thread: Two Under Two At Fortyish???

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Add fionas on Facebook

    Apr 2007
    Recently treechanged to Woodend, VIC

    Two Under Two At Fortyish???

    About two hours after I had my first baby ten weeks ago, I said "OK, when can we have another one?"

    I stil feel the same. However, I am aware from talking to other mums and reading BB that I have been blessed with a very easy baby. She sleeps heaps at night and although she doesn't seem to know the meaning of sleep during the day, she never cries and has a permanent smile on her face. Suffice to say, I am loving this motherhood lark.

    The only downside is I'm 38. Getting pregnant was pretty easy last time BUT if I were to have another one, I've obviously got to get my skates on. Ideally, I would wait until Katrina was three or fourish but at my age that is just not sensible.

    So, I guess my question is twofold. Firstly, has anyone else had two very close together at 40ish? And secondly, regardless of your age or how close together your babies were, did you find that their temperaments were similar or very different. (I'm guessing the latter!)

    My mum has always told me that Baby No. 1 is always an angel and Baby No. 2 is the troublemaker otherwise no-one would have a second. Obviously that's a massive generalisation so interested in hearing everyone's thoughts. (I was Baby No. 2!)

  2. #2
    Registered User

    Nov 2004

    My mum has always told me that Baby No. 1 is always an angel and Baby No. 2 is the troublemaker otherwise no-one would have a second. Obviously that's a massive generalisation so interested in hearing everyone's thoughts. (I was Baby No. 2!)
    I have found it the other way around DS is much more placid and easygoing (so far!!) than DD.

    I don't think there is a perfect gap between kids...there is never the "perfect"
    time to have them!!

  3. #3
    Life Subscriber

    Jul 2006

    I had baby no 1 (the easy one!) at 35 and baby no 2 (the harder one, definitely!) at 36 (well, just before my 37th birthday if we are getting technical!). Two under two is difficult at times, and I think being older also can make it harder. But I wouldn't change anything. Two close together get on really well and there are other advantages too. Only you know what is right for you, but I don't think 2 under 2 at 40 should be ruled out. If you want to do it, go for it.

  4. #4

    Mar 2004

    I think that 2 under 2 is going to be difficult at moments regardless of your age.
    It also has its rewards, my boys are really close which is wonderful to witness.
    As for the first being an angel I've found that it's more about ages and stages. Lately my troublesome one has been my elder son but at other times I've felt that he was the easy/angelic one and his little brother was a handful.
    They do have very differant temprements but both of them bring thier own challenges and rewards.

  5. #5
    Life Subscriber

    Jul 2006

    Good point Chloe - Jack was definitely my easiest baby, but is certainly proving to be a challenging 2 yo!

  6. #6
    Jodie259 Guest

    Fiona... we could be twins!

    I had my DS at 38yo.
    Having never been pregnant before - I thought it would take me ages to conceive. I even mentioned IVF to my husband incase we had troubles. Ha! 1 month later I was pregnant.
    And my son has been a little monster ever since. An adorable monster. But a sleepless one!!! Full of energy, generally happy, extremely active mind...gets bored very easily.

    I had never been hugely maternal... so I wasn't itching to have one baby - let alone two. But 9 months later, I was pregnant again! And just like the first time - it happened within a month or two of 'trying'. And by trying - that meant DTD maybe twice a month! No temps, no charts.

    So... # 2 will arrive in 4 weeks... and I am 39yo. (40 in Feb). My kids will be exactly 18 months apart (27/5 & 26/11)

    I pray that the 2nd child will sleep, and be placid. But if not... then I will just have to deal with it. Mind you... might stop me from having a 3rd

  7. #7
    paradise lost Guest

    I think whatever age you are you just deal with it all, kwim? My mum had her first 3 in 3 years when she was 18/19/20 and #1 was a late walker - still wasn't walking when #3 was born! She was already PG at her 6weeks post partum check twice.

    My closest sibling (#5) and i (#6) were born 3 years and 5 months apart but she lost a little boy at 22wks and another PG at 8weeks in between us, so she could well have had 2 under 2 if one of those had worked out. She was 43 when i was born. When i was a baby she was a childminder. She looked after 2 other little girls 10 and 20 months younger than me, 8am-6pm 5 days a week, so that was 3 under 3 (when she was 46/7) i guess, but not at night.

    She actually told me that she felt it was easier later in life, as she said she had a lot of energy for the first 3 but not the knowledge or the patience she had when she was older. It depends on the person i guess but if you want another kid and your hubby is keen too then i'd just go for it - life's too short for regrets and while i know a lot of people who worry about having i bigger family, i don't know anyone who regrets a specific child, kwim? Like DD came at a difficult time, her father and i aren't together and my life is NOT what i imagined, but she is beautiful and smart and funny and the light of my life and i never regret her even for a second. Yes, the timing could have been better, but my child couldn't be, she is brilliant

    Last edited by paradise lost; March 28th, 2008 at 09:44 AM.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Add fionas on Facebook

    Apr 2007
    Recently treechanged to Woodend, VIC

    Thank you guys. I think you're all right.

    Jodie - WOW! That's fantastic. I'm sure your two will get along. Sorry to get all astral on you but your kids will be a Gemini and a Sagittarius, both of whom are meant to have excellent senses of humour (and very active minds). I think they will keep you busy but VERY entertained!

    Caro - yes, I hear what you're saying. I'm sure the angel child phase won't last!

    I convinced myself once I hit 35 (having just been through a marriage break-up with no significant other on the horizon) that children were now out of the question. When I did get pregnant, I also convinced myself that I'd have to grit my teeth through the newborn/baby stages because I thought I'd only really start enjoying a child when they started to talk/doing stuff. Boy how wrong could I be.

    Hoobley - yes I know what your mum is saying re finding it easier when you're older. I certainly don't regret having my first at this age (only the fact that I'm pushed for time to have number two, if that makes sense).

    I may have had more energy when I was in my twenties (though TBH I think I would have found it very hard to give up my sleep-ins) but I have a much better sense of who I am now and trust my own judgement a lot more. We are bombarded with so much advice about what's right and wrong that I think I would have been beside myself as a younger mum. Plus, I'm very well aware that I MAY not be able to have another one so I really treat every moment with her as precious. I tried doing the 'don't talk to them in the middle of the night when they wake up' thing and found it great in theory, totally ridiculous in practice. How do you not respond to a baby who is giggling and grinning at you even though it is 3am? So now, I just think 'stuff it'. She's only this age once and I think my happiest moments currently are when we're playing away in the semi-dark in the middle of the night. Anyhow, enough happy mummy talk!

    I did ask her yesterday whether she'd like a brother or sister and she looked most unimpressed!