Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't see it as selfish at all. I was 35 - 41 when I had my 3 kids. I consider myself a pretty good parent now, at age 47 to them all. I'm in a good place with my marriage, with our finances, and am at peace with my life in general.
I do make a point to keep myself healthy, much more than I did when I was younger. I want to be around for them, for a long time. I want to be able to go hiking with them, when I'm in my 50s, 60s. There are no guarantees, of course, but I do what I can to keep myself and my family in good shape.
Yeah, the health thing I think is the biggest concern as an older parent. I'd like to live until my youngest is forty - - that'll mean I'll have to make 84 (FWIW, I'm male). Obviously it can be done (and three of my four grandparents made it to that age), but I have to be more conscious of my health than I was before I had any kids.
My first one goes to Kindergarten this year - - and of the three peers he will have, two of them will have fathers older than me (both with their first kids and they each have another). While I know I won't be the norm, I also know I'm not going to stick out like a sore thumb either.
I am in a somewhat precarious situation. I have a 20 year old daughter I had in high school when I was 18 way back in 1995. Father left and never was able to get child support. I am currently pregnant with my second child at 39 with a great man who I will marry. I have always wanted more children but wanted things to be financially stable. My fiance has never had kids of his own.
To be honest while I am happy for my daughter and like having another, I would like to have one, maybe two more. Is that an inherently selfish thing at my age? Me and my fiance love kids just needed the right time. I do keep myself in great shape and eat well. I admit it feels kind of strange with my daughter already in college and starting a new but along with this one I would like to have one, maybe two more. Am I being selfish and wrong here?
I'm not even going to read the 3 pages. I'm going to say this. I had my son at 32, and my daughter at 35. Fairly late, not as late as you. My wife is 18 months older, so she had our 2nd pretty close to your age. While there were times I wish I had them sooner, its mostly for selfish reasons. I do believe having more life experiences has made me a better father, then if I had them when I was younger. Enjoy your new baby, and get busy making another fairly soon
Not if you're prepared for the added risks (ready to care for a child with a birth defect, and have a plan for what happens if you pass while the kid is a minor, etc). Of course, a twenty year old parent should account for these risks, too, it's just more statistically imperative for an older parent.
In many cases an older parent is in a better place in terms of general personal stability and security for child-rearing. So waiting until you're older, like most things, has it's upsides and downsides. It's a trade-off, like most things.
The risks can be mitigated with pre-natal testing. With life expectancy these days at close to 80, statistically there's little chance of not living until the child reaches adulthood, even at age 45.
Quote:
Originally Posted by historyfan
The risk for not having a healthy baby as an older mother would be my only concern.
There are no guarantees on how long any parent will live so that shouldn't be a factor.
There are pros and cons to having children early when young & energetic or later when one is more financially stable & has a calmer temperate. As long as a child is loved, age is a number.
The risks can be mitigated with pre-natal testing. With life expectancy these days at close to 80, statistically there's little chance of not living until the child reaches adulthood, even at age 45.
Pre-natal testing does not mitigate risks it simply reveals them. Approximately 90% of European parents elect to terminate a pregnancy if pre-natal testing reveals a positive result for Down's Syndrome, but only 44% of American parents do. The life expectancy of 80 is not evenly distributed throughout the population. Moreover, in America lots of environmental factors trump the genetic ones in determining actual life expectancy.
I had my oldest of four children when I was 20 and my youngest at 41. It's not irresponsible in the slightest, so long as you are healthy and make appropriate plans for your children in case of your untimely demise....which we all should do anyway, regardless of age.
Generally speaking, while you might have less stamina than a mother in her twenties there is a positive trade-off in that you are likely less self-centered and more apt to put your child's best interests first. I'm a much better mom than I was the first time around.
Pre-natal testing does not mitigate risks it simply reveals them. Approximately 90% of European parents elect to terminate a pregnancy if pre-natal testing reveals a positive result for Down's Syndrome, but only 44% of American parents do. The life expectancy of 80 is not evenly distributed throughout the population. Moreover, in America lots of environmental factors trump the genetic ones in determining actual life expectancy.
Are you advocating that the OP bet on her dying before her soon-to-be-born child reaches adulthood?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.