What was the hardest transition for you?

[theriviera]

I saw a friend yesterday that recently had baby #3. I asked her how hard it was to go from 2 to 3 and she said it wasn't that bad. For her, 1 to 2 was hard because her kids are so close in age but 0 to 1 was the hardest given it is such a big life change.

Out of curiosity, what was the hardest transition for you? We have 2 so far and DH and I both agree that while the first 3 months of DD2's life was rough, 0 to 1 was a harder transition for us.

[Kindra178]

0 to 1 was hard for us, no doubt. DS1 was super colicky, and it was a such a challenge. That ended though before ten weeks though. Things became manageable and easy. Going from 1 to 3 was really tough and we are still recovering.

[elektra]

I have only done 0 to 1 and 1 to 2.
1 to 2 was much harder for me. There was a time there that I thought I was just not cut out to survive it, even though I know people have been doing it for ages and ages!

[iaam]

DS is older than DD by 2 years, 3 month. 1 to 2 was the hardest transition for me. The first time, 0 to 1, only DH and I (adults) needed to adjust. The second time, DS did too, which was tough!

[citymama]

Honestly, they were both hard. 0 to 1 was harder psychologically and because DD1 was colicky, and is generally more high maintenance. 1 to 2 was hard physically - being 4 years older, having more demands on my time, and having gone through a tough pregnancy.

[lhafer]

I hate saying this because I always feel like I have to :duck: but having babies was never a hard transition for me. I have always loved babies and everything about them. I do very well with them, and it prompted me to become a NICU nurse. So baby transitions wasn't difficult for me at all. I was fine with very little sleep, my 1st was a "tougher" baby in that she was more cranky, didn't sleep well, didn't eat well, etc. But I didn't find the transition that hard. 4 years later DD2 was born, and she is the most laid back child, easy going, eats well, slept through the night at 7 weeks, etc. So transitioning to 2 wasn't that hard. Honestly, I was just relieved that I wasn't pregnant anymore, and that the "all Day" sickness finally ended.

Frankly I find having older children much much harder. Dealing with attitudes of a 6 year old, the independence struggle, the wanderings of a 2 year old, getting into everything, the NOs, potty training, sibling jealously/rivalry, etc are much harder than dealing with a baby IMO. Babies are completely portable, they eat 1 thing - milk (be it formula or a from a breast), they poop/pee in a contained place, you can put them in a stroller/wrap/sling/etc and know they are safe.

Yeah....give me back the baby days any day of the week.

[hellokitty]

OP, I have 3 boys and I agree with your friend. DS1 and DS2 were only 18 mo apart. OMG, it was sooo hard, esp the combo of personalities. While DS1 has always been an easy going baby (transitioning to having one baby was very smooth for me), he was very spirited and would never sit still. DS2 was a fussy, needy baby who always needed a lot of attn and wanted to be held or worn all of the time. The age and combo of personalities was a recipe for disaster. I was absolutely miserable for the first 6 months, DH and I fought a LOT during that time. He saw that I transitioned pretty easily with DS1, so he didn't, "get" why I was having such a hard with transitioning to two.

The good thing about when DS3 came along, DS1 and DS2 were 4 and 5 by then and were PT'd, could eat and get dressed on their own, and most importantly, they could play together and entertain each other. It made the transition from 2 to 3 MUCH easier. Plus, DS3 was a pretty easy going baby. Unfortunately, now he is a supper intense preschooler (very similar to DS2, which I hoped he would not be), so I'm finding new challenges, but it's still easier than when I went from one to two.

[TwinFoxes]

Zero to two. :) But honestly, I would think 1-2 would be hard, because then you have to be in two places at once and you're not used to it. But that's just me guessing.

[brittone2]

0-1 was hard
1-2 was also hard, because the triage thing was very difficult for me.

