When am i too old for more kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We are all talking about the same thing - it's that situation where older people have major loans paid off, enough money to raise their child and see them through college and beyond, to have the affordability to stay at home if they desire, that I am arguing brings tremendous peace of mind to parenting and the ability to give their children some things that they might not be able to give if they were much younger.

Your posts all act as if we are stuck in the financial situation that we live in when our first child is born. Even if you're correct, young moms can achieve all this "icing on the cake" that you're talking about, too. People don't stop aging/maturing/earning/saving when the child is born! Assuming even that young parents don't have these things BEFORE the child is born, they will still continue to work toward them through a child's young childhood (even if only one parent works). Assuming you're right and, say, a 42-year-old can achieve the "financial stability" (still a misnomer, you're just talking about getting rich) that a 32-year-old likely won't. Fine. So a younger mom can have a child at, say, 31 and her family can still reach that "financial stability" of which you speak before her child is even in middle school. Looks like we get the best of the both worlds!

There is really no point in arguing with these old heffers. They are obviously bitter and very jealous. Let them be miserable with each other. Oh and to the lady who said that I was making fun of "sick" children by referencing March of Dime...WRONG BITCH...I was referencing March of Dime so all of you old hags can go and do your research about the risks associated with having a baby at an advanced age, you are the sicko that took that reference the wrong way. HAGS

[Anonymous]

I am the 33-year old PP with the 37-year old husband. Our daughter is almost 3 years old and we will have another child in February. I don't think we're typical of the general population but, as another poster noted, we are certainly no outliers in the Washington area. We chose to have kids in our early/mid 30s versus 40s because we thought it likely to get the best balance of financial stability and relative longevity. We also did not want to risk exacerbating any possible fertility problems -- you never know about them until you start trying to conceive.

[Anonymous]

Financial Stability Poster, if you are wealthy enough to do as you state, which is pay off loans by your early 40s, have no debt, have savings, travel, pay for a child's education with relative ease/calm/relaxation/pure "peace of mind"... can you acknowledge that you are not representative of the "general population" either? You say that the early 30s families aren't representative of their age group, but neither are you representative of yours. Most of the "general population" never achieves "financial stability" as you define it, regardless of age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We are all talking about the same thing - it's that situation where older people have major loans paid off, enough money to raise their child and see them through college and beyond, to have the affordability to stay at home if they desire, that I am arguing brings tremendous peace of mind to parenting and the ability to give their children some things that they might not be able to give if they were much younger.

Your posts all act as if we are stuck in the financial situation that we live in when our first child is born. Even if you're correct, young moms can achieve all this "icing on the cake" that you're talking about, too. People don't stop aging/maturing/earning/saving when the child is born! Assuming even that young parents don't have these things BEFORE the child is born, they will still continue to work toward them through a child's young childhood (even if only one parent works). Assuming you're right and, say, a 42-year-old can achieve the "financial stability" (still a misnomer, you're just talking about getting rich) that a 32-year-old likely won't. Fine. So a younger mom can have a child at, say, 31 and her family can still reach that "financial stability" of which you speak before her child is even in middle school. Looks like we get the best of the both worlds!

No. Because children are expensive to raise. Moreover, most women are not able to and don't want to quit their jobs or careers in their early 30's to focus soley on childrearing. So it's a drain on resources at an age when wealth is just trying to accumulate for most people and the option to focus completely on childrearing without the distraction of work and other things is not exercised.
There is really no point in arguing with these old heffers. They are obviously bitter and very jealous. Let them be miserable with each other. Oh and to the lady who said that I was making fun of "sick" children by referencing March of Dime...WRONG BITCH...I was referencing March of Dime so all of you old hags can go and do your research about the risks associated with having a baby at an advanced age, you are the sicko that took that reference the wrong way. HAGS

How many older women have used words such as "bitch" and "old heffer" and "old hags" since this subject began? Using these words simply because someone disagrees with your point reveals much to everyone reading this post about whether you really were ready to influence and raise young children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Financial Stability Poster, if you are wealthy enough to do as you state, which is pay off loans by your early 40s, have no debt, have savings, travel, pay for a child's education with relative ease/calm/relaxation/pure "peace of mind"... can you acknowledge that you are not representative of the "general population" either? You say that the early 30s families aren't representative of their age group, but neither are you representative of yours. Most of the "general population" never achieves "financial stability" as you define it, regardless of age.

