My little sisters are 18 months apart. They do get along well (fantastically so, to the point that I am envious. I’m seven and a half years older than the oldest and am an outsider. A loved, respected outsider, but an outsider none the less.) and there was no real detriment.
Its a choice for your family. I think the sum total of work involed may come out to be a little less, but one baby is so much work anyway that having anything on top of that may not be a challenge you need.
As others have stated, it’s all an individual choice (although I’ve read medical recommendations that babies should be born at least 18 months apart for the health of the mother), but here’s how it shook out with us: First baby, unplanned; I was 25; ridiculously easy pregnancy, C-section delivery. When she was about two, I started to think about when I’d like another one. I figured, for me, about 4 years apart was right. So, when our first turned three, I went to hubby and said “Honey, I think it’s time for another baby”, and he said “Okay” (I had arguments prepared, and he never even let me preset them, dammit 
). I got pregnant quicker than I expected, and they were actually 3 years, 10 months apart. I was 30 when she was born, another ridiculously easy pregnancy, and another C-section. The oldest was almost a year out of diapers, and old enough to be helpful with the baby; it was good timing. For a long time, we said “Two is enough”, but then, six years ago, when I was 36, hubby asked if we could try one more time “for a boy”. It took us longer that time; about 8 months to get pregnant, and we needed to use ovulation predictor tests. There’s 8 years between our second and our baby (who was also a girl). With our third, I had a harder pregnancy, some issues with my blood pressure, and was on partial bed rest; this was much easier than it would have been if I’d had two younger kids to deal with. Another C-section, too. Our oldest doesn’t want much to do with the little one, but our middle daughter, now 13, loves having a much younger sister to play with and teach things to. All things considered, if I’d known all along we were going to have a third one, I wouldn’t have waited so long. But it’s not bad. The older ones are old enough to babysit (I don’t abuse the privilege), and the baby is almost like a second “only child”. Of course, it’s a little trying dealing with an almost-17-year-old who has major issues, a girl just entering teen-hood, and a preschooler all at the same time. But it’s okay. The little one goes to bed at 8PM, and the older ones are sufficiently self-reliant that I then have the next couple of hours to myself, or with hubby.
Best of luck in whatever you decide.
Qadgop, you probably can advise better on this medically. But I do remember reading that your chances of having a preemie are increased if you wait less than a year between pregnancies.
Mine were 3 3/4 years apart. It worked beatifully. The eldest was old enough to put on the clothes I laid out for her, wait a minute if I asked her to, go get the bottle, play nicely with the baby. She didn’t regress in the slightest. My youngest (I have only 2) adores her sister and looks up to her. Always has. They certainly fight and argue to some extent, but they also, without being asked, turn to each other for comfort in numerous ways.
I wouldn’t change a thing, myself. My pregnancies were hard both on my body and the babies. I couldn’t have spaced them that closely together without probably losing one of the two of us. But if you have decent pregnancies and healthy babies, the risks are probably more minimal.
Mrs. Furthur
I think having the second kid at age 35 seems completely reasonable. Age 35 is definitely not too old to have a second kid, and two years between pregnancies (as others have mentioned) seems to be a good amount of time for you, health-wise.
I expect that your husband will understand the prudence of waiting for 2 years.
I don’t really have an opinion for you one way or the other, other than to tell you to trust your instincts and Doctor’s opinions.
I just want to input that my two older brothers are 11 months apart.
Neither had nor have health issues. None of us kids ever had a cavity.
My two brothers were really close growing up. They were, pretty much, twins (I have heard it refered to as ‘Irish twins’, but I don’t know how PC that is.)
I think it’s just luck of the draw.
My children are thirteen months apart. I wasn’t planning to have to have a second so soon, especially since they were both born by C-section. I don’t remember being much more tired during the second pregnancy, but it could be that I was just too busy to really feel it. And I have to say, my daughter was very easy to deal with as a baby and toddler. (that’s changed now that she’s 14) I might think differently if my much more difficult son (as a baby, he’s changed too) had been born first.
Cons:
I wish I had had more time with my daughter as an only child - but that’s not the worst thing in the world. After all, a second ( or later child) doesn’t get any time as an “only”.
There’s only one year between events. ( starting school,communion, confirmation,graduation)
Pros:
I only did the getting off the bottle and toilet training once. Between possibly putting it off a bit for my daughter, and my son wanting to do whatever she could, they stopped using bottles and were toilet trained at about the same time. It may have stretched out a little more, but once it was done it was done. I wouldn’t have liked going back to the bottles and diapers after being free of them.
There was never a big difference in what was appropriate for one or the other.Sure, they weren’t often interested in the same things, but I rarely had to worry that something appropriate for my daughter would be dangerous for my son. I actually think this is the best part about it. I look at my brother and sister-in-law, whose kids are 16,10 and 4, and wonder how they can plan a day trip or a vacation that all three will enjoy. The 16 year old would love to go to a theme park, but she’s never been to one- the 4 year old would hardly be able to ride anything, and the 10 year old would be too short to ride everything his sister could. And while the 4 year old might love a petting zoo, I wouldn’t try to get the 16 year old there, and the 10 year old is iffy. I wonder how hard it was to keep my niece’s Barbie shoes and accessories away from her brother when she was 8 and he was two. I just didn’t let my daughter have games or toys with small parts until I was sure her brother wouldn’t choke on them , but that wouldn’t have worked with children as widely spaced as my brother’s.