Discussion
I've read a few times that the move from having one child to two isn't as great as going from zero to one, or from two to three. Any personal experiences to back that up?
in my head it'll just mean a bit more activity that we would have been doing anyway (cooking, bathing, playing, one more bag to pack for day trips etc), at least when they're small. And it'll have an older brother so they can distract each other whereas with the first one it was all down to us, all the time.
The incumbent would be over 4 years old by then, very well balanced emotionally and generally a good egg - we're fully prepared that the second one might be a nightmare but we'll be less worried about the things we worried about the first time so I'm thinking the impact won't be as big. #selfdeception
in my head it'll just mean a bit more activity that we would have been doing anyway (cooking, bathing, playing, one more bag to pack for day trips etc), at least when they're small. And it'll have an older brother so they can distract each other whereas with the first one it was all down to us, all the time.
The incumbent would be over 4 years old by then, very well balanced emotionally and generally a good egg - we're fully prepared that the second one might be a nightmare but we'll be less worried about the things we worried about the first time so I'm thinking the impact won't be as big. #selfdeception
ScotHill said:
I've read a few times that the move from having one child to two isn't as great as going from zero to one, or from two to three. Any personal experiences to back that up?
in my head it'll just mean a bit more activity that we would have been doing anyway (cooking, bathing, playing, one more bag to pack for day trips etc), at least when they're small. And it'll have an older brother so they can distract each other whereas with the first one it was all down to us, all the time.
The incumbent would be over 4 years old by then, very well balanced emotionally and generally a good egg - we're fully prepared that the second one might be a nightmare but we'll be less worried about the things we worried about the first time so I'm thinking the impact won't be as big. #selfdeception
How old are you? We had our first when I was 42, missus was 41. He's nearly 6 now and whilst we could afford another and would like him to have a brother or sister, it's unlikely to happen - we were trying for a couple of years before he came along. in my head it'll just mean a bit more activity that we would have been doing anyway (cooking, bathing, playing, one more bag to pack for day trips etc), at least when they're small. And it'll have an older brother so they can distract each other whereas with the first one it was all down to us, all the time.
The incumbent would be over 4 years old by then, very well balanced emotionally and generally a good egg - we're fully prepared that the second one might be a nightmare but we'll be less worried about the things we worried about the first time so I'm thinking the impact won't be as big. #selfdeception
However, I am quite happy to never have to ensure the sleep deprivation of the first six months of parenthood ever again. If I was 15yrs younger I'd be fine with it, but it was proper hard to endure then let alone now.
A dog seems a lot more manageable an option to us now!
ScotHill said:
Will be 44 when it arrives - health kick has started in earnest especially back stretches, we both ended up seeing a physio after the first one!
IVF got it in there, fingers crossed that the oven still bakes as well as it did four years ago....
Congrats! Not been there myself, but my general observation is that a second one is easier from your own perspective, in that you know what you're doing after a practice go! IVF got it in there, fingers crossed that the oven still bakes as well as it did four years ago....
Obviously that is with a huge pinch of salt depending on the good sleeper vs bad sleeper lottery, which seems key to lots of things.
Despite what I said above ours was a good sleeper, I just wasn't used to 6am wake-ups every day, including weekends, being 'good'!
0-1 is hard as it's all new, 1-2 is obviously hard as it's starting again but there's two of you so you can still "man to man" mark. I was able to take my eldest out on little day trips to give Mum and the new one time to do the baby stuff and those are some of my most treasured memories and we're very close because of that. 2-3 is a complete sh*t show and you just have to accept you're not able to do it all, day trips with the older two were again fun but you're going zonal rather than man to man at that point!
Having siblings has done wonders for me, even if I was a right t
t to them when I was in single digits!It'll improve their social skills, empathy and it's always good to have someone in the house who isn't the boss of you.
I played with my brother so much I often wondered what only children actually did all day.
As a former child myself, I'd say go for it.
BritishBlitz87 said:
Having siblings has done wonders for me, even if I was a right tt to them when I was in single digits!
