When Charlie was born, I distinctly remember feeling frustrated and sad about the fact that my time and attention was now split between two children. I didn't like feeling that either child was getting less than all of me.
I was thinking about this tonight as I was putting Cubby and Charlie to bed, and assuming it would be even worse with three children among whom I must divide my attention.
But then I had a thought that stopped me in my mental tracks: My kids might get fractionally less of me, but they get a whole, entire other person.
I realized that while a mother (or father, or whoever the primary caregiver is) is paramount when the children are small, there is going to be a lot of their lives after they're . . . well, not small. And for the rest of their lives, they'll have not just me and their father, but their two brothers to support them. Adding a family member is never a diminishment.
Of course, explaining this concept to a child under the age of five is not really possible when every one of the three children is vying for space on Mommy's lap. At such moments of less than brotherly love, I'll just have to remember this profound breakthrough.
And then maybe hide in the bathroom. Because profundity can only help so much.
The same can be said for profanity. Seriously, though, I love your revelation--I'm sure it will provide that extra ounce of patience when most needed.
ReplyDeleteWow. I didn't think about that, either. The H and I have missed the boat on another kid and honestly, we couldn't afford it anyways, but that is the best argument for multiple children I've heard.
ReplyDeleteThem kids is lucky. What a good mama.
Add that to your growing list of the pluses in their little lives that you know but they won't understand or appreciate until way later.
ReplyDeleteYour rationale must have been at least subliminally present on your dad's side - 9 siblings is a lot of support. Or may be it had something to do with the Catholic/Irish influence.
Way to make lemonade out of lemons!