Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Parenting
ParentingMothersSingle ParentsStep ParentsAdoptionTwinsSpankingChildren's Health
Pregnancy
PregnancyBreastfeeding
Marriage
MarriageDivorce
FamilyKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Family Forum / Parenting / Twins / December 2004



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

next baby when? advice please

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
thekobes@comcast.net - 15 Dec 2004 01:41 GMT
Hello,

I'm a long-time lurker, first time poster.  I've gotten alot of great
advice from this list over the past 16 months, so I thought I'd run this
one by you guys.

For those of you who had twins as your first children, when did you
think you were ready (or when did you decide) to have your next child?

DH and I have talked about this briefly, but want to get some real-life
advice/data before we jump in.  I know it's different for everyone, but
I'd like to hear your opinions.

Our boys are 16 months now.

Thanks,

Mimi
mom to Will & JC 7-21-03
Nick Theodorakis - 15 Dec 2004 02:20 GMT
>Hello,
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>advice/data before we jump in.  I know it's different for everyone, but
>I'd like to hear your opinions.

My dw said she wanted to not be pregnant for two years before trying
for another. So our singleton was born 2 years and nine months after
the twins.

Nick

Signature

Nick Theodorakis
nick_theodorakis@hotmail.com
contact form:
http://theodorakis.net/contact.html

H Schinske - 15 Dec 2004 02:26 GMT
>For those of you who had twins as your first children, when did you
>think you were ready (or when did you decide) to have your next child?

We had ours about four years apart, which worked pretty well -- there was some
time for me to spend with the new baby one-on-one (a new experience!!!) while
the girls were in preschool. If we'd had twins again (a definite possibility,
as the girls were fraternal and spontaneously conceived), it would have been
do-able, I suppose.

--Helen
Cindy Senger - 15 Dec 2004 19:35 GMT
Ours are also four years apart and I feel like our timing was good.  Like
Helen, I enjoyed some one-on-one time with Jenna while my "big girls" were in
preschool.  Now they are in K and it seems so easy having just one toddler to
look after-- though I don't really know if that's a "not twins" thing or more
of an experienced mom thing.  The only real downside is that I feel like I'm
cheating A&A a bit out of "extra" activities (like ballet, sports, etc.) right
now because it's still hard to take Jenna places and keep her entertained.  
But, by this time next year, I think a lot of that will be easier-- Jenna will
be 2.5.  It was also nice to have potty training far behind and have A&A able
to entertain themselves somewhat-- as well as feeling like they could
understand that sometimes my hands were full with the baby and they had to wait
a minute.  They were also able to understand how to hold and play with a baby
really well at four.

-Cindy (mom to Ashlyn and Allyson 6/99 and Jenna 6/03)  

>>For those of you who had twins as your first children, when did you
>>think you were ready (or when did you decide) to have your next child?
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>--Helen
KimandJuan - 15 Dec 2004 20:01 GMT
When we decided to start trying around August... I knew I wanted to be pregnant
in time to have the baby by the Sept 1st cut off for school.  The girls would
be close to three and a little more independent and hopefully potty trained.
It was all very idealistic.  Up until this summer though, I wouldn't have even
considered getting pregnant.  It was too tough keeping up after E+A.  

~Kimberly
Mommy to Alexis Iliana 07/17/99 and
Emma Elidia & Aislyn Gabriela 10/01/02
come see us...
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aislynemma/
multimom4 - 15 Dec 2004 23:48 GMT
Our fourth came 4.5 years after the triplets.  It made life easier at first
that the older ones were not poking her in the eye, hitting her with blocks,
etc, although we still had to be careful that they didn't crush her with
their love.  It also helped that they could dress and feed themselves and
were potty trained.  It was also nice that they were in school and I had
time with the baby, as Cindy said.

As time goes on, however, I am somewhat regretting it (not that we had any
real say in the gap at all, it just happened that way for various reasons).
The "easiness" of the first, say, two years, is not a lot compared to the
difficulties we are running into now and which will continue for the rest of
their lives in various ways.

-- Apart from when Holly is in K and 1, I will *never* have the 4 of them in
the same school again, so I will be meeting four buses or running from
school to school twice a day for most of the next 10 years.
-- By the time Holly is old enough for the older kids' current activities,
they will have outgrown them, so we shall (again) never benefit from having
them all in the same activity at once (swim team and swim or ski lessons in
particular, but it would prob. be the same if the girls were into gym,
horses, soccer etc etc etc).
-- Holly gets cheated on activities because as I encourage the older kids to
diversify from each other there just isn't time for me to get everyone
everywhere they need to be.  I worry that if one of the older kids gets
really "into" something (e.g. needs to go to several practices a week) then
Holly and the others will be even more cheated down the road.  Of course I
suppose this is the same whatever the age gap -- it's more of a "why did we
have 4?" issue.
-- Similarly, I would have liked to put them into private school but with 4
to pay for -- ha ha.
-- Holly will still have four long years of school to finish by the time the
older ones go to college (fingers crossed, touch wood, etc.) -- I expect she
will be very lonely when they leave.  I remember this experience myself (I
had two years left) and those were a tough couple of years.
-- OTOH, as a youngest child whose older sisters mocked, abused and made fun
of me intensively ... I also wonder whether she may suffer that, perhaps
even worse than I did, when they are "adolescents" and she is still "just a
baby".
-- Holly desperately wants to "keep up" with her siblings but simply can't
in many ways, which is frustrating for her.  It's good that she learned to
climb up and get into her car seat at a very young age so she could be like
them.  OTOH, we are finding that for example just coloring while the others
do their homework is no longer satisfying to her but since she can't manage
letters (and isn't happy trying) we are experiencing regular meltdowns at
the moment -- and over many other things like this.
-- My age -- I wish for Holly's sake that I had been a bit younger when she
was born.  I had a lot more energy when EHC came along than I do now, 8
years later.

