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'm sorry, but to all those who are trying to have babies at 40 or older, it just seems selfish to me. Like trying to achieve a social fantasy. I hope you are at least well off if you are doing this and you just dumped someone you claimed to care about just to realize some social fantasy. If I loved a man and knew he didn't want kids from the start, I wouldn't just suddenly throw him away at 40 because I wanted to fulfill some social objective. That is just I hope you are well off. Because get real. Do you all now realize you will be paying for this child's medical expenses, education, food, ect for 18-20 years. You will probably be working until you are at least 80 and unable to retire or end up in some horrid nursing home(unable to afford a good one)now because you are so sick from working until you can't. Or now you better hope your kid doesn't go to college and gets a good paying job so they can move you in otherwise you'll be homeless. That's just a sad way to live. I hope you are prepared for that kind of life of having to work your butt off until you're 80 unless your planning to pop out a kid because society told you and then ignore it for life.
Sorry but unless you have a kid at 60 (NOT 40), you aren't going to be working until 80 in order to support them for 18 to 20 years. You should check your arithmetic.
I don't agree with you, emm74. Can't just count the years they're supporting the kids but factor in additional years of working after they move out to do "catch up" since they'll be in debt. Very few kids leave home at age 18-20 years old. They do 5-6 years of college then live with their parents until at least age 30 to pay off college loans. The parents will need to continue working until age 80 to build up their retirement funds because they drained themselves financially having kids.
I really agree with JaneMeyer that it's a bit selfish to make one's husband put off retirement dreams just so you can have a baby.
Also factor in the idea that adults in their 40's will have older parents who may not have the physical health to assist with babysitting. Many women depend on their parents to take care of their kids while they work but an older, ailing grandparent may not have the stamina or interest in babysitting. And if these parents need to help their elderly parents at the same time that they are trying to raise young children, how is that doable?
I don't agree with you, emm74. Can't just count the years they're supporting the kids but factor in additional years of working after they move out to do "catch up" since they'll be in debt. Very few kids leave home at age 18-20 years old. They do 5-6 years of college then live with their parents until at least age 30 to pay off college loans. The parents will need to continue working until age 80 to build up their retirement funds because they drained themselves financially having kids.
I really agree with JaneMeyer that it's a bit selfish to make one's husband put off retirement dreams just so you can have a baby.
Also factor in the idea that adults in their 40's will have older parents who may not have the physical health to assist with babysitting. Many women depend on their parents to take care of their kids while they work but an older, ailing grandparent may not have the stamina or interest in babysitting. And if these parents need to help their elderly parents at the same time that they are trying to raise young children, how is that doable?
Well, I had my son at 42. And no, I won't be working decades extra to catch up because I'm a competent adult who was saving for retirement before I had him and other than a brief gap during his first year with the most expensive childcare, I've continued to save every year since then.
And people who expect their parents to care for their children ought not to have them. It's nice when a grandparent can help out but they've raised a family and should not be expected to raise another one.
As for helping out a parent while also raising a kid? Well, speaking from personal experience with a mother who had surgery a few days ago, you suck it up and do it when it's needed. But you don't have to trade off having a family of your own because - at any age - your parent(s) and your kid(s) might both need you.
I had my son at age 42, without any fertility treatments. Plenty of women get pregnant in their late 30s and into their 40s, with or without assisted reproduction techniques. It is unlikely that the majority of women ages 36-40 who want kids are thinking of adoption as the primary method of creating a family, and even less likely that they are thinking about adopting older children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShinyHappyLucy
Not everyone's eggs are all dried up at the ripe old age of 40. More than likely, these women are hoping to give birth to their own child. It's not all that uncommon.
Yep. I have seen multiple women get pregnant on their own and go on to have healthy babies in their early 40s. I think the risks of all that are made out to be way worse than they actually are. You could have a baby with a disability at any age.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisTown123
Good luck with that. Most women your age see men in their mid-50s, with kids THAT young, are deal breakers...as the mid-50s empty nesters have kids grown and have their own kids.
Definitely not all. It wouldn't be a problem for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timberline742
The vast majority of my friends who have had children had them after 35. Two women friends of mine are pregnant now in their 40s. No big deal at all. It's great that people wait til they're mature and financially secure, and even better, found the right partner (if they decide they don't want to do it alone). Excellent.
Yep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Debsi
It must be nice for all of you whose lives worked out exactly how you hoped and planned they would.
Try walking a mile in someone else's shoes before being so judgmental, or, just worry about how you're living your own lives.
Amen. The whole "get pregnant in your 20s" thing has always annoyed me. As if we can just magically manifest a husband, a home, the income required to raise a kid, etc.
Yep. I have seen multiple women get pregnant on their own and go on to have healthy babies in their early 40s. I think the risks of all that are made out to be way worse than they actually are. You could have a baby with a disability at any age.
Definitely not all. It wouldn't be a problem for me.
Yep.
Amen. The whole "get pregnant in your 20s" thing has always annoyed me. As if we can just magically manifest a husband, a home, the income required to raise a kid, etc.
This is predominant where I live. Back in the 90s, when I went off to college and came back in my early 20s....when I had decided to take some continuing ed. courses at the local community college, it seemed that every female 18 to 21 year old student there were either.
1. Still dating their high school boyfriend.
2. Engaged to be married to their hs boyfriend.
3. Had a high school boyfriend off to college.
Needless to say, most were attached or some even full married by legal drinking age. I had a male friend that was in the military that was stationed in Kansas City, and every single woman he'd come across was a single mom and he was only like 20 at the time.
Depending on the community, if the couple has no high aspirations, the husband will stick to their lifelong blue collar job while the wife remains an admin asst. or working at a big box store.
As to the original question of this thread, most of the older women I knew who discussed having kids definitely meant their own biological kids. It will definitely be harder to have kids at that age, but definitely not impossible either. I think the biggest issue is that there is just a higher risk of birth defects. We are likely talking about aged eggs from the female and aged testicles producing sperm on the male side. I know a few recent mid to late 30 something women who've had kids and there doesn't seem to be any issues.
A guy I know who is 40 just recently had his first kid with his wife. They both had some issues with past pregnancies. They have what appears to be a healthy boy. He said that he does feel that it would've been different had he had the kid at 30 vs 40. Difference in energy level, having to let go of freedom one had for decades of their adult life, etc..
It must be nice for all of you whose lives worked out exactly how you hoped and planned they would.
Try walking a mile in someone else's shoes before being so judgmental, or, just worry about how you're living your own lives.
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.
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.