Don't use me as an example as I am not representative of the general pop as you pointed out also. But 3% of women over 35 are more educated than women between 25-25. Most importantly, financial stability does dramatically improve after the age of 35 simply because women have had more time to devote to their careers and accumulate wealth. It's just a more peaceful time to have a child and many more women after 35 and especially after 40 exercise the option of devoting their complete time to childrearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the 33-year old PP with the 37-year old husband. Our daughter is almost 3 years old and we will have another child in February. I don't think we're typical of the general population but, as another poster noted, we are certainly no outliers in the Washington area. We chose to have kids in our early/mid 30s versus 40s because we thought it likely to get the best balance of financial stability and relative longevity. We also did not want to risk exacerbating any possible fertility problems -- you never know about them until you start trying to conceive.

I agree with you. We had our first in the mid 30's and it was very easy to conceive. Now that I just entered my 40's it is alot harder to conceive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We are all talking about the same thing - it's that situation where older people have major loans paid off, enough money to raise their child and see them through college and beyond, to have the affordability to stay at home if they desire, that I am arguing brings tremendous peace of mind to parenting and the ability to give their children some things that they might not be able to give if they were much younger.

Your posts all act as if we are stuck in the financial situation that we live in when our first child is born. Even if you're correct, young moms can achieve all this "icing on the cake" that you're talking about, too. People don't stop aging/maturing/earning/saving when the child is born! Assuming even that young parents don't have these things BEFORE the child is born, they will still continue to work toward them through a child's young childhood (even if only one parent works). Assuming you're right and, say, a 42-year-old can achieve the "financial stability" (still a misnomer, you're just talking about getting rich) that a 32-year-old likely won't. Fine. So a younger mom can have a child at, say, 31 and her family can still reach that "financial stability" of which you speak before her child is even in middle school. Looks like we get the best of the both worlds!

No. Because children are expensive to raise. Moreover, most women are not able to and don't want to quit their jobs or careers in their early 30's to focus soley on childrearing. So it's a drain on resources at an age when wealth is just trying to accumulate for most people and the option to focus completely on childrearing without the distraction of work and other things is not exercised.
There is really no point in arguing with these old heffers. They are obviously bitter and very jealous. Let them be miserable with each other. Oh and to the lady who said that I was making fun of "sick" children by referencing March of Dime...WRONG BITCH...I was referencing March of Dime so all of you old hags can go and do your research about the risks associated with having a baby at an advanced age, you are the sicko that took that reference the wrong way. HAGS

How many older women have used words such as "bitch" and "old heffer" and "old hags" since this subject began? Using these words simply because someone disagrees with your point reveals much to everyone reading this post about whether you really were ready to influence and raise young children.

You know what lady.....A LOT of women use those terms, old and young....like I said get over yourself. You ride so pretty on your high horse....but one day you are going to fall off....and break a hip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is really no point in arguing with these old heffers. They are obviously bitter and very jealous. Let them be miserable with each other. Oh and to the lady who said that I was making fun of "sick" children by referencing March of Dime...WRONG BITCH...I was referencing March of Dime so all of you old hags can go and do your research about the risks associated with having a baby at an advanced age, you are the sicko that took that reference the wrong way. HAGS

I am the "bitch" to whom you refer. And, being older with a lot more education, I did indeed understand what you were attempting to say, but that's because I am capable of making inferences. However, if you delve more deeply into your own post, you should realize that by mentioning March of - it's DimeS, by the way, you're also implying that sick children are unwanted. PPs had already brought up that elitist view often shared by you and your younger counterparts.

Furthermore, I don't understand your need to end with "HAGS." Did you forget to complete your thought? Or are you just so filled with anger and hostility that you cannot control your emotions?

Enjoy the holidays - that is, if family can stand to be around you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is really no point in arguing with these old heffers. They are obviously bitter and very jealous. Let them be miserable with each other. Oh and to the lady who said that I was making fun of "sick" children by referencing March of Dime...WRONG BITCH...I was referencing March of Dime so all of you old hags can go and do your research about the risks associated with having a baby at an advanced age, you are the sicko that took that reference the wrong way. HAGS

I am the "bitch" to whom you refer. And, being older with a lot more education, I did indeed understand what you were attempting to say, but that's because I am capable of making inferences. However, if you delve more deeply into your own post, you should realize that by mentioning March of - it's DimeS, by the way, you're also implying that sick children are unwanted. PPs had already brought up that elitist view often shared by you and your younger counterparts.

Furthermore, I don't understand your need to end with "HAGS." Did you forget to complete your thought? Or are you just so filled with anger and hostility that you cannot control your emotions?

Enjoy the holidays - that is, if family can stand to be around you.