It'll improve their social skills, empathy and it's always good to have someone in the house who isn't the boss of you.
I played with my brother so much I often wondered what only children actually did all day.
As a former child myself, I'd say go for it.
Out of interest what was the age gap? Feels like 1-2 years they play with each other, 4+ years there's a big/little sibling thing going on, and in-between that they just piss each other off!t to them when I was in single digits!It'll improve their social skills, empathy and it's always good to have someone in the house who isn't the boss of you.
I played with my brother so much I often wondered what only children actually did all day.
As a former child myself, I'd say go for it.
Indeed I would agree; Going from one to two is much easier then zero to one. (In most cases)
A few reasons being, especially having a short gap between them, as you (hopefully) and I have (3 years). You still have a fair bit of usable baby / young child "stuff" that will save a fair bit of money.
Also all the times in the last four years when you've been checking they are still breathing, because they are so so quiet! and when you've been so worried about illnesses, will be much less of an issue, you will fret so much less, you have learned so much, you kind of get that certain things are ok and will sort themselves out.
One piece of advice if I may; When the new arrival comes, be ever so careful not to use them as a reason for not doing something with the first born.
Don't let number one feel they are less important. I spent a lot of time as a stay at home father with my daughter, going to parks and playgrounds almost every day. When my son came along, I too often said "I can't because I've got Tommy". She then started to resent him a bit, and got quite jealous having to share my time.
Good luck to you and your partner
PS: Going from one to three, can really suck.... wanting one more, then having twins happened to two of my friends. I'm glad it didn't happen to me!!
A few reasons being, especially having a short gap between them, as you (hopefully) and I have (3 years). You still have a fair bit of usable baby / young child "stuff" that will save a fair bit of money.
Also all the times in the last four years when you've been checking they are still breathing, because they are so so quiet! and when you've been so worried about illnesses, will be much less of an issue, you will fret so much less, you have learned so much, you kind of get that certain things are ok and will sort themselves out.
One piece of advice if I may; When the new arrival comes, be ever so careful not to use them as a reason for not doing something with the first born.
Don't let number one feel they are less important. I spent a lot of time as a stay at home father with my daughter, going to parks and playgrounds almost every day. When my son came along, I too often said "I can't because I've got Tommy". She then started to resent him a bit, and got quite jealous having to share my time.
Good luck to you and your partner
PS: Going from one to three, can really suck.... wanting one more, then having twins happened to two of my friends. I'm glad it didn't happen to me!!
ScotHill said:
Out of interest what was the age gap? Feels like 1-2 years they play with each other, 4+ years there's a big/little sibling thing going on, and in-between that they just piss each other off!
Three years between each, my brother was the middle child, my sister was the youngest and I'm the eldest. I've always been immature for my age though.I think initially it’s a proper headache as baby needs mums attention so does number 1. You have to divide and conquer. As they get older it’s a lot easier you become a good referee rather than parent. Breaking up fights, fixing them up etc... can’t comment of 3 I don’t know why anyone would do that to themselves but 2 is fine certainly not double the effort 1 was.
We're probably lucky in that #1 is super independent in the house and happy to come out with me on his bike or in his wellies so jealousy/attention hopefully won't be a problem. He still can't stay in his own fecking bed at night though, will try to knock that on the head before #2!
Cheers,
Cheers,
We've got an only child (3.5yr old daughter) and our #1 concern about her future is probably the consequences of being an only child. The thing is, we're now the 'wrong' side of 40 and had multiple miscarriages (some quite late) before this arrival and so the odds are really stacked against us. We'd love another but were too scared to commit emotionally given the likelihood it wouldn't happen. Rather than focus on what our daughter might be missing out on (continuous companionship, an equal child:adult split in the house, shared memories when they're older, shared responsibilities when we're older etc) we try and look at the positives (more time and attention, less financial strain, no sibling rivalry etc). I suspect there are too many variables to determine whether 1, 2, whatever is 'best' for all situations and most of the coverage of the subject always seems to be biased towards the author's own situation (not that that necessarily invalidates the opinion).
