Me at 20? Homeless and couch surfing or living in shelters whenever the dorms were closed. During the school year I went to university on loans and scholarship, but that barely covered room and board, let alone books, clothes, or "extras," like a place to live during summertime or winter break. There were good reasons I didn't have a kid then.

It took a very long time to get to the place where my life was stable enough to consider children and even longer than that before I met DH. As a result, we were almost 40 when we married and started TTC. Of course, we struggled with infertility. And yes, I do mourn the fact that we may not live to see a lot of our kids' major milestones (marriage, kids, etc.). My parents both died very young and it saddens me to know my kids may follow in my footsteps in that respect. So, at the other end of the spectrum, there are challenges too.

On the whole, unless I got to relive my life as a rich kid, I'd still rather be 40 and able to provide for my kids financially - even with the significant downsides of being an older parent - than to have brought kids into the life I had at 20.

Had my first at 30 and 2nd one at 36. Would not have been ready at 20, and had no more energy left at 40. So glad DC went to prk4.

I think 20 so I could get it over with, and have more free time in my 40’s. But I would be a better parent at 40.

20, of course. Biologically, this is when mother and baby have healthier short-term and long-term outcomes.

I had my kids at 25 (while in grad school) and 30. Shortly after that I developed two chronic health issues that impact my fertility and ability to bring a baby to term and recover. Thank goodness I didn’t wait to have kids!

I had mine at 30, 32 and 40. 40 if I had to choose, but neither 20 nor 40 is ideal.

I had my first at 39 3/4 It’s fine. I think I would have had more energy at 20, but I also have a lot more resources and am way more chill.

20.

I had my first baby at 24. Then 26, 29 (two weeks after turning 29) and 30 (2 weeks before turning 31.)

I'm so glad I was a "younger" (by current DC standards) mom.

Now I'm in my mid 40's and some of my kids are adults, and the ones that aren't are still semi-independent. In 5 years they will all be adults.
I can't imagine being my age with a kid in pre-school (or younger!) right now.

If those are the only options, 40. I’d rather split the difference with 30.

Anonymous wrote:Why not both?

Then, you have kids and grandkids the same age.

Why not both?

Another young idiot vs. old hag thread?

40 hands down. I had my first at 34 and my second at 36.

Had my 1st baby at 30. Currently 35. I’d choose 40.

40. My husband actually did that and had his first at 20, next after 40 and he much preferred later as he had more money and only working one job. He had far more time but less energy so its a trade off.

Spinoff: Would you rather have a baby at age 20 or at 40?

Ill answer first. I had my first at 26. I envy women that fully lived and then had kids, so Ill admit Im biased.

If I had to choose between 20 and 40, Id choose 40. Honestly, if I had to choose between 16 and 48, and could be guaranteed a healthy baby, Id choose.. 48 ....

What would you choose?