Poor little Natalie. She's child number three of four (all born within five years of each other).
When you have that many kids that close together, child number three gets the short end of the stick. It's impossible to keep track of a five-year-old, a four-year-old, and a two-year-old who doesn't care how far away she runs or who might be following her--so the two year old gets strapped into the stroller, rides in the shopping cart or gets carried by Daddy.
This, of course, just makes her want to run more.
I feel bad about this almost every day. I know Natalie needs her freedom. She needs to be able to run and explore, and she needs to be able to do so while properly supervised, so she can stay safe while she is running and exploring (something a two-year-old can't, obviously, do on her own).
How can we manage this when we have a four-year-old and a five-year-old to look after? They don't have the same running away issues, but together they require at least one parent's undivided attention. Natalie alone requires one person's undivided attention, and now that we have five-month-old Henry there just aren't enough parents to go around.
We've even resorted to that one evil I said I would never bow to--the dreaded child leash. Sure it's a cute little backpack, but it's still a leash. I still feel like I'm walking my baby. She handles it OK; it's better than the stroller, still not as good as absolute freedom.
I try to justify restraining poor Natalie by telling myself that the trade off is that she will have two very close older siblings and one baby brother, all of whom will be her friends and playmates as she grows up. It's a pretty good justification, but it doesn't stop my heart from breaking every time my husband takes the two older children outside and Natalie has to stay inside with me and the baby because there are just too many two-year-old hazards in our backyard (a pond, horses, potential rattlesnake habitat, ticks, occasional mountain lions). I just don't think risking her life is worth avoiding a few tears.
If she were our only child it would be a different story. But she's not our only child.
That's a wonderful thing. For us, it's meant a lot of sacrifices--sacrifices that I was more than willing to make and would gladly make again if I had to do it all over again. What I didn't anticipate, though, was that Natalie would have to make sacrifices, too. And sometimes it just doesn't seem fair to ask a two-year-old to make sacrifices.
I just hope when she gets older, she'll understand.
When you have that many kids that close together, child number three gets the short end of the stick. It's impossible to keep track of a five-year-old, a four-year-old, and a two-year-old who doesn't care how far away she runs or who might be following her--so the two year old gets strapped into the stroller, rides in the shopping cart or gets carried by Daddy.
This, of course, just makes her want to run more.
I feel bad about this almost every day. I know Natalie needs her freedom. She needs to be able to run and explore, and she needs to be able to do so while properly supervised, so she can stay safe while she is running and exploring (something a two-year-old can't, obviously, do on her own).
How can we manage this when we have a four-year-old and a five-year-old to look after? They don't have the same running away issues, but together they require at least one parent's undivided attention. Natalie alone requires one person's undivided attention, and now that we have five-month-old Henry there just aren't enough parents to go around.
We've even resorted to that one evil I said I would never bow to--the dreaded child leash. Sure it's a cute little backpack, but it's still a leash. I still feel like I'm walking my baby. She handles it OK; it's better than the stroller, still not as good as absolute freedom.
I try to justify restraining poor Natalie by telling myself that the trade off is that she will have two very close older siblings and one baby brother, all of whom will be her friends and playmates as she grows up. It's a pretty good justification, but it doesn't stop my heart from breaking every time my husband takes the two older children outside and Natalie has to stay inside with me and the baby because there are just too many two-year-old hazards in our backyard (a pond, horses, potential rattlesnake habitat, ticks, occasional mountain lions). I just don't think risking her life is worth avoiding a few tears.
If she were our only child it would be a different story. But she's not our only child.
That's a wonderful thing. For us, it's meant a lot of sacrifices--sacrifices that I was more than willing to make and would gladly make again if I had to do it all over again. What I didn't anticipate, though, was that Natalie would have to make sacrifices, too. And sometimes it just doesn't seem fair to ask a two-year-old to make sacrifices.
I just hope when she gets older, she'll understand.
Leave a comment