When I first read your post I thought you meant a doll! Silly! Unbelievably I am feeling clucky again too - I thought I never would. The ubiquitous 'they' say that going from 2 to 3 is harder than going from 1 to 2, but that's no reason not to do it. Aren't lots of the best things also the 'hardest' in some ways?
Even I am feeling clucky. And yes Kaylene, I am one of the 'they' who can confirm that 2 to 3 is harder than 1 to 2. But that may be because one of the 2 was wildly autistic at the time. Personally, I'd give it a 3-4 year age gap. That's what we'll be waiting for for number 4. Nothing really good and valuable is easy. Otherwise it wouldn't be valuable and good... law of the market?
My grandmother said "Once you have three, you might as well go all the way to nine or ten". She stopped at four, however (one was sadly a rubella baby and passed away at 18 months).
I waiver in cluckiness. There are times when I look at the kids and would love another. Other days (like today's tantrum-filled day), I am somewhat more hesitant...
Cecily - agree with your recommendation on a 3-4 year gap for number 3. After a mere 13 months between numbers 1 and 2, we are looking for a larger gap to number 3. The problem is with trying to work it around (finally) putting into action our long delayed plan to leave Sydney! - although maybe I am trying too hard to plan and control.
we found a 2.25 year gap was hard but I felt that after 2.5 no 1 got much more independent - so if i were thinking another then i reckon 2.5-3 years (and 3 years means could be at preschool!). But I'm not having another!
7 comments:
Still clucky?
Don't ask me what I think. I am dreaming of longer than 2-4 long naps at night... sigh.
When I first read your post I thought you meant a doll! Silly! Unbelievably I am feeling clucky again too - I thought I never would. The ubiquitous 'they' say that going from 2 to 3 is harder than going from 1 to 2, but that's no reason not to do it. Aren't lots of the best things also the 'hardest' in some ways?
Even I am feeling clucky. And yes Kaylene, I am one of the 'they' who can confirm that 2 to 3 is harder than 1 to 2. But that may be because one of the 2 was wildly autistic at the time. Personally, I'd give it a 3-4 year age gap. That's what we'll be waiting for for number 4.
Nothing really good and valuable is easy. Otherwise it wouldn't be valuable and good... law of the market?
My grandmother said "Once you have three, you might as well go all the way to nine or ten". She stopped at four, however (one was sadly a rubella baby and passed away at 18 months).
I waiver in cluckiness. There are times when I look at the kids and would love another. Other days (like today's tantrum-filled day), I am somewhat more hesitant...
Here's another thing to add to the comments (related to the name of your blog)...
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23165302-2,00.html
Cecily - agree with your recommendation on a 3-4 year gap for number 3. After a mere 13 months between numbers 1 and 2, we are looking for a larger gap to number 3. The problem is with trying to work it around (finally) putting into action our long delayed plan to leave Sydney! - although maybe I am trying too hard to plan and control.
we found a 2.25 year gap was hard but I felt that after 2.5 no 1 got much more independent - so if i were thinking another then i reckon 2.5-3 years (and 3 years means could be at preschool!). But I'm not having another!
Post a Comment