Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Which is better.. 2 or 3 years age gap between having kids?

My friend swears by 3 years. But my son will be 2 in March and I'm ready for another one. But I'm trying to figure out which is better based on your opinions.

Answer Question

Asked by Anonymous at 10:19 AM on Jun. 22, 2009 in Just for Fun

Answers (11)
  • i think the less time is the better, so you can get them out of diaper, off of bottle feed, and then have alittle more time to your self..... If you space them further apart then ull have one wanting to runa round outside and play while i have one that you have to carry around with you while ur other isnt... My son and daughter will only be 16 months apart when when she is born.... plus u have to remember it might take a few months to get preggo and then +9 months if u wait til 3 years to try it will be more like 4-5 when u have the baby

    Answer by Anonymous at 10:33 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • My girls are 3 yrs apart by 6 days. They get along great and it was nice as I had one out of diapers before the other was born. I now have sons that are 13 months apart and I would NEVER recomend having kids that close toghether, it was very hard. My sister and I are 22 months apart and extremely close, but as for how hard it would have to ask my mom lol.

    Answer by salexander at 10:39 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • I wanted 2 years between my 2, but I have been tryign to conceive for a while now and its just not working. My DD will be 2 in october so if I get pregnant soon then it will be closer to about 3 years. but I was hoping for 2. lol

    Answer by mommyBrooke849 at 10:39 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • My favorite gap was 15 months. For me 15-18 months would be perfect. My 2nd and 3rd were 13 months and that was a little close. Or maybe it's because my son (#2) was super clingy unlike my oldest (who was 15 months when he was born).

    There is 3 1/2 years between #3 and #4 and I HATED most of the first few months of the baby's life. It sucked. I had gotten used to not having all the baby stuff, although the toddler still wasn't potty trained then all of a sudden I was back to sleepless nights and diapers and strollers and stuff. It was hard to get adjusted.
    Now those two are 6 1/2 and 3 and it still kind of sucks. The older 3 play with each other and hang out and are at school and the youngest is alone all the time and just looks plain lonely. She also grew up super fast to keep up with her older siblings. She acts like she is 4 1/2 and just turned 3.

    Answer by justanotherjen at 10:40 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • My girls are 4 years apart.  I like this gap because my oldest started school about the time her sister was born which gave me more time to devote to the baby.  Now my oldest is 16 and will be starting her last year of high school in Sept which means college tuition.  YIKES!  My youngest is 12 and will be going into grade 7 so we have 6 more years before we have to worry about her college tuition.


    Answer by beeky at 10:56 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • Speaking for the 3 kids I birthed, not the stepkids here: My 1st & 2nd are 8 years apart & it was crazy. I had not planned on having another child so I didn't have any baby stuff. But it has worked out now b/c the oldest can babysit occasionally. They are close but since they are so far apart in age, it really feels like the oldest is an only child. My 2nd & 3rd are 17 months apart & I loved it (and still do). They are very close. It was crazy when I had a toddler running around & was nursing a baby but it all worked out for us. They were able to share a lot of stuff as well. Plus, my 2nd doesn't really remember life before his sister was born so there was no jealous feelings. It was a very natural transition for him. Good luck whatever you decide!

    Answer by funnyface1204 at 11:23 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • personally i like closer together....we started ttc for #2 when #1 was 6 took us 18months ttc for #2.

    then #3 was a oldest was 5, my middle was 3 when #3 was born. it was an adjustment thats for sure.

    but you know what...ITS UP TO YOU TO DECIDE. why let someone else's views sway what YOU do? so they think the opposite.....lots of my friends have different views...but none of them have treated me different because of those differences.

    Answer by hypermamaz at 11:34 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • Mine are 2 years and 4 days apart. They are 2 and 4 now. They play well together and get along pretty well. I like having them 2 years apart.

    Answer by Cavalrybaby02 at 11:55 AM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • If your son is 2 now and you are ready for another one, and got pregnant soon, then your son will be almost 3 years old by the time your next child is born.
    I think 3 years apart is best because potty training the older one is finished and your diaper funds will only be for one child instead of two.
    They can still be close friends growing up - it's not that much of a difference in age.
    Best wishes to you!

    Answer by PrydferthMenyw at 1:27 PM on Jun. 22, 2009

  • There isn't a magic number. My first 2 are 26 months apart and it's been fine. Number2 and 3 will be 18 months apart and I think I'll like that a little better.

    Answer by RyleeMendez at 6:52 PM on Jun. 22, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.