Saturday, November 15, 2008

Terrible Two's Nothing



Who ever coined the term "Terrible Two's" hasn't lived with my three year old. I think the three's are far worse than the two's, in fact I don't remember Ashie's two's being bad at all. Ashie now talks back, he screams a lot, and there is a whole lot of whining.

Anyone else find the three's far worse than the two's? Can you give me any hope for the four's?

7 comments:

watsonshuffle said...

AMEN! It was almost as if Devin grew devil horns on his head the day after he turned three. My sister-in-law says that is does get better when they turn four. Here's to hoping.

Karen, Mackay, Easton & Kallie said...

talk to becky...she told me it sucks til they go to kindergarten...and i agree with you...three is worse than 2

Missletoe said...

Amen! Actually, I am hoping Abizella peaked a few weeks ago when we last spoke about it. She has been much more pleasant since (meaning I haven't had any underwear thrown at me).

Michelle said...

ummmm...do you remember Jenna at 3? What a nightmare. Look forward to the 5's they are simply the best!!! Even better than the baby stage because there are no diapers involved!

Joanna Taylor said...

My friend lovingly refers to the threes as the "three-tards". Harsh, but oh so true.

The Lambourne Family said...

Mindy-
This is Jenny. Thanks for leaving a comment on my blog! I have secretly looked at your blog too. Now we are even. I have heard that 3 is harder than 2 but kind of forgot about it. Dang! I was looking forward to 3.

Tamra said...

I agree, at two you still have some control over them, but by three they assert way too much independence and your influence as mom is not as strong, unless you physically move them. Good luck with the three's and fours. As for hope for the future, every age has it "thing" you just trade one behavior for another plus you have to add on responsibilities and get them to do those responsibilties. But at least they are cute-right??