Oh well excuse me Ms. Educated, Old Wench...I am sure your family just LOVES being around you and all of your self righteousness. Give me a break. Being older and a lot more educated than I, then you would know by reading my earlier post that I NEVER implied that sick children are not wanted, and you are an ignorant soul for which will burn in hell for even trying to put words in my mouth. If you took the time to read through the posts you would see that I was stating FACTS from the March of DimeSSSSSSS about the risks associated with getting pregnant over the age of 40. I, having a downs relative have much love and sympathy for babies that are born with this disease. And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering with this because you OLD HAGS decide that after you achieved all of your education....which by the way....didn't teach you how to be a descent HUMAN, you wanted a baby. Your time is up. I am done with you. I would definitely start praying to God and ask him for forgiveness for all of your selfishness, self centeredness and bitterness. Merry Christmas!

[Anonymous]

I agree that we don't have to use profanity but the wantedness of disabled children is another topic. The high rate of abortions of those with Trisomy 21 is compelling evidence that our society, in general, does not value these children in the same way that "normal" children are valued. There are, of course, numerous individual exceptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Oh well excuse me Ms. Educated, Old Wench...I am sure your family just LOVES being around you and all of your self righteousness. Give me a break. Being older and a lot more educated than I, then you would know by reading my earlier post that I NEVER implied that sick children are not wanted, and you are an ignorant soul for which will burn in hell for even trying to put words in my mouth. If you took the time to read through the posts you would see that I was stating FACTS from the March of DimeSSSSSSS about the risks associated with getting pregnant over the age of 40. I, having a downs relative have much love and sympathy for babies that are born with this disease. And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering with this because you OLD HAGS decide that after you achieved all of your education....which by the way....didn't teach you how to be a descent HUMAN, you wanted a baby. Your time is up. I am done with you. I would definitely start praying to God and ask him for forgiveness for all of your selfishness, self centeredness and bitterness. Merry Christmas!

Again, there is no need to resort to name calling - "old wench, old hags." When I was pregnant with both children (at 38 and 41), I did indeed go through extensive testing. I, however, decided against amniocentesis, knowing fully well that I would have the resources and the stamina to deal with a child born with health issues. I didn't need to contact March of "DimeSSSSSSS" b/c I do have the resources to find quality OBGYN care for "women in my age bracket."

Both of my children are healthy, and for that I am grateful. You state, "And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering," which translates into taking preventive measures to ensure that these children are never born. So I seriously doubt that I will "burn in hell" for making assumptions based on your previous posts. Now, young one, who has a better chance of burning in hell?

Obviously, you're proving over and over again that you're extraordinarily hostile and ignorant. not a healthy combination

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Oh well excuse me Ms. Educated, Old Wench...I am sure your family just LOVES being around you and all of your self righteousness. Give me a break. Being older and a lot more educated than I, then you would know by reading my earlier post that I NEVER implied that sick children are not wanted, and you are an ignorant soul for which will burn in hell for even trying to put words in my mouth. If you took the time to read through the posts you would see that I was stating FACTS from the March of DimeSSSSSSS about the risks associated with getting pregnant over the age of 40. I, having a downs relative have much love and sympathy for babies that are born with this disease. And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering with this because you OLD HAGS decide that after you achieved all of your education....which by the way....didn't teach you how to be a descent HUMAN, you wanted a baby. Your time is up. I am done with you. I would definitely start praying to God and ask him for forgiveness for all of your selfishness, self centeredness and bitterness. Merry Christmas!

Again, there is no need to resort to name calling - "old wench, old hags." When I was pregnant with both children (at 38 and 41), I did indeed go through extensive testing. I, however, decided against amniocentesis, knowing fully well that I would have the resources and the stamina to deal with a child born with health issues. I didn't need to contact March of "DimeSSSSSSS" b/c I do have the resources to find quality OBGYN care for "women in my age bracket."

Both of my children are healthy, and for that I am grateful. You state, "And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering," which translates into taking preventive measures to ensure that these children are never born. So I seriously doubt that I will "burn in hell" for making assumptions based on your previous posts. Now, young one, who has a better chance of burning in hell?

Obviously, you're proving over and over again that you're extraordinarily hostile and ignorant. not a healthy combination

One more question, PP - In reference to your relative with Down Syndrome (no S needed), was this relative born to an old wench or a hag?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Oh well excuse me Ms. Educated, Old Wench...I am sure your family just LOVES being around you and all of your self righteousness. Give me a break. Being older and a lot more educated than I, then you would know by reading my earlier post that I NEVER implied that sick children are not wanted, and you are an ignorant soul for which will burn in hell for even trying to put words in my mouth. If you took the time to read through the posts you would see that I was stating FACTS from the March of DimeSSSSSSS about the risks associated with getting pregnant over the age of 40. I, having a downs relative have much love and sympathy for babies that are born with this disease. And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering with this because you OLD HAGS decide that after you achieved all of your education....which by the way....didn't teach you how to be a descent HUMAN, you wanted a baby. Your time is up. I am done with you. I would definitely start praying to God and ask him for forgiveness for all of your selfishness, self centeredness and bitterness. Merry Christmas!