2-3 was the easiest IMO, at least in infancy. I was more laid-back, the 2 older siblings had one another to play with when I was nursing or getting the baby down for a nap, my DS1 was old enough to hold the baby for a second while I went to the bathroom. From 18 months to 2, 2-3 was more challenging because DS2 just adds a lot of chaos (and fun) to our lives. I'm an introvert and when all 3 need me or are talking at the same time I want to back up slowly and hide in a closet at times ;) We moved out of state when DS2 was 6 weeks old, so we were packing (had movers but still did a little packing on our own) and so forth when he was a teeny tiny newborn. DH defended for his PhD in those early weeks, and he started a new job when DS2 was just a few weeks old. I'd still say 2-3 was the easiest transition for me though, at least in the newborn phase.

All of those transitions had their challenges. I'd say 0-1 was the toughest, but 1-2 was tough as well.

eta: mine are all roughly 3 years apart (DS1 and DD are 2y10m and DD and DS2 are 3y3m). Any closer and I would have lost my mind I think. I can only handle one baby at a time.

[smilequeen]

0-1 was the hardest, but closely followed by 2-3. 1-2 was easy for me and pretty much the whole reason I went for #3. #3 has been proving I met my match since conception...I was sick all the time, he had a tongue tie, so many nursing issues. Then he was easy for a while. And now...he's an incredibly sweet but difficult toddler. Throws food out of the grocery cart, runs off, throws tantrums, throws food off the table, climbs on the table, you get the picture...For sure it's a good thing that he's so cute and that when he's sweet, omg is he ever sweet. Smart as can be too. I'm glad to have him but I am done.done.done.

[infocrazy]

1 to 2 for us. 0 to 1 wasn't too bad, but DS1 was a very easy going baby. DS2 had colic and reflux and screamed constantly until about 6 weeks old when I finally started him on reflux meds. DS1 was only 21 months at that point and it was a rough time.

DD was even easier than DS1. She was a GREAT sleeper, AND would actually sleep in a crib which her brothers wouldn't. As some one else mentioned, there is more of a gap between her and DS2 so the boys would play/entertain each other, much more self sufficient and eager to help their baby sister.

Ask again in a couple months and I'll tell you about 3 to 4. :)

[daisymommy]

Absolutely hands down going from 0 to 1 kid.
I used to be a preschool teacher with 12 kids in my class all by myself, no help. I thought surely being a parent to one child would be a piece of cake. HAH! the joke was on me!
Not only did I just have no clue how unrelenting parenthood was--no breaks, no sleep, no down time--but DS also had colic, reflux, and a dairy allergy on top of that. I told DH we were never having anymore children...and I meant it.

Going from 1-2 was about 50% as hard. Learning to juggle the demands of two children when they both are crying and need you at the same time, and learning to triage care was hard. And the increased noise level was a surprise. But it still wasn't as bad as adjusting to being a first time mom.

Going from 2-3? Easy. Somehow DS2 just slipped into our lives and the family routine. I was more of a confident mother, I knew what I was doing, and I didn't freak out if he was crying and I couldn't jump to him asap. I just had learned to roll with the punches by then, and was more mellowed out.

I'm really hoping that's how it is when we add #4 :)

[cindys]

I agree with almost everything LHAFER said except that all 3 of my babies were easy peasy and good sleepers, I LOVED being pregnant and I am not a NICU nurse ...


Cindy
Mama to 3 boys...20, 6 & 3 :heartbeat::heartbeat::heartbeat:

[Mommy_Mea]

0 to 1 was the hardest for me, at least initially. I thought I totally knew what I was getting myself into, and I had NO idea. It didn't help that I had a whopping case of PPD.

1 to 2 wasn't that bad, DS1 transitioned relatively well, and DS2 slept well initially, and I had some GOOD hormones this time around that just made me one happy mommy.

Things are tough right now, but that is because DS2 turned into a bad sleeper, and seems to be getting worse lately, and the lack of sleep for the past 10 months (3 years??) is starting to add up.

