Anonymous
04/15/2025 17:54
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am just realizing how selfish it is to your kids to wait to have much older parents. DH's dad is 86 and we are 41. He is in declining health and needs a ton of care. He is not financially well off so it is all falling on us/SIL to take care of him. Right now he is in the hospital. This is the second hospital visit this year that has been for a week or more. So SIL and DH need to split time and drive and take care of him. We have 3 young kids (under the age of 10), both work full time and have busy lives.
When my parents are the same age as FIL I will be in my 60s. No kids at home and more easily able to take care of them as they age. The sandwich between elderly parents and young kids is just so hard and unfair to the kids who have to deal with the burden.
I am 60 yr old yoga instructor with breast cancer. My parents are looking after me. Shit happens.
Exactly. People like op think if you follow a prescribed path you can control your outcomes. But that’s not how it works.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 17:49
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My MIL had DH (her youngest) in 1965 when she was 42. My grandmother had her youngest (my uncle) in 1957 when she was 41. Having children late in life is not a new phenomenon.
Pre birth control availability most of my ancestors had children well into their 40s.
In societies without birth control, the average maternal age at the birth of the last child is 41. So half of women who had children, had their last child at 41 or older.
LAST CHILD
Right. That’s what I said. Congrats on your ability to read.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 17:29
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:I am just realizing how selfish it is to your kids to wait to have much older parents. DH's dad is 86 and we are 41. He is in declining health and needs a ton of care. He is not financially well off so it is all falling on us/SIL to take care of him. Right now he is in the hospital. This is the second hospital visit this year that has been for a week or more. So SIL and DH need to split time and drive and take care of him. We have 3 young kids (under the age of 10), both work full time and have busy lives.
When my parents are the same age as FIL I will be in my 60s. No kids at home and more easily able to take care of them as they age. The sandwich between elderly parents and young kids is just so hard and unfair to the kids who have to deal with the burden.
I am 60 yr old yoga instructor with breast cancer. My parents are looking after me. Shit happens.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 17:26
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am just realizing how selfish it is to your kids to wait to have much older parents. DH's dad is 86 and we are 41. He is in declining health and needs a ton of care. He is not financially well off so it is all falling on us/SIL to take care of him. Right now he is in the hospital. This is the second hospital visit this year that has been for a week or more. So SIL and DH need to split time and drive and take care of him. We have 3 young kids (under the age of 10), both work full time and have busy lives.
When my parents are the same age as FIL I will be in my 60s. No kids at home and more easily able to take care of them as they age. The sandwich between elderly parents and young kids is just so hard and unfair to the kids who have to deal with the burden.
Lesson here is to not marry someone with such old parents. Op, you should have chosen differently.
This.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 15:49
Subject: Re:Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
What an incredibly myopic view of the world. Are you this narrow-minded regarding all things or just this one?
Anonymous
04/15/2025 14:01
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My MIL had DH (her youngest) in 1965 when she was 42. My grandmother had her youngest (my uncle) in 1957 when she was 41. Having children late in life is not a new phenomenon.
Pre birth control availability most of my ancestors had children well into their 40s.
In societies without birth control, the average maternal age at the birth of the last child is 41. So half of women who had children, had their last child at 41 or older.
LAST CHILD
Anonymous
04/15/2025 14:00
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's ARROGANT to intentionally wait until you are 40 plus to have kids.
1. Your assumption that you will buck the fertility odds and actually be able to get pregnant.
2. That you yourself will remain healthy, against increasing odds of cancer, heart disease, etc.
3. And if you were hoping that your parents or ILs would be a supportive presence for your new family, there is a much higher chance those people will need you more than help you at this stage of their lives.
It's not selfish, it's arrogant to assume that YOU will be the minority that bucks the odds in all three categories.
But hey, if it works out for you, awesome.
Very few people intentionally wait until their 40s to have children.
I intentionally waited. You might call it arrogant, but then is a 15 or 30-year mortgage arrogant? Is saving for retirement arrogant? I mean, it's just called life planning. Some would take it as a sign of being smart. There's been a lot of studies about the links between delayed gratification and intelligence.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 14:00
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:My grandmother had my dad when she was 43 and lived to be in her 90s. Women have had kids in their 40s for centuries.
