Moms of 3 or more, which transition was the hardest?

[ourbabygirl]

(Poll coming)

I have a few friends and former classmates who have 4 kids, and at least one of them has said that she just can't imagine having 5. I figured that it's probably the biggest jump going from 2 to 3 since you're outnumbered, you probably need a car bigger than a sedan, etc. But I figured that once you had 4, what's one more? ;)

So what do you think?

[brittone2]

1-2 for me. It was hard for me to figure out how to triage the needs of a toddler and a newborn. DS1 had to learn how to play independently a bit, which was hard for him.

2-3 was actually quite easy for me for the first year. My older two played together a lot, so if I was tied up with the newborn at times, I didn't feel like I was neglecting anyone. My DS1 was 6 when DS2 arrived, and could get himself and DD a snack, etc. if I was stuck with the baby. I'd say the period from little past 1yo to 2-2.5 has been more challenging, but DS2 is now approaching 2.5 and things are starting to feel more manageable again.

ETA: Some of this IMO also depends on spacing. My older two are 2y10m apart, and my middle and youngest are 3y3m apart. By the time the new baby came around, the older was usually PTd, could get into their carseat reasonably well, walked holding hands fairly cooperatively, could get a simple snack from the fridge or get themselves a drink, etc.

[maestramommy]

2 to 3. I feel truly outnumbered now, whereas before I couldn't understand that comment. BUT I think it has to do with the fact that #3 is more than 2 kids in one. I could probably have 4 if they were like #1, or even #2.

[hellokitty]

1-2 was the worst. DS2 is really intense and was a horrible baby. Just fussy, never smiled, cried all the time, had to be held all of the time, I still have residual carpel tunnel and I thin it was from holding him so much. Combine that with DS1 who was only 18 mo old when DS2 was, DS1 is a sweet kid, but spirited and would just get into everything. The first 6 mo after DS2 was born was pretty hellish and I was very unhappy. Things got better when he started to crawl and walk, I think he was upset to not be able to keep up with DS1 (DS2 has a personality prone to jealousy).

2-3 was not bad, b/c DS3 was a good baby and I had learned how to prioritize by then. HOWEVER, DS3 has become JUST like DS2, after he started to walk. He basically started his terrible 2's at 14 mo old. However, I've accepted that I only have so much control over things (DS2 taught me that lesson), so I have chilled out a bit and accepted that they will do what they want to do and I just have to deal with it. Plus, DS2 was 4 and DS1 was 5 by then, so they were both potty trained and could feed themselves. That was HUGE vs. when I went from 1-2 and DS1 was basically still a baby too, so it was like taking care of two babies, but one was mobile and getting into everything. I don't recommend spacing kids 18 mo or less, lol.

[cuca_]

1 to 2 was the hardest for me. Going from giving DD 100% of my attention, to dividing it between her and the baby was tough. 2 to 3 and 3 to 4 were much easier. I think more than 4 would push me over the edge. I admire parents that have 5 or more kids, but I don't think I have the patience or energy. We were done at 3 and then were surprised with #4. Thankfully she is my easiest child and the most independent!

[Beth24]

Going from 2 to 3 for me. DS1 was starting kindergarten and DS2 preschool when DD was a newborn. And she wanted to be held. 100% of the time. By me. And no one else. And DH was in a lengthy trial that year and gone for several months. That was a rough year.

[ABO Mama]

We started with twins, which was a rough first year. DC#3, who came 3yrs later, was a piece of cake!

[swissair81]

2 to 3 was very hard for me. My number 2 had a very difficult time adjusting to a new sibling.

[Melaine]

0-2 was a doozie.

[anonomom]

1 to 2 wasn't easy. but it wasn't bad. 2 to 3, on the other hand, has just about killed me. Part of it is my younger two are closer in age than my older two (2.5 years vs. 3.25 years). Those few months made a huge difference!

I just feel like someone is always getting short shrift. I can't volunteer in DD1's school as much as I'd like because I didn't have child care for DS. DS has to get his naps in whenever he can because I don't have the luxury of staying home most days. And on the days when our schedule is lighter, DD2 spends hours trapped in the house while I try to get him down for naps. Nobody ever gets undivided attention. And one tiny little stumble, one change in routine or misplaced item, can send the whole structure of the day crumbling down.

[♥ms.pacman♥]

That was HUGE vs. when I went from 1-2 and DS1 was basically still a baby too, so it was like taking care of two babies, but one was mobile and getting into everything. I don't recommend spacing kids 18 mo or less, lol.

Ok i only have 2 kiddos but just had to come here and post this: Sing it, sister!!! For me The first 6 months going from 1-2 were ROUGH. I don't think most people get how insane it is to have a newborn while having an older baby that could get into everything and run off (i did not). Now that the kids are 2.5 and 1.5, and they are both walking, can feed themselves their own food and can entertain each other and i can do many things (mealtime etc) in parallel it's easier. Knowing what i know now, while i would do it over again, i would NOT do it again IYKWIM... if we ever go for #3, at least the oldest will have to be in school already and i will be working FT. I cannot even imagine having 3 under 3 or 4yo...:dizzy:

[Simon]

I voted 0-1 only because Ds1 was the most difficult baby. He seriously put us through everything--NICU to food allergies, nursing trouble to horrible separation anxiety, never slept, and the list goes on. By the time we figured out things with him, there was almost nothing we hadn't done or tried.

