Let me preface this by saying that I don’t really have an opinion on the matter, as I have never really given it too much thought. Up until recently, I was convinced that I did not ever want children, though now I’m starting to think that maybe I might like to.
I just turned 30 a few months ago, and it has crossed my mind recently that I’m quickly approaching the age where it might not be wise to do so.
But what is that age? Is there an age?
I have an aunt and uncle, who are in their early 50’s and whose eldest daughter is a few years younger than me, that recently adopted two 1 year old children. It helps, I’m sure, that my aunt owns a daycare center, but it struck me that when these kids are 20, they’ll be in their 70s (presuming they even live to be that old). Is that perhaps unfair to the children?
I realize that it might be quite possible to actually create children at almost any age, but taking into consideration things like ability to participate in the child’s life (in everything from playing catch to attending PTA meetings to relating to their generation), is there a certain age where one might rightly say, “I’m too old to have children”?
Well, i’d say that it would be fair to still have children (or adopt) as long as you expect to still be in reasonably good health when they’re twenty. By that point they should be able to take the stress of you dying or becoming senile/afflicted with some kind of debilitating illness, plus at that point they would be (or at least should be) pretty much independant of you and be able to take care of their own affairs.
That’s something I think about often. I’m 40, nearly 41, and my twins are 20 months old. We were quite surprised when I became pregnant at 38 (my Mom swore it was menopause until the Dr. confirmed).
I think 45 is about the limit - most people are in good health through their mid-60s, which gets the kid to, if not through, college. And after women turn 45 the risk of birth defects is frighteningly high.
Of course, when I was 30 I thought 40 was ancient and would never have planned to have toddlers at my age. But it’s really OK (actually, it’s mostly a blast). The increase in patience makes up for the decrease in energy, IMHO. I see younger mothers struggling with things that don’t “get to” me.
The more important issue is the parents’ health, physical and mental. In an ideal world, anyway.
Even though it wasn’t an issue for me, I wouldn’t have wanted to have a child in college when I was ready to retire, and I want to be able to retire young. As it is now, my daughter will graduate 2 years before I’m eligible to retire, and I was 31 when she was born. If I’d had another child (we tried, but no dice) I would have had to work past my minimum retirement age.
But I think a good rule of thumb is to try to have some retirement years in that empty nest. It’d also be nice to be young enough to be able to enjoy possible grandchildren. I honestly don’t understand women in their late 40s and into their 50s having babies. Each to his/her own, I guess.
I thought about this when Letterman announced he was going to be a father. Harry was born when Dave was 57. There’s a distinct possibility that Dave might not see Harry graduate from high school.
My parents planned my sister and me to be 4 years apart so that they would not have 2 kids in college at the same time. (My mother was apparently able to conceive at will.) So my sister dropped out of college in her junior year to start a family. I started college the following year, and got married the summer after my freshman year. So they had NO kids in college. I also found out years later that they had fully expected that each of us would finish school and then live at home until marriage; I had fully expected to have my own place on approximately the day after graduation anyway.
OTOH, I am within a couple of years of when I’d hope to retire, and last year my 28-year-old daughter moved out. This summer, my 33-year-old daughter moved back in. I had exactly 8 months of the empty nest. In both cases I welcomed her home, and they are both pleasant to have around and do what they can to be of help. But still.
My own personal opinion is to not have kids after 30, but I could push it to 40 if it did happen. After 40 is another story because I’d be afraid that my baby would have birth defects.
The culture here in the Boston area tells educated females that they have plenty of time to have careers, get married at their own pace, and then have children when they are ready. You see that a lot in Hollywood too. I don’t approve of that plan much not only for the parent’s health and stamina and the increased possibility of bith defects, but also because that plan doesn’t leave much room for error.
My wife’s friends and coworkers didn’t even think about getting married until they turned thirty. Under that plan, it might take a few years to find a suitable husband and then you have to kick it into overdrive to hurry up and have kids. Better hope they don’t want more than two.
One thing that many people don’t understand is that medical science cannot extend the natural limit of female fertility at all. Females differ but when it is gone, that’s it. No doctor in the world can buy you more time except with donated eggs. Nothing wrong with that but I don’t think most people would consider that ideal.
My parents had me in their early twenties and I am thankful for that. I am 32 now and they still aren’t old.
Um, all babies are “natural”, and all births worth of congratulations. And since identical twins are the result of a single egg splitting, the point you’re trying to make is moot.
Congratulations, E = mc2! As my relatives said, “Two babies, no waiting!” (i.e., having to wait for the chance to be the one holding the baby).
Exactly. One of my grandmothers had her first child at 25, the other at 40. Either have children at whatever age, or don’t. Age is only relevant in terms of your physical ability to actually have the kid. Think about your state of mind, physical health, financial position, suitability of spouse. Don’t think about your age.
Because the risk of birth defects and infertility begins to become quite significant at about the age of 35, I think it is preferable to be done with childbearing by that age. But, of course, real life usually doesn’t fall neatly into the ideal.
My own mother did not originally want to have kids. My brother was a “surprise” when she was 34. She decided she liked children after all, so I ended up being born to her when she was 37.
There were times when I felt bad about having older parents. Both of my parents had serious health issues when I was a child, particularly my father, and it was very traumatic for me when my dad died when I was on the verge of turning 20. Yes, a 20 year old may be technically capable of caring for themselves, but it still is very painful to lose a parent at that age.
On the other hand, though, other than the health issues, they are/were good parents to me. Overall, my life has been happy and successful so far, so I’m not sorry I was born. For all I know things might have turned out worse in some unforeseeable way if I had been born to younger parents, so I wouldn’t change things even if I could.
I do feel that all parents owe it to their children to try to take good care of their health, in the hopes of staying around for the kids as long as possible…but life has no guarantees in that regard whether you have kids at 20 or 50.
I know of a woman who had a child at the age of 25 and then died just 2 years later of a very rare and aggressive cancer. You just never know what life has in store for you.
I meant did she have the babies by IVF or conceived the old fashioned way. I’m not slamming anyone for any form or way they have their kids. I’m just curious. Is it true that women in their late 30’s or early 40’s have multiple births? That’s what I was trying to get at.
Because the risk of birth defects and infertility begins to become quite significant at about the age of 35, I think it is preferable to be done with childbearing by that age. But, of course, real life usually doesn’t fall neatly into the ideal.
My own mother did not originally want to have kids. My brother was a “surprise” when she was 34. She decided she liked children after all, so I ended up being born to her when she was 37.
There were times when I felt bad about having older parents. Both of my parents had serious health issues when I was a child, particularly my father, and it was very traumatic for me when my dad died when I was on the verge of turning 20. Yes, a 20 year old may be technically capable of caring for themselves, but it still is very painful to lose a parent at that age.
On the other hand, though, other than the health issues, they are/were good parents to me. Overall, my life has been happy and successful so far, so I’m not sorry I was born. For all I know things might have turned out worse in some unforeseeable way if I had been born to younger parents, so I wouldn’t change things even if I could.
I do feel that all parents owe it to their children to try to take good care of their health, in the hopes of staying around for the kids as long as possible…but life has no guarantees in that regard whether you have kids at 20 or 50.
I know of a woman who had a child at the age of 25 and then died just 2 years later of a very rare and aggressive cancer. You just never know what life has in store for you.
I think it’s about what you, personally consider to be acceptable risks and benefits.
Is a 1% chance of Down syndrome (combined with the 1% chance of miscarriage during amniocentesis) acceptable to you?
Is it important that your child is genetically yours?
Is termination of pregnancy for foetal abnormality something you’d consider?
Is “having a baby” more important than “having a baby with the right person”?
There are no certainties… you could live to 100 or you could be run over by a bus at 30.
Do you want to have your freedom when you’re young, or when you’re old (and don’t forget that you might spend your golden years looking after your grandchildren, even if you had planned otherwise).
My parents had me when they were 32 and 38, and my youngest sister when they were 38 and 44. They have more free time as a couple than my in-laws, who spend most of their time looking after their grandchildren. My parents made the right choice for them, my in-laws love their grandkids and love the way their lives turned out-they made the right choice for them.
I’ll always remember what my mother told me, “Don’t wait for everything to be perfect before you start a family or you’ll be waiting forever, decide what you can compromise on and then dive in!”
Do what suits you as a couple (or an individual, depending on circumstances), having weighed up everything and decided what you can and can’t compromise on. There isn’t an absolute one-size-fits-all cut off age.
Well, yeah, there are no guarantees that plans will pan out. Still, I feel better having something in mind, even if it doesn’t go the way I’d intended. I was nearly 30 before I married, and at one point, I was seriously considering my life alone forever.
I had also, at one point, thought I’d like 6 kids. Thankfully, I grew out of that. But there was a plan in mind. And that plan didn’t include giving birth at 50 and raising teenagers in my 60s, which I still count as insanity.
End of hijack. It just seemed important to let you know I’m not totally out of touch with reality. No, really, I’m not…
Congratulations!!!
I’ve got 10 month old twins and I’m 44 and Mom is 36. One hits high risk at age 35 and so IMHO you don’t want to wait long after 35.
I used to dream of retiring early. With 3 kids it’s gonna be 65 but worth it.
For all I know things might have turned out worse in some unforeseeable way if I had been born to younger parents, so I wouldn’t change things even if I could.
You just never know what life has in store for you.