Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I never thought I'd be doing this but I am seriously pondering baby number 3. Turning the ripe old age of 38 this coming September I figure it's now or never! I can hand on heart say I found the transition from 1-2 difficult and whilst some people say that a 3rd isn't much harder than 2 other people say it's the one that sends you over the edge! Lol. So I am looking for some advice from parents that have been there and done that!


thanks all!


X

Hi Strawbs!


As you know, I've got 3. Ages now are nearly 9, 7.5 and 4 (today!) - so when number 3 arrived the others were nearly 5 and 3.5. I was 38 when I had my third baby.


Hand on heart, I haven't found it hard. Eldest was in reception, middle child half days at school nursery, and after such a small gap between my first two (just under 17 months) I found having just one baby at home in the mornings was lovely. I was far more chilled out than with the others too - I think with the first two I felt the easiest way to deal with a small gap was to get out to playgroups etc every day, whereas with one winter born baby I relished the opportunity to cosy up inside and watch TV :)


Now they're all at school, youngest half days, and it makes me realise just how quickly the years pass by.


Logistics can sometimes be tricky, for example two of mine spent 2 years on Monday afternoons sitting outside a ballet class, and there are often occasions where two kids need to be in different places at the same time, but you just adapt. Where possible we combine activities, so all 3 have swimming lessons at the same time.


The washing pile is never ending, that's probably the biggest thing I notice. And as they get older, suddenly you find the food bill increasing. The house is noisy, and I fight a battle against clutter every day (for another 11.5 months until we move to our new life on the other side of the world!).


I wouldn't change it, best decision we could have made. Must add though, a supportive partner makes a huge difference, so make sure you're both on the same page (which I'm sure you are).

Thanks Pickle that's very reassuring to hear! The Noise and mess are the things that cross my mind! We would have to upgrade the car but tbh we need to do that anyway and we would need to move but again we are doing that anyway whether or not baby 3 comes or not. We are meant to be moving to Oz in November but progressing with baby number 3 we would delay that for a while, I can't fathom uprooting everyone whilst pregnant etc.


When I think about it I know in my heart I will regret if I don't do it but I am definitely left feeling daunted by the potential chaos of it all. I had better get all of my knitting orders in before you go lol!


Life is just starting to get back to normal with number 2 Approaching two years old and I actually find time to get the the gym and get some me time so rewinding again to newborn I wonder if I am mad but I guess it's all just a phase and I will find that time again and a new baby far outweighs going to a pump class haha. (Someone remind me of this please when you see me pounding the pavement with a crying baby and my hair not brushed!)


Xx

We bypassed number 3 and went directly from 2 to 4 (number 3 was twins). It's noisy, noisy, messy, chaotic, did I mention noisy? The washing never ends and sometimes I feel like a total drudge. childcare bills are enormous but work keep me sane. But I love it, it's lots of fun and I feel very lucky.


I think the fact that you are even asking the question means you want it to happen.


Maybe this will help:


http://www.scarymommy.com/having-a-third-child/

We had the same thought process as you Strawbs, turned 38 and thought now or never. My kids are 7 and 4 and while I sometimes worry about life with 3 I am looking forward to number 3 arriving in April.


We are too moving to Oz at the end of the year and that concerns me a bit too as will leave support network but think it will all work out.

Nice to hear positive stories from other 3/4 child families!


On the life getting back to normal point - I found this happened a lot sooner after my 3rd child than with the others. I love my running/exercise, and it became even more important to me when I had #3, as the time to myself was such a treat! In the early days I would go out for a long walk with the baby, leaving my partner with the others... you quickly realise that the baby is the easy job 😉


Being organised helps. I've got the kids uniforms, PE kit, books etc all laid out ready for tomorrow morning - the more you can do in advance, the better.


Anyway, good luck x

I have no real idea how on earth we managed to pay for all that childcare, or how we survived the period while they were all under 5. I mean literally. No real memory. I suspect I was too tired. Now that they're older I'm noticing less immediate things, for instance how family tickets for things are almost always set up for 2+2. Holidays get very expensive very quickly. Meals out too. Everything it just... more. Managing the calendar can be challenging at times but it's not usually too bad. Swimming with all three becomes impossible for a while (wrong ratio of adults to kids under whatever-age-it-is). As others have said there's never-ending noise, clutter, laundry... The house is too small and we can't afford to move without going much further away than we'd like. But despite all this I'm glad we went for number three. Wouldn't have felt finished otherwise, if that makes sense.

