Why do young people have kids they can't afford?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever seen the TLC show “Unexpected”? This program shows the ups and downs of teens having babies. Typically, teens pregnancies have occurred for a few generations. They interview the soon to be grandma, who is in her early 40’s, and the great grandma, who is barely 60 years old. It’s an eye opener and honestly, maybe a must see TV for the young teen crowd. Note the gender reveals and baby showers the new mother’s expect.

From a biological standpoint this is very much the natural order of things. Beyond the many women who struggle to conceive after prioritizing education and career for most or all of their 20s, and many who are never successful because they waited too long and cannot afford fertility treatments, there is also the very real issue of modern women who have children later in life having less support from other generations who just don’t have the energy once grandchildren and great grandchildren come along.

It would be nice if we could reorganize our society so that women could have babies in their early 20s if they want to without losing all the opportunities that come from delayed motherhood. Iceland is one of the few countries that really enforces this approach through social policies to support mothers.

The current model is unsustainable, I know that.

pp here -- this is such a valid point and I would love to know more about Iceland's support system.

I had my child at 26 (planned) and it has worked out great for me but it was under unusual circumstances. My career has not suffered at all.

I am anecdotally seeing more of my peers have a baby in their late 20s with the advent of paid parental leave.

26 is too young. Sorry

Lol, 26 is not too young. Both of my gen x siblings were married and had their first kids before 26. They are also incredibly successful and wealthy. They had their shit together and did not waste their twenties (and frankly, their peak fertility years) toying around at bottomless brunches and social sports leagues.

My parents also were married at 23 and had their first kid at 25. Both professionals, including biglaw. Was it too young 40 years ago? The only thing that’s changed (besides reproductive medicine) is that for some reason, it’s now acceptable for adults to still be considered incapable children by their mid twenties.

I have no issue with people who choose to wait until they’re 35+ or don’t meet the right person until then, but don’t attack mid twenties as too young either.

-married in my mid twenties, first kid in late twenties.

Your parents are from a different generation. That is not relevant to 20+ years old today.
Success and wealth do not make one a good parent at a young age. Only serves to cement how wrong you are in your reasoning for having a child.

Bottomless brunches and sports league talk shows your immaturity. I pity your children.

You sound bitter. Praytell, what incremental “maturity” helped you between 25 and 35+ in terms of raising kids?

And you sound emotionally imbalanced.

None of this is emotionally imbalanced. Your posts are the ones that come off as if you are quite triggered by and defensive about the idea that childless people in their twenties and thirties enjoy much more downtime for leisurely activities than their counterparts who are parents (and go on to namecall their parents and say you “pity” their kids.)

Generally, yes, people who are not raising children have more leisure time. To say that those young ones are playing sports and brunching is asinine.
You inadvertently cemented that you are emotionally imbalanced as pp said.

Again there is nothing imbalanced about it. That is quite literally what I -and my circle- was doing in our twenties. Our lives completely revolved around work, our social lives and activities, and travel. Everyone was earning money and very few financial obligations. That’s just life without kids. And the people I know who have put off having kids have done so because they enjoy the lack of responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had mine at 26 too. And why not, I had already graduated from college and worked my way up to a director position.

So did I. I was married and in my third year of residency, doing mostly outpatient work.

My career isn’t amazing, but it seems fine.

Oh, as a third year resident, who raised baby?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever seen the TLC show “Unexpected”? This program shows the ups and downs of teens having babies. Typically, teens pregnancies have occurred for a few generations. They interview the soon to be grandma, who is in her early 40’s, and the great grandma, who is barely 60 years old. It’s an eye opener and honestly, maybe a must see TV for the young teen crowd. Note the gender reveals and baby showers the new mother’s expect.

From a biological standpoint this is very much the natural order of things. Beyond the many women who struggle to conceive after prioritizing education and career for most or all of their 20s, and many who are never successful because they waited too long and cannot afford fertility treatments, there is also the very real issue of modern women who have children later in life having less support from other generations who just don’t have the energy once grandchildren and great grandchildren come along.

It would be nice if we could reorganize our society so that women could have babies in their early 20s if they want to without losing all the opportunities that come from delayed motherhood. Iceland is one of the few countries that really enforces this approach through social policies to support mothers.

The current model is unsustainable, I know that.

pp here -- this is such a valid point and I would love to know more about Iceland's support system.