[m448]

well aside from 0-1 which pretty much rocks anyone's world 1-2 was the hardest for us. Whereas we could tag each other out when we had one, with 2 it was all hands on deck. Adding #3 and #4 weren't really large upheavals since adding to the chaos of 2 little kids is not an exponential thing. LOL

[boltfam]

I've only done the 0-1 and 1-2 adjustment so far, and I found 1-2 waaaay harder. My DS1 did not take to his new sister very well and still seems to get riled up by her 2 yrs. later. I am hoping that the adjustment from 2-3 isn't any worse; we'll find out in a couple of months...

[KrisM]

For me, 2-3 was the hardest. Mine were 25 month apart each, so I had an infant a 2 year old and a 4 year old. The 2 and 4 didn't nap any more and the 2 year old was potty training when DS2 was born. While DS1 tried to help, he was only 4. He couldn't do too much. I swore DS2's first words were going to be "I hear you DS, but you just have to wait". It seemed like he was always neglected because poop and blood, etc, took priority over him being hungry :(. But, he's good and those weren't his first words! If there was more spacing somewhere, I think 0-1 would have topped it.

[g-mama]

Going from 0-1 was hardest for me b/c ds1 was a VERY difficult baby. He cried from 3pm til midnight or 1am, constantly, inconsolably, every single day from birth to 3 months. I had no help - no mother or mother-in-law - a husband who had just taken a demanding job as a new attorney and didn't get home til 9 or 10 every night. I thought I was going to lose my mind. I became unhealthily thin and had to go on Prozac.

Everything after that, from 1 to 2, and from 2 to 3, were far easier if only because they were typical, easy babies. I remember thinking, "OMG, *this* is the way other mothers experience having a new baby - eat, sleep, repeat...aaaaah.."

[queenmama]

0 to 1 was wonderful.

1 to 2 is a huge adjustment since there are about 12 years between our babies!

Sent from the HTC Vivid 4G LTE via Tapatalk 2

[Melaine]

0-2 sucked big time. Jury is still out but 2-3 is going much better so far.

[maestramommy]

2 to 3. I feel like I've boarded the crazy train since then.

[carolinamama]

0-1 was my hardest hands down. DS1 was a very difficult, high needs baby. He cried all the time and didn't sleep. When he did, he slept in my arms or for 10-15 minutes at a time. He was colicky and had reflux. After he hit 6 months or so, he turned into the most pleasant, good-sleeping baby. I also think the reality of parenthood hit me hard when I realized that I just never got a minute to myself. That was difficult.

Funny thing is that 2-3 was/has been my easiest transition. Maybe because I am so immersed in parenthood already or a combo of factors: DS1 started kindy several days after DD was born, DS2 was 2y9m and potty-trained, and DD has always been an easygoing, good sleeping baby. It's definitely busier but not such a shock to the system.

[MaiseyDog]

For me, the 0 -1 was the hardest adjustment. With DD1 I felt so overwhelmed and unsure of myself. Add on top of that that DH and fought a lot her first year over who had what responsiblities and dividing up "chores." Maybe its because DH really helps out a ton and is very much an equal parent, but we still had to figure out who was going to be tending to the baby while the other one cooked dinner and who was going to take off work when the baby was sick and all these little tasks that had to be worked out. We both felt over worked, under appreciated, and sleep deprived.

When DD2 came along, I felt much more comfortable with my skills as a mom and DH and I had figured out the best ways to get things done, so adding DD2 was really quite easy.

[mom3boys]

I would say 0 to 1 even though 1 to 2 was also very hard since DS1 and DS2 are 20.5 months apart.

DS1 was actually a pretty good baby, but my whole life changed when I went from 0 to 1. Before, I worked full-time in midtown Manhattan every day. DH and I went out (dinner, drinks, concerts, etc) ALOT. We did not really worry about money, since we had 2 incomes and no childcare costs. Neither of us have family around so we spent a lot of time with our (childless) friends. This changed a little when I was pg but not much. So then suddenly being home, alone, all day with a newborn, well, it was very different. I thought it would be relaxing to not WOH, but it was instead some combination of exhausting, stressful, boring, and lonely. I loved my baby of course, but I did not mind going back to work as much as I think some other moms do. And on top of that, all our dinners, going out late, etc virtually stopped, and I didn't see my friends nearly as much as I used to. So even when I went back to work I didn't have my social life back. DH and I didn't have any kind of evening babysitter until after DS1 was 1. We took him with us out or more often, just didn't go out. For our 5th wedding anniversary we ordered takeout.