MJNewton said:
We've got an only child (3.5yr old daughter) and our #1 concern about her future is probably the consequences of being an only child. The thing is, we're now the 'wrong' side of 40 and had multiple miscarriages (some quite late) before this arrival and so the odds are really stacked against us. We'd love another but were too scared to commit emotionally given the likelihood it wouldn't happen. Rather than focus on what our daughter might be missing out on (continuous companionship, an equal child:adult split in the house, shared memories when they're older, shared responsibilities when we're older etc) we try and look at the positives (more time and attention, less financial strain, no sibling rivalry etc). I suspect there are too many variables to determine whether 1, 2, whatever is 'best' for all situations and most of the coverage of the subject always seems to be biased towards the author's own situation (not that that necessarily invalidates the opinion).
She'll be fine If it helps, I'm sure there is research that shows only children aren't detrimented (?) by being only children, and there may be an effect of being a little more emotionally stable earlier in life, I forget exactly though. It seems a lot more common than when I was at school where pretty much everyone had siblings.
Going from one to two - it is tough going back to the start, sleepless nights etc when you were just getting your life back, it's vastly more costly with childcare etc - unless you time it right, but then you end up with a large age gap!
Our first daughter was hard work, not much of a sleeper, stubborn etc, so we had reservations about a second - because another one of the same would have killed us... We did have two in the end with just under 4 years between them, and thankfully my second daughter was a LOT easier, she's just a happy little thing and I'm glad we did now. It's interesting to see their different personalities!
In the end it wasn't too bad because she was a good sleeper and placid, so easy to just cart round and fit into our life.
No way I'd have another though!
I also know others who had an easy kid first and then a tough one... That's worse! (And wiped the smugness off their face!). That's the problem - it's a lottery!
Our first daughter was hard work, not much of a sleeper, stubborn etc, so we had reservations about a second - because another one of the same would have killed us... We did have two in the end with just under 4 years between them, and thankfully my second daughter was a LOT easier, she's just a happy little thing and I'm glad we did now. It's interesting to see their different personalities!
In the end it wasn't too bad because she was a good sleeper and placid, so easy to just cart round and fit into our life.
No way I'd have another though!
I also know others who had an easy kid first and then a tough one... That's worse! (And wiped the smugness off their face!). That's the problem - it's a lottery!
Edited by Hub on Thursday 10th December 15:02
Hub said:
Going from one to two - it is tough going back to the start, sleepless nights etc when you were just getting your life back, it's vastly more costly with childcare etc - unless you time it right, but then you end up with a large age gap!
Our first daughter was hard work, not much of a sleeper, stubborn etc, so we had reservations about a second - because another one of the same would have killed us... We did have two in the end with just under 4 years between them, and thankfully my second daughter was a LOT easier, she's just a happy little thing and I'm glad we did now. It's interesting to see their different personalities!
In the end it wasn't too bad because she was a good sleeper and placid, so easy to just cart round and fit into our life.
No way I'd have another though!
I also know others who had an easy kid first and then a tough one... That's worse! (And wiped the smugness off their face!). That's the problem - it's a lottery!
We had that with BIL we had a very difficult boy first it was pretty tough going, they had golden child girl. Second time around we are all 3 years older we have the girl they have the difficult boy. Now they understand. Our first daughter was hard work, not much of a sleeper, stubborn etc, so we had reservations about a second - because another one of the same would have killed us... We did have two in the end with just under 4 years between them, and thankfully my second daughter was a LOT easier, she's just a happy little thing and I'm glad we did now. It's interesting to see their different personalities!
In the end it wasn't too bad because she was a good sleeper and placid, so easy to just cart round and fit into our life.
No way I'd have another though!
I also know others who had an easy kid first and then a tough one... That's worse! (And wiped the smugness off their face!). That's the problem - it's a lottery!
Edited by Hub on Thursday 10th December 15:02
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff