I have a 13 month old daughter who of course, I absolutely adore. I love staying home with her and really love being a mom. When I got pregnant with her, I had wanted to be have a baby for a while. I really wanted to have a baby more than anything. I could not imagine having to wait another month to try and get pregnant. It took all I could to wait that long until the time is right.
We had always planned to have another baby when she was about 2 which would put trying to conceive at around July. However, I am now having second thoughts. It would be a good time for us financially and my husband is willing. The thing is, I just don't feel the burning desire like I did for my daughter. Some days it seems like a good idea but other days I just don't feel like I am ready. I worry that it will take away the time and energy I have for Eliza. I worry that it just won't be the same and won't be fair for the second baby. I know some of these worries are normal. I guess what I wonder is did other people have as strong a desire for a second baby as a first? If you didn't and still got pregnant, did you eventually feel the same way about that baby? I don't want to hold out for some elusive feeling that I might never have again but I do want to wait until I can give as much to that baby as I did for my first.
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
I think that if you're not 100% sure that bringing another life into this world is the right thing to do for you, your family, and this planet, then you shouldn't put an extra effort into making that happen.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
It will take away the time and energy you have for your first child. And it won't be the same and won't be fair for your second baby.
This has been true for every second baby I've ever seen, my own included. Studies back this up, too; only children and first children generally do better, probably due to the attention factor in infancy.
But if you ask me whether I love my second baby, and whether my second baby is growing up okay, and whether I regret having had that second one in any way, my answers will be "yes", "yes", and "no."
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
I had the same doubts you did when deciding when to conceive my second child. I have to admit that a large part of the reason I went ahead and had a second child was that I didn't want my son to be an only child. I don't mean this as an attack on anyone who only wants one child, but that wasn't for me and I knew it. When I got pregnant with my first, I had committed myself to 2 children.
So for me, the reason I went ahead and got pregnant again was that my family felt incomplete with just the three of us.
We ended up with a 2.5 year spacing, which I think is great. I can't quote you sources, but I've read several places that developmental psychologists recommend a 3-year spacing in terms of balancing the emotional needs of both children. (At 3, the older child won't need you in quite the same way. At 13 months, your daughter is still very much a baby.)
Even when I was pregnant, I wondered how I would love this unknown child as much as my son, but I can assure you that I love my daughter (who will be 1 on Sunday) just as much as my son. They have different strengths, weaknesses, and personalities, but I love them both equally.
Also, my family feels complete now.
And yes, having a second child takes a bit away from the first, but IMO, it also adds something. My kids love one another very much and while there is plenty of sibling rivalry, I hope neither of them would trade the other for a little more time with mommy.
It's a tough decision but I have no doubts that you will bond with your second child, if you are to have one. It may be that the 2 year spacing you were originally considering isn't right for you. There's no reason you have to do this again right now if you're not ready. Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
theresa, my first (and only) child is now 2 and a half. Our original plan sounded a lot like yours. Though I also said before I had another, I had to lose the baby weight and my husband had to have a good job. Those things are all done now and yet I am still happily on the pill. I feel bad because I didn't really want the kids to be that far in age, but I just don't want another one right now. But I feel like until I am ready and feel like I can handle another one, I will just wait.
Posted by School4ever (Member # 5575) on :
My opinion. Kids need to be less than three years apart. My son is an only child - not by choice. He is almost four and is having a very hard time with the idea that he might have to share attention with another human being. I could see his sharing problem really start to grow at two and a half.
Posted by natural_mystic (Member # 11760) on :
Prior to our second (who is now 5 months old) I definitely did not feel a void or any such thing necessitating another baby. However, both my wife and I had siblings who we are close to who differ from us by about 2 years, so we felt confident that whatever our elder lost in terms of our attention would be made up for in the future by having a sibling. And, I guarantee you, when you have the second baby you will realize how much you have missed having a little baby and will have no problem loving the second (that being said we are taking a break before (possibly) having a third). There's no question that the second gets less attention than the first. I think you just do the best you can. Many, many younger siblings turn out fine, so it is possible.
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
There's a 6 1/2 year age gap between me and my brother, and I think that did lessen second baby syndrome somewhat. I was at school when he was born, so did have the time during the day at least with full time parental attention.