If you did, great, but a LOT OF people will not be able to and it's harmful to present this info without a big asterisk *results are not normal, odds of conceiving naturally, and staying pregnant, past 40 for first child is very low.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 13:53
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:It's ARROGANT to intentionally wait until you are 40 plus to have kids.
1. Your assumption that you will buck the fertility odds and actually be able to get pregnant.
2. That you yourself will remain healthy, against increasing odds of cancer, heart disease, etc.
3. And if you were hoping that your parents or ILs would be a supportive presence for your new family, there is a much higher chance those people will need you more than help you at this stage of their lives.
It's not selfish, it's arrogant to assume that YOU will be the minority that bucks the odds in all three categories.
But hey, if it works out for you, awesome.
Very few people intentionally wait until their 40s to have children.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 13:53
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My MIL had DH (her youngest) in 1965 when she was 42. My grandmother had her youngest (my uncle) in 1957 when she was 41. Having children late in life is not a new phenomenon.
Pre birth control availability most of my ancestors had children well into their 40s.
In societies without birth control, the average maternal age at the birth of the last child is 41. So half of women who had children, had their last child at 41 or older.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 13:49
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
It's ARROGANT to intentionally wait until you are 40 plus to have kids.
1. Your assumption that you will buck the fertility odds and actually be able to get pregnant.
2. That you yourself will remain healthy, against increasing odds of cancer, heart disease, etc.
3. And if you were hoping that your parents or ILs would be a supportive presence for your new family, there is a much higher chance those people will need you more than help you at this stage of their lives.
It's not selfish, it's arrogant to assume that YOU will be the minority that bucks the odds in all three categories.
But hey, if it works out for you, awesome.
1. Your assumption that you will buck the fertility odds and actually be able to get pregnant.
2. That you yourself will remain healthy, against increasing odds of cancer, heart disease, etc.
3. And if you were hoping that your parents or ILs would be a supportive presence for your new family, there is a much higher chance those people will need you more than help you at this stage of their lives.
It's not selfish, it's arrogant to assume that YOU will be the minority that bucks the odds in all three categories.
But hey, if it works out for you, awesome.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 12:40
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am just realizing how selfish it is to your kids to wait to have much older parents. DH's dad is 86 and we are 41. He is in declining health and needs a ton of care. He is not financially well off so it is all falling on us/SIL to take care of him. Right now he is in the hospital. This is the second hospital visit this year that has been for a week or more. So SIL and DH need to split time and drive and take care of him. We have 3 young kids (under the age of 10), both work full time and have busy lives.
When my parents are the same age as FIL I will be in my 60s. No kids at home and more easily able to take care of them as they age. The sandwich between elderly parents and young kids is just so hard and unfair to the kids who have to deal with the burden.
Lesson here is to not marry someone with such old parents. Op, you should have chosen differently.
Absolutely. OP, this is on you for your poor life choices. You didn't vet your DH properly; if you had, you'd have gotten one who would have been 70 when your child was 10. Blame yourself.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 12:36
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
My mother in law had my husband in her 20s and died of cancer in her 60s. Her parents had her when they were close to 40 and lived into their 90s.
Bad things happening isn’t a personal attack on you. If your father in law had kids earlier, your husband wouldn’t exist.
I’m sorry you’re having a hard time.
Bad things happening isn’t a personal attack on you. If your father in law had kids earlier, your husband wouldn’t exist.
I’m sorry you’re having a hard time.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 12:17
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:My MIL had DH (her youngest) in 1965 when she was 42. My grandmother had her youngest (my uncle) in 1957 when she was 41. Having children late in life is not a new phenomenon.
Pre birth control availability most of my ancestors had children well into their 40s.
Anonymous
04/15/2025 11:54
Subject: Its selfish to have kids in your 40s and beyond
Anonymous wrote:I feel the general IQ of DCUM has plummeted recently. Was it always this full of idiots?
+1