Again, there is no need to resort to name calling - "old wench, old hags." When I was pregnant with both children (at 38 and 41), I did indeed go through extensive testing. I, however, decided against amniocentesis, knowing fully well that I would have the resources and the stamina to deal with a child born with health issues. I didn't need to contact March of "DimeSSSSSSS" b/c I do have the resources to find quality OBGYN care for "women in my age bracket."

Both of my children are healthy, and for that I am grateful. You state, "And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering," which translates into taking preventive measures to ensure that these children are never born. So I seriously doubt that I will "burn in hell" for making assumptions based on your previous posts. Now, young one, who has a better chance of burning in hell?

Obviously, you're proving over and over again that you're extraordinarily hostile and ignorant. not a healthy combination

One more question, PP - In reference to your relative with Down Syndrome (no S needed), was this relative born to an old wench or a hag?

No heffer, he was adopted by my family....he was given up probably by some old hag like you. And yet again, it's comments like this that you will burn in hell for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Oh well excuse me Ms. Educated, Old Wench...I am sure your family just LOVES being around you and all of your self righteousness. Give me a break. Being older and a lot more educated than I, then you would know by reading my earlier post that I NEVER implied that sick children are not wanted, and you are an ignorant soul for which will burn in hell for even trying to put words in my mouth. If you took the time to read through the posts you would see that I was stating FACTS from the March of DimeSSSSSSS about the risks associated with getting pregnant over the age of 40. I, having a downs relative have much love and sympathy for babies that are born with this disease. And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering with this because you OLD HAGS decide that after you achieved all of your education....which by the way....didn't teach you how to be a descent HUMAN, you wanted a baby. Your time is up. I am done with you. I would definitely start praying to God and ask him for forgiveness for all of your selfishness, self centeredness and bitterness. Merry Christmas!

Again, there is no need to resort to name calling - "old wench, old hags." When I was pregnant with both children (at 38 and 41), I did indeed go through extensive testing. I, however, decided against amniocentesis, knowing fully well that I would have the resources and the stamina to deal with a child born with health issues. I didn't need to contact March of "DimeSSSSSSS" b/c I do have the resources to find quality OBGYN care for "women in my age bracket."

Both of my children are healthy, and for that I am grateful. You state, "And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering," which translates into taking preventive measures to ensure that these children are never born. So I seriously doubt that I will "burn in hell" for making assumptions based on your previous posts. Now, young one, who has a better chance of burning in hell?

Obviously, you're proving over and over again that you're extraordinarily hostile and ignorant. not a healthy combination

One more question, PP - In reference to your relative with Down Syndrome (no S needed), was this relative born to an old wench or a hag?

No heffer, he was adopted by my family....he was given up probably by some old hag like you. And yet again, it's comments like this that you will burn in hell for.

Oh and one more thing...DownS is commonly used when referring to Down Syndome...now who's the POS on this board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Oh well excuse me Ms. Educated, Old Wench...I am sure your family just LOVES being around you and all of your self righteousness. Give me a break. Being older and a lot more educated than I, then you would know by reading my earlier post that I NEVER implied that sick children are not wanted, and you are an ignorant soul for which will burn in hell for even trying to put words in my mouth. If you took the time to read through the posts you would see that I was stating FACTS from the March of DimeSSSSSSS about the risks associated with getting pregnant over the age of 40. I, having a downs relative have much love and sympathy for babies that are born with this disease. And I for one do not want to see other babies suffering with this because you OLD HAGS decide that after you achieved all of your education....which by the way....didn't teach you how to be a descent HUMAN, you wanted a baby. Your time is up. I am done with you. I would definitely start praying to God and ask him for forgiveness for all of your selfishness, self centeredness and bitterness. Merry Christmas!

No heffer, he was adopted by my family....he was given up probably by some old hag like you. And yet again, it's comments like this that you will burn in hell for.

PP -- I can't imagine what motivates you to be so vicious to strangers on a message board. Your conduct is both terrifying and sad. Please get some help.

And by the way, Down's Syndrome is a chromisomal disorder, not a disease.