Seriously, juggling my toddler and newborn (Ds2 and Ds3) alone was still a breeze compared to Dh and I together trying to manage just one Ds1.

I have been told here often that I just need to wait until Ds3 is older and then I'll change my mind. The jury is out since I believe in never say never, but he's pretty mobile, grabbing big kids hair and toys, and so far still not the worst. We'll see what his toddler temperament is like so ask me again in about 8 months.

[mikeys_mom]

0-1 was hardest for me. Just getting used to taking care of a baby was such a major lifestyle change.
1-2 was pretty easy. DD1 was pretty mellow once I discovered that she needed to nurse often and liked to be in a sling and co-sleep.
2-4 was certainly hard and lots of work but even with 4 kids under age 5 I didn't feel as overwhelmed as I did with DS.

I don't think that having a 5th child would be difficult to manage at this point.

[todzwife]

It REALLY REALLY depends on the newborn! My hardest transition was 1-2. There was less than 2 1/2 years in between, she was a 35 weeker, it was just HARD. She cried all.the.time. I thought I was going to lose my marbles (I probably did there for awhile but found them eventually). When I had #3, she was such an easy going, super sweet, quiet, fun baby that I never ever felt overwhelmed with her. She was 180 degrees different than #2 and I felt SO blessed.

We are talking about #4 and I can only hope and pray that if we do have another, that it's not like #2 because that was incredibly unfun.

[carolinamama]

Hands down: 0 to 1. DH would agree. It was a very challenging time for us trying to get adjusted to being parents and dealing with a colicky, high needs baby. If DH were on board, I would probably go for a fourth. My easiest transition was 2-3 and that's with DS2 actually being more demanding than DD.

[Katigre]

Honestly, going from 2-3 has been a breeze - he's 7 weeks old now . Sure you have to juggle more b/c of the baby but overall its been fine. DH works 11 hour days and I'm on my own with all three but right now dinner is in the oven, laundry all put away, house is clean. I struggled more to stay on top of things with going from 1-2 and 0-1. At this point I think I could add a 4th in a few years.

[smilequeen]

0-1 was the hardest. 2-3 was close behind. 1-2 was comparatively a piece of cake. Probably doesn't hurt that DS2 was the easiest newborn ever. DS3 was my hardest newborn and had significant BF issues, but because of spacing and help from my family, I think the transition went pretty well.

[emily]

I voted 1-2 as they were only 20 mos apart. It literally took me almost until DC2 was a yr old for me to venture out of the house solo. Going from 2-3 has been surprisingly not as overwhelming as Id feared. DC2 and 3 are 27 mos apart. The older ones have been so helpful with the baby and they play well together most of the time. It helps that #3 is a super easy baby.
But i can not imagine anything more frightening than having #4.

[SASM]

I voted "2 to 3". Going from 1-2 was fairly easy bc DS was still not very independent at 24mos. LOVED his stroller & naps and was fairly easy going (unless I went into Marshall's or TJMaxx and then he screamed his head off...go figure). Going from 2-3 was tough bc I had 2 VERY active kids, age 4.5 & 2.5 - one was in preschool 3x/wk and the other was in a 1x/wk preschool and both were a handful. The KKAFP was a GODSEND!!!

[buddyleebaby]

Going from one to two...so far.

[american_mama]

I have three, and 0 to 1 was hardest for me. I'm curious if any consensus will appear. I've heard people with two balk at three, people with 4 say once you have 3, you can keep right on going with no problem. And I've heard someone with 4 say it never got easy, and she had a "fool me once"type mentality about it. And I've heard someone with 5 so she's maxed out and cannot imagine more.

My first was my most active baby and toddler, plus I found the diminshed freedom of motherhood difficult so that's why 0-1 was hardest for me. My second was milder as a baby and toddler, plus I had a good rhythm as a mom and wasn't phased by a second. And my third was and is the easiest child so that was an easy transition. I never felt outnumbered out three because I had spent so much time by myself with my two older kids that I was already outnumbered.

[Katigre]

I never felt outnumbered out three because I had spent so much time by myself with my two older kids that I was already outnumbered.
This is a good point. I also think age spacing has something to do with it
at least for me). There are over 3 years between the baby and DD, and both older kids are super capable/independent with their own needs most of the time. If I had a smaller age gap and thus no older chil capable of holding the baby for me I'd be a lot more stressed with a messier house and less homecooked meals.

[jjjo1112]

Going from 0-1, 1-2 and 2-3 were relatively easy for me. My first few are close in age- 15 months apart and then 24 months apart. We were still in the baby stages with a 3yo, 2yo and newborn and there wasn't much transition for the kids.
Adding number 4 has been really difficult for me. She was super difficult as a newborn- cried for the first 3.5 mos, BF didn't work out, she has reflux, etc. Plus there is a bigger age difference which is proving hard. My 6, 5 and 3 year old are in activities- we have hockey 3 weeknights, cheering 2 weeknights plus dance, swim and speech. The 3 older kids go to school at 3 different times/places, so between pick up/drop off and then all the activities, we are always on the go- I feel like the baby can never have a schedule- every time she falls asleep, I'm waking her up to bring her somewhere.
I think, for me, it would have been easier for them to be closer in age- I wish I didn't wait the 3.5 years between 3 and 4. Otherwise, I should have waited longer- until more of them were in full day school and taking a bus and could be dropped off at activites vs. me needing to stay for everything.