From: scott@Apple.COM (scott douglass)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Having children close together-happy stories wanted
Date: 24 Jul 92 05:04:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

alanj@endeavor18.tek.com (Alan Jeddeloh) writes:

>In article <144jjpINNos1@smaug.West.Sun.COM> zoe@cypress.West.Sun.COM (Zoe Friedlander) writes:
>-I read the FAQ on how far apart to have children, and I see that most people
>-suggested wide spacing, though a (very) few seemed to think narrow spacing
>-worked.  In case someone might be going to have two children close together, 
>-like let's say 19 months apart, and feels very anxious after reading that
>-FAQ, could some of you who had kids close together and wouldn't have done 
>-it any other way please e-mail me?
>
>Perhaps it would be best to post.  There are more of us out here agonizing
>over spacing.

Well, I'll bite.  I'd have to say that within reason, the closer together the
better.  I have Alan and Jeff, 22 months apart, then Anna Lise (first
tooth today!) 30 months after Jeff.

Alan and Jeff are close enough that they really play together as playmates.
I have friends with kids 3 or 4 years apart, and while they may love
each other, there is a limited amount of playing.  I mean, a two-year-old
and a six-year-old can't sit down and play Legos together, that sort of
thing.  I never had to worry about the older kid's toys having small
pieces, since he wasn't quite two.  They play with the same toys a lot.

Another plus is that a little baby doesn't feel as jealous as an older
child can.  Alan can certainly not remember a time before Jeff was around.
He was too little to understand that it was because of the baby that things
were so hectic and that everyone payed attention to the baby.  Jeff is
having a harder time adjusting to Anna, and I think it's because he's
that much older and more aware than Alan was when he (Jeff) was born.

Another plus is that you don't get used to the freedom of throwing everyone
in the car and going then lose it!  We've had a long spell here without
having to worry about bringing the whole house when we go out, so I keep
ending up out at the park without a clean diaper in sight.  When they're
closer together you don't lose the rhythm, somehow.

Of course the drawbacks need to be considered.  Two in diapers is a bitch.
Luckily Alan decided that diapers were for the baby so he would wear
underwear, so that didn't last long.  And the second baby gets seriously
shortchenged in the one-on-one mom contact.  But they get a lot more
sibling play and learn social skills so much faster.  Jeff, almost
two, is so good at playing with kids.  He knows when to do what the other
kid says, but he knows how to get what he wants done, too.  All my friends
and his teachers love Alan;  all the kids (including Alan's friends!) love
Jeff.

Anyway, I think just around two years is really good.  I guess four and a
half is good too -- Alan just adores Anna.  It's hard at first, but that
kind of all fades away and I really like what I see now.  So go for it,
Alan!  Time's a'wastin'!  >;)

		--  maggie
-- 
				--scott douglass
Any opinions above may be mine and are not necessarily those of Apple Computer.
domain: scott@apple.com  UUCP: {nsc, sun, voder, well, dual}!apple!scott
CSNet: scott@Apple.CSNet  AppleLink: Douglass1
Newsgroups: misc.kids