|
I’d say, despite some risks, mid thirties. You have lived a life, you likely have a career, have traveled, made some mistakes and acquired some wisdom. You are still young enough to have one or two or three!
|
| I had my first at 29 and would not change a thing. |
| 29-33 |
| Oh no, not another forum for brunch granny to berate us for choosing to have children after age 35. |
| I had my first at age 30 and 2nd at age 32 and it seems just right to me. I’m almost 40 now and it’s hard to imagine having a baby or toddler at this stage of life—I feel like I had a lot more energy 10 years ago than I do now. |
| I had my first at 25 and would have preferred to be done early 30s but life doesn't always work out the way we want. |
|
Why wait at all? first period, pump them out. That's all women are good for right? (insert eyeroll)
|
| The best age is whatever works for your particular situation. Why do you care what others choose to do, OP? |
| Wish I'd had my kids when I was much younger--25 or even earlier--because now they'd be in college/out of college. We got married young but waited to have kids. DCs are now in 7th and 9th grade; I'm in my early 50s and am exhausted all the time. |
Yes, that's exactly the same thing as having a baby at age 29. |
+1 |
| I had my babies at 30 and 33. 30-35 is a complete blur to me now. It's like I woke up and I'm late 30s. |
|
I was almost 27. Perfect. I wouldn't have changed that, but what I would have changed is a little more financial stability (DH lost his job when I was pregnant and it took a while to get back on foot).
I had one but if I had had two I'd have done it two years later, so 26-30 and done. |
46 |
| Like virtually all other things in life, the answer depends heavily on the specific human beings involved in the decision. |