Erik Reuter wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 09:26:55AM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
>
> > Personally, I think that if a lesbian couple were trying to maximize
> > the procreation, a good schedule would be one has a baby, the other
> > has a baby a year later, the first has her second a year after that,
> > etc. But that's not a totally unheard-of rate among heterosexual
> > couples, either.
>
> Or they could go continuously but 180 degrees (4.5 months) out of
> phase...
You need at *least* 3 months to recuperate. A year is a lot better.
And you don't ovulate the day after you give birth -- it can be a few
months.
Actually, I read an article somewhere recently (and I really, really
wish I could remember where) that indicated that the ideal time to get
pregnant was something like 19-23 months after giving birth. Having a
baby every 2 years just gives you 15 months. (But if it was a certain
magazine, I might be able to dig it up in the next couple of days if
anyone cares enough for me to do so.)
Spacing births every 2.5 years might be best for both mother and all
children after the first. But that doesn't maximize the number of
children as well as every 2 years.
Julia
who would really rather not get pregnant again anytime soon
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