BellendenBear Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>" We bypassed number 3 and went directly from 2 to 4

> (number 3 was twins)."


If that is not enough to strike fear in your heart I don't know what would!

Northeastview Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BellendenBear Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >" We bypassed number 3 and went directly from 2

> to 4

> > (number 3 was twins)."

>

> If that is not enough to strike fear in your heart

> I don't know what would!


hahaha AGREED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Thanks for all of your input, it is a lot of food for thought, I shall continue my slow ponder..

I love that uncleglen but I managed to stop at 3. Happy with that but defo tip my hat to those that carried on.


Strawbs as someone else said along the way if you are thinking about it then it is highly likely you will go for it and probably just need someone to push you off that cliff.


Sod the cash and practicalities and think that it is another little person you are thinking about and soon enough you won't be able to remember life without them.


It is another little bit of chaos but you are experienced and more relaxed. Someone did mention swimming lessons and yes I do think 'ugh how many more swimming lessons do I have to sit through?' but that's about it.


People regret the kids they didn't have and not the ones they did.


Go for it.

We went from 1 to 3. As others have mentioned the washing and food provision are endless and the childcare bills are horrific.

Still wouldn't change it. The dynamic is different, noisy, slightly feral but there is a lot of fun.

I was one of three, I never thought the dynamic was right growing up. Honestly I think 2 or 4 works better but having got twins second time round, nothing was going to sort out that dynamic so we are sticking with 3.

You've nailed I think I do just need that push, when I think about it there are a million reasons not to but a million and 1 to!


Every time I make my mind up I talk myself out of it!


Mrs TP Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I love that uncleglen but I managed to stop at 3.

> Happy with that but defo tip my hat to those that

> carried on.

>

> Strawbs as someone else said along the way if you

> are thinking about it then it is highly likely you

> will go for it and probably just need someone to

> push you off that cliff.

>

> Sod the cash and practicalities and think that it

> is another little person you are thinking about

> and soon enough you won't be able to remember life

> without them.

>

> It is another little bit of chaos but you are

> experienced and more relaxed. Someone did mention

> swimming lessons and yes I do think 'ugh how many

> more swimming lessons do I have to sit through?'

> but that's about it.

>

> People regret the kids they didn't have and not

> the ones they did.

>

> Go for it.

That was me! I've birthed two woeful sleepers but I used Nicola Watson second time around and she changed my life so I'd use her again in a heartbeat! X

MarianaTrench Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Strawbs ? didn't you post a while ago about having

> a bad sleeper :-) Or was that someone else?

I do worry re the dynamic now everyone keeps mentioning it! X


KatDew Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We went from 1 to 3. As others have mentioned the

> washing and food provision are endless and the

> childcare bills are horrific.

> Still wouldn't change it. The dynamic is

> different, noisy, slightly feral but there is a

> lot of fun.

> I was one of three, I never thought the dynamic

> was right growing up. Honestly I think 2 or 4

> works better but having got twins second time

> round, nothing was going to sort out that dynamic

> so we are sticking with 3.

Sorry this may be completely irrelevant as I do not have 3 children - I only have 2, and I suppose you always ultimately have to end up happy with what you have.


Anyway, we seriously considered having a third when my youngest was 13/14 months so we would have a similar 2 year age gap, and decided to go for it. Unfortunately things don't always work out the way you plan, and various set backs and miscarriages later we decided enough and to enjoy our two boys. They are now 4 and 6, it's brilliant and noisy and crazy so god only knows what a third would be like! We fit in our car and in hotel rooms and can just afford flights and holidays, the boys are great buddies (and boxing partners!) and I feel like life has really moved on. I know it's not the same but when one of them has a friend round the dynamic of three is totally different. I went back to work shortly after things not working out and childcare (now only school wraparound) has been just about manageable - and whilst clearly I feel sad in theory for the baby that didn't make it, I also sometimes think maybe, just maybe, we are just right with two, and that was how it is meant to be.


So I suppose I'm saying absolutely go for it, but also that surviving with 'just' two boys is hard work, they are pretty full on but also a really cool pair!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...