3 under 3?
 

For anyone that has (or will have) 3 under 3, what made you decide on this? What factors did you think about to come to your final decision? I know i must be crazy because DS2 is only 7 weeks old, but I am particularly fond of the age gap (17 months). Which surprises me, because even though we planned it that way (close in age),I was freaked out during my entire pregnancy with Elliot about having 2 kids. But now that he is here...i wouldn't change it! In fact i think it was harder transitioning from 1 child to 2...but now im thinking about the practicalities of it all....for instance, what about the car? We are a one car family and a one income family, so getting a second car is not an option. but our current car only holds two carseats....or what about grocery shopping or going out on your own with the kids? I babywear ALOT (always have). As it stands know my Isaiah will either sit in the cart or the stroller while I wear Elliot. If im with DH then we each babywear...but what about adding 3 into the mix? How do you get out and about with 3...especially if your oldest is crazy active and always wanting to run off everywhere plus is strong willed? How does it all work?:scratch

So im just looking for experiences, advice, ideas, just anything :D
Before the birth of Elliot we were dead set, not having more children for another 5 years..but now that he is here, it almost seems like it wouldn't make sense for us to wait, especially if we have a girl this time, then she would be our last (unless of course the Lord decides to bless us with a surprise...or i change my mind :lol), but anyways, if we only end up having 3 then i wouldn't want #3 to feel left out because the older two are so close in age and such.

****UPDATE PLEASE READ*****

Re: 3 under 3?
 

I'm not fond of closely-spaced children, so maybe I shouldn't chime in. :shifty

I know a number of moms who had close children (3 under 3 type) and they say they liked the spacing once the kids were out of diapers. Before that, it's just a blur. :giggle

IMHO, having children so close takes quite a toll on mom's body. I'm not totally sure we were meant to have children so close, KWIM?

Also I don't know if you lose your milk supply while pregnant, but that is something to think about as well.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

That is true... i hadnt considered that since DS1 weaned himself at 5 months (little stinker! :doh) so i didnt have to consider that when TTC again...im hoping this one nurses for much longer.:nak2

Re: 3 under 3?
 

My first had just turned two when my third was born. My fourth was born when my oldest was still three (for two more months anyway). I will tell you that two to three was hard because I suddenly didn't have enough arms for all of my kids. It's difficult to do it that way when they are so very young that they NEED your arms.

All in all, I love it. It does get overwhelming and some days I wonder what in the world I was thinking. The first year of my third child's life really WAS a blur. But I wouldn't trade it for the world. Especially now that they are getting a little older, I really love it.

However, my body, does not. I had increasingly worse pregnancies and now I keep throwing out my back because my core strength has gone kaput. I also didn't get to nurse my older three (for complicated reasons) which is why they are all so close in age. I've been up and down in weight over the past 5 years and my body is definitely showing signs of stress over it.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

I had 3 under 3, not on purpose.

I would never, ever, in a million years, do it on purpose again. Accidentally was bad enough :shifty

I lost my milk (and #2 was the one most attached to breastfeeding). #3 was a ROUGH pregnancy, my body was done with being pregnant and it was obvious. Postpartum was hard, and was even harder with having to chase an almost 3yo and a 1 1/2 year old - and my husband is very helpful and took 3 weeks off of work. I didn't make it to a year breastfeeding #3 - he was weaned to formula at 10 months - and part of it was that my poor body was just all worn out.

I could go on. But yea, at least for me, it was awful. I don't recommend it, honestly.

Sorry for such a negative post :shifty

Re: 3 under 3?
 

i had 3 in 3..actually i had 4 in 4yrs. :phew :phew
like Lexi,I didnt nurse the first 2- so i was pregnant at 3 mo.pp. i didnt plan to have babies so close together..but i didnt plan not to either,yk?

looking back..i dont think i gave everybody quite the attention i should have - and my body is *trashed*

BUT..i wouldnt take it back - or advise someone not to have children close together :no..they're all best friends. its alot of fun :hearts

eta:i was nursing when i got pregnant with #5..and my milk went away-so that IS a concern, a BIG concern for a small baby.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

oh and i loved the 18m spacing the first time (we did it on purpose). it was the second time that was awful.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

Thanks girls.

yeah....BFing is very important to me...and i have such a go with it since I have IGT, so i guess you all have made me realize that i def dont want to get pregnant before this little one self weans....

Re: 3 under 3?
 

All three of mine are between 14-16 months apart. We didn't 'plan' but we didn't prevent. One word of caution, going from 2 to 3 kids was so incredibly hard, so much harder than going from 1 to 2. When we came home, dh took a week off. I was so scared for him to go back to work. It was hard enough when he was home all day to help out. After he went back to work, I was miserable. I wasn't sleeping because the baby nursed literally all.night.long, and my middle child was an early riser, like 5 am early. I really thought we had a made a HUGE mistake having a third so close in age with the other two.

