Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my surprise twins at 43. I never wanted kids, but when I found out I was pregnant I thought "what the h*ll. " I don't find the age to be old in the DC region. I felt great and I continued to swim on my masters swim team until 3 days before I delivered.

My 70-something parents rejoiced, joined a gym and became 10 years younger.

Kids are now 12 and we are such calm parents and grandparents. Better at this age!

Now imagine if OP goes for a third and gets surprise twins.

Or special needs.

^This. Raising neurotypical kids is hard enough. If you have two heathy children already and are in your 40s, don't tempt fate.

holy shit y'all. your ableism is really awful. There are valid reasons to consider not having kids later but "omg they might be disabled" is really awful.
ANY time you get pregnant you have to know there's a possibility of a child w/ a disability.

Signed, a parent who gave birth at 28 to a kid with disabilities.

Well yes, obviously. Surely you’re familiar with statistics, though?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmation bias. People always believe the choice they made was the right one.

OP isn't going to get any valuable info here. People are just saying the choice they made was correct, whatever it was.

This is almost right. What I think is more accurate is that these 40+ mothers are being defensive because they know in their heart of hearts that theirs was a selfish decision. Having babies after 40 is ridiculous.

Unfortunately it’s even more selfish to have one child, and do it on your 40s. Not fair to that child

Why is 40 the age where it’s ridiculous though? Is 39 fine? 38? I don’t see how one or two years would make a difference. And, no, I’m not being defensive; I had my 3rd and last at 32 I just am genuinely trying to understand the logic here

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my surprise twins at 43. I never wanted kids, but when I found out I was pregnant I thought "what the h*ll. " I don't find the age to be old in the DC region. I felt great and I continued to swim on my masters swim team until 3 days before I delivered.

My 70-something parents rejoiced, joined a gym and became 10 years younger.

Kids are now 12 and we are such calm parents and grandparents. Better at this age!

Now imagine if OP goes for a third and gets surprise twins.

Or special needs.

^This. Raising neurotypical kids is hard enough. If you have two heathy children already and are in your 40s, don't tempt fate.

holy shit y'all. your ableism is really awful. There are valid reasons to consider not having kids later but "omg they might be disabled" is really awful.
ANY time you get pregnant you have to know there's a possibility of a child w/ a disability.

Signed, a parent who gave birth at 28 to a kid with disabilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my surprise twins at 43. I never wanted kids, but when I found out I was pregnant I thought "what the h*ll. " I don't find the age to be old in the DC region. I felt great and I continued to swim on my masters swim team until 3 days before I delivered.

My 70-something parents rejoiced, joined a gym and became 10 years younger.

Kids are now 12 and we are such calm parents and grandparents. Better at this age!

Now imagine if OP goes for a third and gets surprise twins.

Or special needs.

^This. Raising neurotypical kids is hard enough. If you have two heathy children already and are in your 40s, don't tempt fate.

holy shit y'all. your ableism is really awful. There are valid reasons to consider not having kids later but "omg they might be disabled" is really awful.
ANY time you get pregnant you have to know there's a possibility of a child w/ a disability.

Signed, a parent who gave birth at 28 to a kid with disabilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my surprise twins at 43. I never wanted kids, but when I found out I was pregnant I thought "what the h*ll. " I don't find the age to be old in the DC region. I felt great and I continued to swim on my masters swim team until 3 days before I delivered.

My 70-something parents rejoiced, joined a gym and became 10 years younger.

Kids are now 12 and we are such calm parents and grandparents. Better at this age!

Now imagine if OP goes for a third and gets surprise twins.

Or special needs.

^This. Raising neurotypical kids is hard enough. If you have two heathy children already and are in your 40s, don't tempt fate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not have a kid in my 40s. Had my youngest at 35 and even that is kinda pushing it IMO. My husband and I know multiple people our age, who are still in their prime and who’s kids are off to college. A few even are already grandparents. And my youngest is just starting elementary. It is what it is, but if given the choice I would of had them younger.

You are 40-42 and know multiple people your age who are already grandparents? I know of one that age...she had her daughter our senior year of high school. I wouldn't exactly make light of teen pregnancy.

Yeah PP are we missing something here? Early 40s with grandkids? I would say this is not typical, or viewed favorably, by families that value attending college and attaining some measure of financial and career stability prior to having kids. And no disrespect to teen moms, it’s a huge amount of work, but it’s not something I’d wish on my kids as it’s a tough road.