Of course, such long spacing does come with its own drawbacks as well.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Our first two are 2 years apart almost exactly, and are best friends despite being girl and boy.
The problem is, they tend to gang up a bit on our third, who is more than 3 years behind our second. He's had to forge his own path, but gets the extra attention of being the baby in the family.
If we have a fourth, our third will be somewhat isolated in the middle, as he is already 3.
I figure kids learn to deal with, accept, and even prefer their place in the family, as much as they may complain about it. It does shape who they are, but it certainly doesn't ruin their lives. Worrying too much about timing and placement is needless stress, IMO.
Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
My younger sister was born 8 days before my second birthday. I've had almost 41 years of her in my life, and I am 100 percent glad that I do.
I'm sure I had coping problems when i was two. I do remember when we were about ten and eight that she kept LOOKING at me when we were eating cereal in the morning. She also would chew too loudly, on purpose .
I'm just saying I liked being the oldest. It had perks, like always being right.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sharpie: I'm just saying I liked being the oldest. It had perks, like always being right.
*high-fives*
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sharpie: I'm just saying I liked being the oldest. It had perks, like always being right.
Wow, I got gypped.
Posted by theresa51282 (Member # 8037) on :
My husband and I are both first children so I do think that skews our perspective a bit. I had a rough relationship with my sister who is five years youner. Paul had a good relationship with his two bothers who are only 1 year apart and 3 years apart. It makes me wonder if my sibling relationship would have been better if we were closer in age.
It is nice to hear everyone else's opinions and experiences. I guess the good part is no matter which I chose I will probably look back and think it was the best decision because I will love that particular child and think no other could be better.
[ May 12, 2009, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: theresa51282 ]
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
For relationships, I have a brother fairly close in age and a sister fairly far apart in age (nearly 6 years). My brother and I sometimes got along. We were often co-conspirators, but we also often were at each others throats. My sister and I rarely got along as kids and looking back, there are a lot less fond memories of our interactions, but we do get along really well as adults, probably better then my brother and I get along. That could be gender related of course.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Studies back this up, too; only children and first children generally do better, probably due to the attention factor in infancy.
Its an overstatement to say that studies back up the idea that only children and first children generally do better. Some studies have found only children and first children do better in certain limited areas, others contradict these findings. Taken as a whole, the research is inconclusive and does not suggest that birth order is a highly significant factor in personality development or success.
First children do seem to develop language skills earlier, most likely because their parents talk to them more, but there is no strong evidence that this advantage persists into adulthood. Findings in other areas are a lot more complex and controversial. Some studies find that only children and first children are more independent while others find they are less independent. That may be in part determined by how independence is defined. Only children and first children do tend to be more capable of entertaining themselves which is a form of independence but at the same time they are often less able to complete tasks or solve problems without adult supervision which would suggest less independence. There is some evidence that only children and first children tend to be more likely to assume a controlling roll when they interact in groups, some studies see that as leadership while others see it as selfishness or inability to compromise and cooperate. But even those conclusions are not very strong or significant.
Overall, birth order does not seem to be a particularly important factor in personality development.
I think there is little doubt that parents are less obsessive about their second and third children and that those children get less individual attention. It's just not evident that more attention from parents is always beneficial or that being obsessive about a child is good for them.
After a good friend of mine had his second child he explained the changed dynamic in the following way. When you have only one child and there is a conflict between what that child needs/wants and what you want/need, there is no question. You do what is best for the child. But when you have two children you have to balance the needs/wants of one child against the needs/wants of the other child so you can't always do what is best for either child. This is true even in issues as simple as which color cup the child wants and this is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact most of the time a very good thing. Children need to learn empathy for others and unselfishness, lessons they are unlikely to learn in a home where they are the only child surrounded by adults.
[ May 12, 2009, 04:01 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posted by Catseye1979 (Member # 5560) on :
I really enjoyed being a second child personally. My parent's knew better with me what to do, and so they made less mistakes. And in my older brother I had a perfect role model on what not to do. Saved me a lot of misery.
My brother and I got along the first 5 years of my life....then we spent 15 years where.....well I wouldn't say we fought a lot....we didn't fight, we pretty much didn't talk or do anything with each other, just had our own lives and stayed out of each others life. Once we were both adults we were back to getting along great and are best friends and I think we will stay best friends as long as we never have to live in the same house again.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.