Another caution, and you may have noticed this when you had your second, is that no matter how young your youngest is, when you have your baby, the one that was the youngest is literally visually not a baby. I know I made a huge error when I brought home my second and third, expecting the older two to behave in ways that was beyond their scope. I'm speaking generally here:)

But with that said, my youngest turns four next week, and I wouldn't change the age range for anything. They all three play really well together (most of the time ;)). The youngest and oldest will happily play together. The older two will do the same, as will the younger two, or they will all three play together.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

I do not have 3 under three but 3 in 4years (and 26 days ;)) :phew I daily ask myself what I was thinking...my first 2 are 19 months apart...I love the gap. :yes the transition from 1 to 2 was hard but nothing like 0 to 1 was. I thought. A 2.5 year gap between #2 and #3 would be great..mthat is 1 whole year more than I got before and it seemed doable. I wish I had factored in what physically, mentally and emotionally would be involved in parenting a 3 year old while preggo (my pregnancies are hard) :crazy and 2 yo :crazy :crazy :crazy


I would encourage anyone just thinking on these things that your kids change...this can be good and BAAAD. Some stages will be "easy" and others will he hard...and don't make any decisions regarding fertility and family until you have experienced ages 2-4 with a couple of kids and seen how different they can be and how truly (awesome but) WILD CRAZY INSANE the stages can be.

This time last year I had a 19 month old and a 3 year old who were blooming into little buddies ..mi thought "they grow so fast...i don't want #3 to he all alone.:shifty

I can see now 3 years is a small gap...to me 4 years is a small gap. :shifty

Looking back, i cant say id change anything..i just couldn't have known how wild and intense 2 yo would be for dd2... and I do like that dd3 wont be super far behind them :yes


But had I the choice, I might have waited a couple more years and had another "batch" of little buddies. Being super pregnant with 2 small extremely active children is probably the hardest thing I have ever done. Parenting 2 small very dependent children and caring for a newborn....totally different ball game than the adjustments I remember from last time.

---------- Post added at 08:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:42 PM ----------

Eta I don't mean to be so dramatic :O we've had a rough week..mans like a pp said about age expectant behaviors and struggling with your previous baby: I Ak there right now. but "2" with her makes what we dealt with dd1 seem like nothing. She. (Dd2) is struggling with the new dynamic..and it is hard to be 2.5. :bheart


I love having 3 ...and in the end I don't think anyone would trade the dynamic they were given for anything..its just the adjustment period is hard.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

I have a friend, who has 3 girls, all 18 months apart, almost to the day. Her 3rd girl was born a couple days after her first girl's 3rd birthday.

She loves it. They are now 12, almost 11 and 9.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

Since I'll have a 3yo, a 20mo, and newborn at the end of summer, I was hoping to read more encouraging/hopeful responses.

The only thing that close pregnancies have taken a toll on is my energy level. Other than that, I don't really have any health issues. :shrug3

We are a one car and one income family right now, and our car won't fit 3 carseats either. DH is looking for more work as well, so we're really having to just trust God to provide the finances and vehicle. We didn't "plan" any of our children, and certainly weren't thinking of having them this close, but God did and if he provides for the sparrows, he won't leave us high and dry. Plus it seems kind of nice to have kids close together and then be done for good.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

I had 3 under 3 and 3 under 4 twice, and if I could perfectly plan these things, I would have 2 close together, a significant space, and then 2 more close together. 3 close really limits your mobility, even more than 2. There are places you can't go because you can't safely watch everyone, etc. It can be very isolating. Its also hard on a marriage when there are more kids of a carrying age than you can get into a restaurant with two parents or things like that. Not mention you are very tired. Having a 19 month old and a baby is pretty easy compared to a 1 year old, 2 year old, and 3 year old-- or a 2yo, 3yo, and 4yo. That is a lot harder than when you have the one of the carrying age. When your kids get bigger it won't be as easy as it is now. Enjoy! But just know that if you throw that 3rd one in there, its going to be a ride.

Sorry to be a downer... but my husband did cheat and abandon his wife and kids while in the throws of 4 small kids and I am sure it had a factor in it, though most husbands won't jump off the deep end.

Re: 3 under 3?
 

:hunh ...ok...now im not so sure about having them close...:scratch

Re: 3 under 3?
 

Lol.... you'll be fine, great even, just stick with the 2! Give it a rest and then have more later. You won't regret the resting period, and you're so young you have lots of time.

I love my kids <3