A girlfriend of mine had triplets and then her fourth one is only 22 months
behind.  Mayhem at first (she "solved" that with grandma visits and lots of
babysitters so that she could get breaks and she could also take some but
not all of them out at once) but now she is reaping the benefits of having
them all in grade school together (three in 2nd, one in K).  They are doing
their swim, gym and ski lessons together.  They all went to -- and
enjoyed -- the same camps last summer.  They were all on the "junior" (8 and
under) swim team together.  They all learned to inline skate at the same
time, etc etc etc.  When the older kids started to get homework, the younger
was of an age to be able to do some real letters and feel big about it.

Of course the grass is always greener -- I guess any degree of separation
has its pros and cons, but it seems to me that 4.5 is a bit too much.

Just a few thoughts.

--Janet
Elliot, Hanna, Connor  (10/21/96)
and Holly  (4/4/01)

> Ours are also four years apart and I feel like our timing was good.  Like
> Helen, I enjoyed some one-on-one time with Jenna while my "big girls" were in
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> >
> >--Helen
H Schinske - 16 Dec 2004 02:14 GMT
>The "easiness" of the first, say, two years, is not a lot compared to the
>difficulties we are running into now and which will continue for the rest of
>their lives in various ways.

I don't know about the rest of their lives. I am the youngest of six, with the
next closest sibling nearly four years older, and it seems to me that since
we've been grown up we've all been essentially the same age. I'm better friends
now with several siblings than I probably was growing up.

--Helen
multimom4 - 17 Dec 2004 22:26 GMT
It's a strong statement, I agree -- but in our 40s my sisters still treat me
like I'm 13 and they're the only ones who are all grown up, so it's
certainly not impossible.

--Janet
Elliot, Hanna, Connor  (10/21/96)
and Holly  (4/4/01)

> >The "easiness" of the first, say, two years, is not a lot compared to the
> >difficulties we are running into now and which will continue for the rest of
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> --Helen
H Schinske - 18 Dec 2004 19:43 GMT
>It's a strong statement, I agree -- but in our 40s my sisters still treat me
>like I'm 13 and they're the only ones who are all grown up, so it's
>certainly not impossible.

Sounds to me as though they're the ones who aren't so grown-up, then :-) I
expect it would have been much the same even if you'd all been closer in age.
For that matter, my daughters currently treat each other much worse than they
treat their little brother.

My siblings sometimes kid around about not being used to the idea that I can
drive, and what not, and I get stuff like being introduced as "my little
sister," but basically it's not enough to be any problem, just a little family
joke kind of thing.

--Helen
Megan Byrne - 16 Dec 2004 03:50 GMT
I coouldn't even imagine thinking about another baby with 16 mo. old
twins! Our plan is to try again when our twins are 4-5, they are 2 now.
I really want to give them the one on one that they need and are
entitled to. I know that they are not ready to share Mommy yet!

  ~Megan~
"Mama" to twins,  
Aidan & Alexis
Paula Johnson - 15 Dec 2004 23:35 GMT
>For those of you who had twins as your first children, when did you
>think you were ready (or when did you decide) to have your next child?

Well, we weren't planning on a next child, but one is on the way
anyway :-), and my twins will be about 26-27 months old. I feel like
that is too close and I'm very scared about it, to be perfectly
honest.

If we had planned on another, I think I would have wanted a 3-4 year
age difference, ideally. You have to do what feels right for you,
though. Good luck!

Paula
Andrea - 19 Dec 2004 00:42 GMT
>Well, we weren't planning on a next child, but one is on the way
>anyway :-), and my twins will be about 26-27 months old. I feel like
>that is too close and I'm very scared about it, to be perfectly
>honest.

Congratulations Paula!  This announcement deserves it's own post.  :)

Andrea
twin girls-Jordan & Madison
3/22/00
Jack H. - 16 Dec 2004 17:21 GMT
> Hello,
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Our boys are 16 months now.

mine are 2 years and 3 months and the thought hasn't come up yet.

> Thanks,
>
> Mimi
> mom to Will & JC 7-21-03

Jack
Abigail and Jonathan
9-10-02
berlioz3 - 18 Dec 2004 04:34 GMT
<thekobes@comcast.net> wrote in message
> For those of you who had twins as your first children, when did you
> think you were ready (or when did you decide) to have your next child?
Hi Mimi,

I have not posted here in, oh my, I forget how long, lol, but you lured me
out. ;-) I don't exactly quailfy w/ your request, but I wanted to add my
2cents, too.

It took me quite a few years to have my oldest child (now almost 9). The
doctors told me not to wait too long to come back in if we wanted to try
again. (infertility issues). Ok, so I took them seriously...and was
expecting the girls when he was 10 months old. I might not have actually
planned them quite that close, but I wasn't complaining. Now, there we were
w/ a 19 month old and newborn twins and my husband can't wait to try again.
Okkaayyy....I seriously did not know how I felt, until right as my girls
were turning two. One day I just knew I did want to try again. We started
trying pretty much right away at that point and the boys came not quite two
years later. At this point Nicholas was almost 5 1/2 and his sisters almost
4. For us this has been pretty ideal, I think.

Anyway, I guess my point in sharing is that I think having a plan is truly
great, but I also really think you'll have a *feeling* when it's the right
time. :-)

Good Luck whatever you decide!
Beth
Nicholas 12/95
Samantha & Alexandra 7/97
Zachary & Gabriel 5/01
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.