1 to 2 was hard in the way where I would hide in the bathroom for a couple of minutes just to be away from the crazy. But by then I was used to no social life so there was no change there.

The only thing hard about going from 2 to 3 was being back in the baby phase after we had left it, going back to having to stay home more (to accommodate DS3's naps) when we were to the point where the older boys could go more places, and the sheer number of kids. DH and I have to do a lot of "divide and conquer" where 1 parent takes the older boys somewhere, and 1 has the baby, and DS3 is dragged to a lot of places. But the age difference of 3 years between DS2 and DS3 helped a lot. And DS3 has just been a great baby which also makes things easier.

[sidmand]

I have only done 0 to 1 and 1 to 2.
1 to 2 was much harder for me. There was a time there that I thought I was just not cut out to survive it, even though I know people have been doing it for ages and ages!
:yeahthat:

I think a lot of it was because I didn't expect it. I KNEW life would be very different 0 to 1 and nothing would ever be the same again. I didn't much think about the transition from 1 to 2 except how DS would be affected. But the triage aspect as someone mentioned, and the being unable to give anyone a break because it was usually one parent with one child when they were little... Now that they're older one parent can take both but when they were little that was almost out of the question.

[mom2khj]

I hate saying this because I always feel like I have to :duck: but having babies was never a hard transition for me. I have always loved babies and everything about them. I do very well with them, and it prompted me to become a NICU nurse. So baby transitions wasn't difficult for me at all. I was fine with very little sleep, my 1st was a "tougher" baby in that she was more cranky, didn't sleep well, didn't eat well, etc. But I didn't find the transition that hard. 4 years later DD2 was born, and she is the most laid back child, easy going, eats well, slept through the night at 7 weeks, etc. So transitioning to 2 wasn't that hard. Honestly, I was just relieved that I wasn't pregnant anymore, and that the "all Day" sickness finally ended.

Frankly I find having older children much much harder. Dealing with attitudes of a 6 year old, the independence struggle, the wanderings of a 2 year old, getting into everything, the NOs, potty training, sibling jealously/rivalry, etc are much harder than dealing with a baby IMO. Babies are completely portable, they eat 1 thing - milk (be it formula or a from a breast), they poop/pee in a contained place, you can put them in a stroller/wrap/sling/etc and know they are safe.

Yeah....give me back the baby days any day of the week.

:yeahthat:

[hoodlims]

0-1 was hardest. I really didn't know anyone with babies before we had ours, so I had no idea what to expect. Plus, I didn't really have much help, still don't. 1-2 was easier, because I just threw the second kid in on top of whatever I am doing with Kid #1. But I do NOT like the infant stage, at all. I think I really dislike babies, but want to have a few more kids. This is a dilemma for me.
:-)

[twowhat?]

0 to 2 sucked so much that we're DONE. Having been through it, I do not wish multiples on ANYONE and I give people weird looks when they tell me "I'd LOVE to have twins!"

I still think I'm recovering from the PTSD from that double whammy of being brand new parents AND having multiple children at the same time.

eta: I agree with PP below - 2 kids are not twice as hard as one, the increase in difficulty is exponential because you're dealing with twice as much work plus the interaction factor which is truly exhausting. Most of our meltdowns have to do with the interaction factor. However, I could see that once they are old enough 2 kids would be less work than one once they can (nicely) entertain themselves for longer periods of time:)

[♥ms.pacman♥]

i have only done 0 to 1 and 1 to 2. 1 to 2 was hardest by FAR. DS was a fairly easy baby (full-term, no colic or any issues, slept thru the night from 3 mos on). contributing factors of why 1-2 is so rough are the fact that mine are only 14mos apart AND DD was unexpectedly a preemie that required a month long NICU stay which ate up ALL our family help (we have no family in town)..so the first few months after DD was home were very rough as we did it ALL on our own (actually i did almost all of it, DH only took about 1 week off after we brought DD home).