I had my child at 26 (planned) and it has worked out great for me but it was under unusual circumstances. My career has not suffered at all.

I am anecdotally seeing more of my peers have a baby in their late 20s with the advent of paid parental leave.

26 is too young. Sorry

Lol, 26 is not too young. Both of my gen x siblings were married and had their first kids before 26. They are also incredibly successful and wealthy. They had their shit together and did not waste their twenties (and frankly, their peak fertility years) toying around at bottomless brunches and social sports leagues.

My parents also were married at 23 and had their first kid at 25. Both professionals, including biglaw. Was it too young 40 years ago? The only thing that’s changed (besides reproductive medicine) is that for some reason, it’s now acceptable for adults to still be considered incapable children by their mid twenties.

I have no issue with people who choose to wait until they’re 35+ or don’t meet the right person until then, but don’t attack mid twenties as too young either.

-married in my mid twenties, first kid in late twenties.

So those who don’t have children in their twenties are eating at bottomless brunches and talking sports leagues. Okay, you! Sorry I didn’t have children in my twenties nor ate brunch and talked sports. I missed that email.

Um, pretty much. That’s what I was doing before I had my kids- working, living in the city, going out for nice meals, and traveling. That’s what my family and friends who don’t have kids were doing and are still doing. Some people are getting grad degrees in their twenties. And all of that is fine. My only point is that it’s fine to delay having kids (or don’t have them at all! Who cares?) but it’s also fine to have them in your twenties when you are also an adult. There is nothing “too young” about it other than our culture continuing to delay what’s considered to be adulthood. And people who are adamant that you have to wait until your mid to late thirties are as equally annoying and self righteous as the camp who insists on having them young.

So you’re saying nothing to young in regards to having babies. Move to Afghanistan, you’ll fit right in.

No, I said ones mid twenties is not too young- the PP i replied to originally said 26 was too young. A person becomes an adult somewhere between 18 and 21 in the US. So even if it’s not recommended to marry right then, saying you’re too young 5 years later, and should only have kids 12-17 years later is absurd!

[Anonymous]

Well this was actually a very nice and considerate thread until the "26 is too young" debate entirely derailed it...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More than 'why do young people have have kids they can't afford', I don't understand how OP doesn't understand it.

OP, here. I don't understand it because it doesn't make any sense to bring kids into your life that you don't have the time or resources to raise properly. Even if you are putting the burden on the grandparents as free babysitters or rent free living, it's still irresponsible. It hurts people, including and especially the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever seen the TLC show “Unexpected”? This program shows the ups and downs of teens having babies. Typically, teens pregnancies have occurred for a few generations. They interview the soon to be grandma, who is in her early 40’s, and the great grandma, who is barely 60 years old. It’s an eye opener and honestly, maybe a must see TV for the young teen crowd. Note the gender reveals and baby showers the new mother’s expect.

From a biological standpoint this is very much the natural order of things. Beyond the many women who struggle to conceive after prioritizing education and career for most or all of their 20s, and many who are never successful because they waited too long and cannot afford fertility treatments, there is also the very real issue of modern women who have children later in life having less support from other generations who just don’t have the energy once grandchildren and great grandchildren come along.

It would be nice if we could reorganize our society so that women could have babies in their early 20s if they want to without losing all the opportunities that come from delayed motherhood. Iceland is one of the few countries that really enforces this approach through social policies to support mothers.

The current model is unsustainable, I know that.

pp here -- this is such a valid point and I would love to know more about Iceland's support system.

I had my child at 26 (planned) and it has worked out great for me but it was under unusual circumstances. My career has not suffered at all.

I am anecdotally seeing more of my peers have a baby in their late 20s with the advent of paid parental leave.

26 is too young. Sorry

Disagree and I would not lump people planning pregnancies at this age in with teenagers having children. It is very possible to be well educated, married, and be established in a career that at the age of 26. An 18 y/o likely does not have these things and this will impact how they can manage raising a child.

To OPs question; there are many many factors involved and a lot of this has been touched on already. Poverty, lack of education, lack of opportunity, family or cultural norms etc etc etc. like another poster said, it’s unlikely that the 17 year-old who gets pregnant and chooses to have the baby and struggles to financially provide would have otherwise gone to a great school gotten a great job and had a child a decade later, instead. Completely different lifestyles and backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a couple of younger female relatives that had their first child in their teens, which was tough enough. But then they had more kids with other boyfriends in their early twenties. They struggle financially and socially with unstable relationships and stress. What is the logic among younger women, wanting so many kids so young?

