
johub is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off