Even now over a year later i struggle with it. 2 kids is not just twice has hard, because there is an interaction factor. Learning to triage is also hard. They fight over stuff, one kid annoys the other, etc. It can be very exhausting at times.

I would not recommend having kids close in age unless you have a very strong support network (family, etc). It is so exhausting.

crazy as it sounds though, i could see going for a 3rd, once DD and DS are in school. i think having siblings spaced further apart would make a world of difference.

[hellokitty]

0 to 2 sucked so much that we're DONE. Having been through it, I do not wish multiples on ANYONE and I give people weird looks when they tell me "I'd LOVE to have twins!"

I have also always found it weird when ppl gush about how much they would like to have twins. One baby is hard enough, I can't imagine having two (so kudos to you, I think if I had twins, that would be it too, no more babies). We get zero help from family. Ppl that I know IRL that have multiples have survived based on immense help from family and church members. We just do not have that kind of support, I would have no clue what I'd do. Every time I got my first u/s for my pregnancies, I always breathed a sigh of relief that there was only one in there.

[jerseygirl07067]

2-3 was the hardest for sure. Going from 0-1 wasn't bad because I was expecting it to be hard. 1-2 was actually easier since both were only 16 mos apart, and I was already in baby mode.

I have heard so many people say 2-3 really was so much easier than 1-2, but not for me! DH and I are outnumbered, and dragging 3 kids to stores when I have errands to run is trying on my patience for sure. I feel like my 3 constantly compete for my attention all at the same time, and when the two older ones come home from school and there's all 3 that want attention, want snacks, etc. all at the same time, I find it to be the most stressful time of the day - and it's draining. I felt like our family of 4 was so perfect and easy, but having a 3rd has been a hard transition.

I don't want to sound like I have regrets, as I love DD #3, but I'm being honest, it's been tough. We don't have much family help either. I also used to never yell much at all, but I do more yelling now since I have much less patience!

[WatchingThemGrow]

Any closer and I would have lost my mind I think. I can only handle one baby at a time.
Me! Me! Me! I lost my mind going from 2-3!!!! Not sure I'm back to normal yet 3 years later! Mine are all 18 mos apart. So, when #3 was born, I had a 36mo, 18mo and a newborn. It was cuh-razy, but there are lots of weekend days when DH is with us that we have a blast together because everyone likes the same kinds of activities and they all play together.

[megs4413]

I only have two, but by far it was 1 to 2. Mine are 23 mos apart and DS was born with social needs. It was tough!

[emily]

0-1 was the hardest. I felt so overwhelmed. 2-3 has been easiest so far (#3 is only two mos though so I may feel very differently in a few months).

[megs4413]

Frankly I find having older children much much harder. Dealing with attitudes of a 6 year old, the independence struggle, the wanderings of a 2 year old, getting into everything, the NOs, potty training, sibling jealously/rivalry, etc are much harder than dealing with a baby IMO. Babies are completely portable, they eat 1 thing - milk (be it formula or a from a breast), they poop/pee in a contained place, you can put them in a stroller/wrap/sling/etc and know they are safe.

Yeah....give me back the baby days any day of the week.
Oh my gosh, I feel this same way exactly!!! Whenever a new mom starts wistfully talking about how it will be easier when the baby is older I think, "boy are you in for it." I thought it was just me! I just seem to get babies.... big kids? I am lost. :(

[swissair81]

2-3 was the hardest for me. I didn't have enough hands. I had 2 babies (as opposed to with my oldest 2, who are four years apart). I suddenly needed a double stroller, and I felt like I was losing my mind. Going from 3-4 was much easier. There was definitely a learning curve, but I already didn't have enough hands and my oldest was big enough to hold someone's hand when we walked.