They may have been wronged, but they don’t realize that their life is still their responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had mine at 26 too. And why not, I had already graduated from college and worked my way up to a director position.

So did I. I was married and in my third year of residency, doing mostly outpatient work.

My career isn’t amazing, but it seems fine.

Oh, as a third year resident, who raised baby?

DP. But I know plenty of ppl in medicine who had kids in their mid to late twenties. Even two doctor couples. You make it work, especially if one spouse has a more traditional or flexible work schedule. Or you get a nanny or use daycare, the same as a 38 year old middle-senior executive, or biglaw partner first-time parent would require. But maybe you’re anti-childcare and think a woman should work until 37, have her first kid, then quit? That’s very feminist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 'why do young people have have kids they can't afford', I don't understand how OP doesn't understand it.

OP, here. I don't understand it because it doesn't make any sense to bring kids into your life that you don't have the time or resources to raise properly. Even if you are putting the burden on the grandparents as free babysitters or rent free living, it's still irresponsible. It hurts people, including and especially the kids.

Because poor people and poor families value children, too. I’m not saying it’s necessarily a wise choice and coming from a more privileged position I can’t understand being in those shoes but it’s very common for people to have children they can’t afford. There are entire countries struggling with poverty on a societal level that have high birth rates. There is a biological desire to reproduce and it is a cultural norm in most societies to have children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Young men are horny and want to have sex without condoms.

Young women are usually from tough family situations, many a times sexually abused or groomed by family members, and they confuse the sexual hunger of a man as love. They get that attention from men who are just interested in having someone to fuxx.

So there you have it. By being pregnant they get some attention - good or bad.

Girls from loving and stable family, girls who are not abused and girls who have strong loving dads - go on to get an education and if they have sex, they have BC and they protect themselves.

Yes, I agree this is really all it is. No need to make it more complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 'why do young people have have kids they can't afford', I don't understand how OP doesn't understand it.

OP, here. I don't understand it because it doesn't make any sense to bring kids into your life that you don't have the time or resources to raise properly. Even if you are putting the burden on the grandparents as free babysitters or rent free living, it's still irresponsible. It hurts people, including and especially the kids.

Dp here, and while I don’t have answer, many of the people getting pregnant in their teens and very early twenties will not have acquired the proper education or career trajectory to ever have truly sufficient resources to raise kids. Many were raised in poverty and broken homes, and it’s all they know. In certain ways they have different ideas of what’s “sufficient” in terms of the resources and infrastructure to raise a child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Young men are horny and want to have sex without condoms.

Young women are usually from tough family situations, many a times sexually abused or groomed by family members, and they confuse the sexual hunger of a man as love. They get that attention from men who are just interested in having someone to fuxx.

So there you have it. By being pregnant they get some attention - good or bad.

Girls from loving and stable family, girls who are not abused and girls who have strong loving dads - go on to get an education and if they have sex, they have BC and they protect themselves.

Yup. Not complicated!

[Anonymous]

There is no logic. They don't consider the consequences of their actions because they weren't brought up to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 'why do young people have have kids they can't afford', I don't understand how OP doesn't understand it.

OP, here. I don't understand it because it doesn't make any sense to bring kids into your life that you don't have the time or resources to raise properly. Even if you are putting the burden on the grandparents as free babysitters or rent free living, it's still irresponsible. It hurts people, including and especially the kids.

Dp here, and while I don’t have answer, many of the people getting pregnant in their teens and very early twenties will not have acquired the proper education or career trajectory to ever have truly sufficient resources to raise kids. Many were raised in poverty and broken homes, and it’s all they know. In certain ways they have different ideas of what’s “sufficient” in terms of the resources and infrastructure to raise a child.

+1. Yeah I think if your coming from the perspective of “but what about, college, grad school, a sfh, and savings for summer camp???” You are not fully appreciating the lifestyle poor women with young children lead or the backgrounds they likely come from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had mine at 26 too. And why not, I had already graduated from college and worked my way up to a director position.

NP. College or not. Nope to babies at 26.

for you. For other people, it's fine.