If you're reading this blog, I need your opinion.
First, it's school picture time and I'm not sure which mug shot is cuter:
Second, and probably more important, I've recently started thinking about whether or not we should have another kiddo. We waited to have Aurora until I really felt like it was time, and I figured I'd have a second if and when I felt that again. So far, I haven't. I'm really enjoying our little family of three, and while I know that I loved having a baby, I can't imagine doing it again. But, I'm only getting older, and I keep hearing that if we want two, a 3-year age gap is pretty ideal.
If I'm being completely honest, it's tough raising a family without family nearby. Taking care of Aurora isn't so hard, but daycare is expensive, and other than work we really don't get much of a break. Some people say that two isn't much harder than one, since we're already doing it. Others tell me two is infinitely harder because they both want your full attention.
So, I'm asking you, my loyal readers... if you have more than one child, if you are an only child, if you have an opinion, or if you simply want one of the above photos, leave me a comment with your thoughts! Be honest. I want to hear it.
13 comments:
First I think Picture #2 is the one, they are both cute, but #2 shows her eyes better.
As for more children, I honestly think it is something you have to really feel you want and our ready for. I feel there is alot to think about when it comes to making the decision:
Rich and I have decided to have none of our own. Rich and I also discussed if something did happen and we accidently got pregnant than it would be ok also. we decided this due to us wanting to have some just the two of us time, that we did not get to do when Sam was growing up (ie: Traveling, going out to dinner soem where nicer than Red Robin, or just being able to pick up and go for the weekend without football, or taekwon do to stop us).
At the point when all your children are grown and on their own what goals do you and Chuck have and will you be at a good age to do the things you want to do together when your older, or will you possible be past your prime for those events.
I can tell you that my brothers and me our all three and half years a part and Mom always said it was perfect, becuase there was enough of a gap that we had different intrests, but close enough we all got along. Also none of us ever went to Junior high or High School at the same time meaning she never had to deal with us taking over each others territory or friends, or being embarassing to each other at school.
I say if you are going to have another baby do it now. I love babies and would be so happy for you and three years seems perfect. I agree though that you have to really feel it in your heart and if you choose to only have Aurora I think that your little family of three is perfect. Personally having two kids even at 8 years age difference has been hard. I dont know what we would do without Nancy and my parents. Oh and I was an only child (until I was 9) and it was amazing!
Ha ha, instead of mug shots, these new school photos make Aurora look like a professional football player. I think I like 216 better, but either way, I think her team's gonna win! As for the kiddo dilemma, well, I always wanted to have 5 kids and was very disappointed to have only three. But I got some good ones! I think it's up to how you feel - you shouldn't force yourself if you don't feel it - but another cute little linebacker in the world wouldn't be so bad.
I like 215.
I think it would be a crime not to have another kid, Aurora is adorable and the world needs more adorable :) I agree with Julia, if you are going to have another have one soon. I loved being closer in age with my siblings!
I vote for photo #216.
Katie turns 6 in January and is a only child; we are happy and sticking with our family of three. With all the activities Katie has plus school functions I can't imagine having another kid. I love being able to focus on Katie and sharing all her experiences with her.
I do feel bad though because I know Katie would make a great big sister; and she wants to be one. Along with no siblings she currently has no first cousins. Family is very important and as she grows up she won't have anybody her age to grow with.
Here's hoping she finds some wonderful life long friends to grow up with.
Both pics are great. I like the lighter one. As far as kids go...do it! And do it soon. Yes, it is way harder and more expesive, they will be sick at different times and things will just never be easier. But trust me...two is still way easier than three! Aurora will be a great big sister, but if you don't she will be an exceptional only as well. No worries either way.
Hi Amber, I like the 1st one but the photos you take of her are about a thousand times better than these. Regarding 2nd baby, I would have to say you should do what you want to, there are so few things in life we have a choice over. People only should have children because they really want to. love, susanna
I think you should do whatever you want to do. Who cares if others have 3 year age gaps, or multiple kids... whatever. My brother, sister, and I are all 2 years apart and I also have my younger brother who just turned 8 (15 year gap - that I LOVE). But I know others that have bigger age gaps (than 3 years) between their siblings, and others that are only children - we all turned out fine :). My mom and her youngest sister are 9 years apart, and they talk every day! I feel like women are pressured to have children, or have multiple children - but each person has to do what works for them. If you're not ready, then don't. And if in a few years, you decide that's what you want, then go for it. But this is not something I think you should be considering others opinions on - just my thought :)
Both pictures are very much alike, but I would say the second, 216, is best because Aurora is a little bit bigger in it.
As far as having another child, I have mixed feelings. There's positive and negative on both sides of the question. I know if I had only had one child I would have felt that I was missing something. In fact, I wanted a 3rd child, but didn't have the means to care for him (her). However, that was me. Other people don't feel that way. Ultimately, it should be your and Chuck's decision. What other people feel and do doesn't really matter.
Having said all that, I guess I am somewhat prejudiced in favor of your having another child. I think you two are good parents and there seem to be so few of those in the world. Also, I think Aurora would do well with a brother or sister.
216.
You already know how I feel about you having another little Rooster :) Coming from me, being an only child, I always wished (and still wish) that I had sibling(s) to play with and talk to.
Hi to my "other daughter" dear~ Surprise, surprise! On the adorable pictures...#1 has a special little twist in the smile which is so cute, but I also love the eyes in #2! What a doll!
On another child...well, you know I had 3 and would not want that changed at all. It was hard. Generally, it's only as expensive as you let it be. They mostly have each other and two would be such good friends and so cute to watch and 'be'. I think you ought to have one for Aurora!! a gift nobody else can give her! But, the most important thing is whether you and Chuck want another baby. Each little one is a gift & a responsibility. (PS. the second is definitely easier!! and hey it's my Kate!) Love to you all~
Thank you all for your feedback! I think for now we'll stick with Aurora, but I'm open to having another child if or when the time becomes right - even if she's 6 years old, and even if it's REALLY hard. But it doesn't sound like being an only would be so bad either.
For Donnell, I completely understand where you're coming from when you say that kids are only as expensive as you let them be, but... that doesn't really apply to childcare. Our daycare costs about $1000 per child (more for infants), so to have two would be crazy costly. And I do want to keep working... but who knows, anything can change.
Mom, I don't think Aurora looks like a football player!!! I almost didn't buy a photo package this time, but ended up going with 216 :)
Hi,
I know I'm later than most in leaving this comment (sorry). First, I like #215 better -- it seems a more genuine smile, while the other is an "are you taking another one?" smile. Both are adorable, though, and you couldn't go wrong with either.
As for having another baby, while you an Chuck clearly create cute ones, if you're happy with one I think that's a good choice. Keep in mind adopting is not a bad option for later (if age is the issue when you feel ready), too. Really, not even looking at how you feel about it, there are pluses and minuses. The first plus that I think of is that the world could use more people that come from intelligent, good parents (so very many kids are born to parents who can't afford it and/or don't care enough -- of course intelligent, good parents that adopt are a great influence, too). A minus (very big, actually) is that the world really has a very high -- and growing every minute -- population already, and those of us worried about the effect human population has on the world must keep that in mind when planning for kids. In theory having one kid to replace each parent is the way to go, but there are so many parents out there (good or not) that have too many (the show 19 Kids & Counting comes to mind...).
This is a rather detached viewpoint, and I do love you all and would love your next child if you have one. No judgement on your choice. It's a very personal choice. That's my two cents. Love you lots.
Post a Comment