[♥ms.pacman♥]

eta: I agree with PP below - 2 kids are not twice as hard as one, the increase in difficulty is exponential because you're dealing with twice as much work plus the interaction factor which is truly exhausting. Most of our meltdowns have to do with the interaction factor. However, I could see that once they are old enough 2 kids would be less work than one once they can (nicely) entertain themselves for longer periods of time:)

this is what is getting hard right now. a few months ago having 2 wasn't too bad bc DS would do his own thing, DD was still a baby, wasn't too mobile and wasn't too interested in what DS was doing. NOw she is snatching toys away from DS, wrecking his blocks/train setups, messing with his things, annoying him, hitting him, etc and vice versa. They are starting to fight over stuff and annoy each other, get in each others face..OMG, it's beyond frustrating. If they were each in their own rooms playing they would be fine. when one is a sleep and i have just one it's soo much easier. I see lhafer's point about babies being easier..when DD was tiny i could just wear her everywhere, or put her in a swing...she woudl sleep a lot, and it would be ok. now that DD is older ihave to worry about them stealing food from each other's plates, them fighting over the steering wheels in the the shopping cart when i'm at the store, etc. The freaking FIGHTING is really starting to get to me. I am longing for the day they can nicely entertain each other :)

[crl]

Zero to one was hardest for me. But we adopted ds at 13.5 months so I went from zero to a toddler who had spent the first year of his life in an orphanage and turned out to need speech and occupation therapy and just be very challenging overall. I also had never been around babies or toddlers and quit work to stay home so my whole world changed. Ds was nearly seven when dd came home so I think that made my one to two transition much easy in most ways as he could already take care of himself quite a bit. And I was already a SAHM so my day to day life did not change nearly as much.

Catherine

[Octobermommy]

0-1 was very easy for me, I love babies. 1-2 was great bc my first were over 3 years apart even though my second was a very spirited baby. 2-3 was by far the hardest bc they were less than 2 years apart & my third is my most difficult child by far. Sometimes I don't understand why he won't chill just a little.

Basically I think it matters how far apart the kids are and most importantly the kids temperament.

[american_mama]

I've heard DH say, possiby before we had 3 kids, that going from 2 to 3 is or would be tough because then you're outnumbered. I have also heard other people say this, sometimes ones who don't have 3 or more. But for me, I was often outnumbered at 2 kids since I spent so much time as the only adult around them. But I think that feeling of being outnumbered at 3 might be more on the minds of many dads, since they are less likey to be the at home parent.

For me, 0 to 1 was by far the hardest. My sister has 4 kids and she says the exact same thing.

[oneontheway]

1 to 2 was really hard. DS was 21 mo. when DD was born and I had a very hard time balancing the two. I felt like DS was still a baby and I couldn't please them both. I had a much harder time getting out of the house since DS was too young to really follow instructions or know what was not safe.

Going from 2 to 3 was a piece of cake but my DD was 3 1/2 so the older two were pretty self sufficient which made a huge difference :)

[m4nash]

0-1 was definitely the hardest for me. I don't know how you could really be prepared for #1. I think my husband would say 2-3 was the hardest. When #3 was born my older two were 16 months and 4 years old. 1-2 was a piece of cake in comparison (they are 3 years apart). Now that #3 is almost 2, I can't even remember what it was like to have only 2 kids.

[twowhat?]

0-1 was definitely the hardest for me. I don't know how you could really be prepared for #1. I think my husband would say 2-3 was the hardest. When #3 was born my older two were 16 months and 4 years old. 1-2 was a piece of cake in comparison (they are 3 years apart). Now that #3 is almost 2, I can't even remember what it was like to have only 2 kids.

DH has several colleagues who all claim that 2-3 was really rough. His theory is that it's because DHs are simply required by necessity to do so much more when #3 comes. And in some cases that means the DH doing a LOT more than he is used to:)