I had my first child at 25. She was born three months after I finished my Master's degree. We took her to freshman year of college last week. I'm 43. How was I a teenage mother? Second kid is a junior in high school.

Wait, so are you a grandparent?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think having a kid at 43 is the problem - its what happens later. My husbands parents had him when they were 43 and 45. We are now 38 and doing the whole sandwich generation thing, years earlier than our friends. His dad is now 83 and has dementia and is in declining health. DH and I both work full time, leave 4 hours away from his dad and we have 3 young kids. It is horrible. Also DH lost his mother when he was 25, which has done a number on him both emotionally and mentally.

This. 60s is when cancers and other serious ailments start to pop up, even is formerly very heath people. And 70s-80sis even more dicey as to how your healthy will be.

My friends that have parents their 70s-80s really struggle to balance the needs of young children/elementary and schools yrs with old parents that need help managing Drs appointments, various medical conditions, nursing homes, and just big parts of life they can no longer handle independently. It is hard

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

Anonymous wrote:I don't think having a kid at 43 is the problem - its what happens later. My husbands parents had him when they were 43 and 45. We are now 38 and doing the whole sandwich generation thing, years earlier than our friends. His dad is now 83 and has dementia and is in declining health. DH and I both work full time, leave 4 hours away from his dad and we have 3 young kids. It is horrible. Also DH lost his mother when he was 25, which has done a number on him both emotionally and mentally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not have a kid in my 40s. Had my youngest at 35 and even that is kinda pushing it IMO. My husband and I know multiple people our age, who are still in their prime and who’s kids are off to college. A few even are already grandparents. And my youngest is just starting elementary. It is what it is, but if given the choice I would of had them younger.

You are 40-42 and know multiple people your age who are already grandparents? I know of one that age...she had her daughter our senior year of high school. I wouldn't exactly make light of teen pregnancy.

Yeah PP are we missing something here? Early 40s with grandkids? I would say this is not typical, or viewed favorably, by families that value attending college and attaining some measure of financial and career stability prior to having kids. And no disrespect to teen moms, it’s a huge amount of work, but it’s not something I’d wish on my kids as it’s a tough road.

I had my first child at 25. She was born three months after I finished my Master's degree. We took her to freshman year of college last week. I'm 43. How was I a teenage mother? Second kid is a junior in high school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not have a kid in my 40s. Had my youngest at 35 and even that is kinda pushing it IMO. My husband and I know multiple people our age, who are still in their prime and who’s kids are off to college. A few even are already grandparents. And my youngest is just starting elementary. It is what it is, but if given the choice I would of had them younger.

You are 40-42 and know multiple people your age who are already grandparents? I know of one that age...she had her daughter our senior year of high school. I wouldn't exactly make light of teen pregnancy.

Yeah PP are we missing something here? Early 40s with grandkids? I would say this is not typical, or viewed favorably, by families that value attending college and attaining some measure of financial and career stability prior to having kids. And no disrespect to teen moms, it’s a huge amount of work, but it’s not something I’d wish on my kids as it’s a tough road.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmation bias. People always believe the choice they made was the right one.

OP isn't going to get any valuable info here. People are just saying the choice they made was correct, whatever it was.

This is almost right. What I think is more accurate is that these 40+ mothers are being defensive because they know in their heart of hearts that theirs was a selfish decision. Having babies after 40 is ridiculous.

Unfortunately it’s even more selfish to have one child, and do it on your 40s. Not fair to that child

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not have a kid in my 40s. Had my youngest at 35 and even that is kinda pushing it IMO. My husband and I know multiple people our age, who are still in their prime and who’s kids are off to college. A few even are already grandparents. And my youngest is just starting elementary. It is what it is, but if given the choice I would of had them younger.

You are 40-42 and know multiple people your age who are already grandparents? I know of one that age...she had her daughter our senior year of high school. I wouldn't exactly make light of teen pregnancy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmation bias. People always believe the choice they made was the right one.

OP isn't going to get any valuable info here. People are just saying the choice they made was correct, whatever it was.

This is almost right. What I think is more accurate is that these 40+ mothers are being defensive because they know in their heart of hearts that theirs was a selfish decision. Having babies after 40 is ridiculous.