I agree with you, OP. My husband's father always told him not to have kids before 35, and my husband listened. I wasn't in a huge hurry either - we traveled, partied, focused on ourselves and enjoyed a DINK life before having our kids at 36 and 38. Honestly we wish we would've started at least 5 years earlier. We have wonderful kids but we are exhausted and still have many years of dealing with little ones ahead of us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]I hope you support paid family leave and universal affordable childcare, and candidates that push for those policies.[/b]

I do, but in the past, everyone started having kids in their early 20's and none of these things existed.

But then a family could live on one salary and women weren't suppose to have careers outside their homes. We can't live on one salary anymore.

You could, you just don’t want to.

Sure, we could. Buy an inexpensive house in a neighborhood with poorly rated schools, pinch pennies, have all the basic needs met (food, shelter) but not be able to save for things like trips and college. And then our kids would be at a disadvantage when trying to find their way in this increasingly competitive society. Everyone wants to give their family the best possible start in life and for most, it's not possible on one income.

Anonymous wrote:It seems like there has always been a progression based on the technology/invention/economics - in colonial times people had kids at like, what, 16 yrs old, then with the introduction of "modern" conveniences it was more like 18 yrs iat the turn of the century, and then by the 20th it was in the early 20s.
Here we are into the 21st century and people are having their first kids at 40 yrs old.

That's not true. In 1890, the average age of a first marriage for men was 26 years, and the average age of marriage for women was 22 years. That wasn't far off from what it was in colonial America. People assume that teens were routinely having babies in the past, but men had to be able to support a wife before they could marry. Probably more men and women never married at all because they couldn't afford to. Also, effective birth control wasn't widely available, so women had little control over how early and how many kids they had. And since life expectancy was shorter, people didn't necessarily know their grandparents for any longer.

Now, a high school degree is the bare minimum to be able to get a job, and college or professional training is almost always required to get a job that pays decently. When people need more education, they delay marriage. When raising kids is more expensive (people tend to frown on making your kids work, and child labor is mostly prohibited), people delay having kids and have fewer of them.

If people really cared about encouraging couples to have children, they'd support a stronger safety net, affordable quality child care, universal health care, free college, etc. Mostly, the people lamenting that women aren't having enough babies don't support those things. And listen to anyone crying about how they shouldn't have to pay for someone else's choice to have kids, or bitching about welfare for teen mothers. You want to treat it like a purely individual choice that you are responsible for, but then the rational choice is to have fewer children later. Want different outcomes? Create different incentives.

I think this is one of the consequences of having widely available birth control and legal abortion. There is no societal obligation to help families with young children. If you chose to conceive this child, and you chose not to have an abortion, then it is completely up to you to be able to care for that child on your own.
Before these things were widely available, children were just a part of life rather than a lifestyle choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because you have young kids now and feel you are old and busted, you want all of society to avoid your mistake? There is something seriously wrong with your thinking. I definitely don’t want my DD having kids until she gets to enjoy her own life first.

Yeah but if everyone does this, then no one gets to know their grandkids and vice versa. And lots of adults in their 40s-50's end up losing their parents - my own parents were in their 60's when their parents started dying. You have to wonder whether it's worth the trade off. Isn't it really family and relationships that life is all about?

My life is not about my relationship with my grandparents.

Same. My life is about ME and my choices. Not what "society" encourages. I feel for people that think they have to follow these hidden rules.

Well, this kind of life saves you from painful losses that people who make their lives about others (spouse, kids) experience. I’ll give her that one.

The statistics for the longevity of early marriages are not good. I saw lots of classmates and family members marry young, have kids young, divorce and struggle to have the careers that they hoped for. Having kids outside of marriage is no better. Some people make it work, and that’s great, but not the norm.

As a woman, I chose to take my chances with future fertility in exchange for a solid, mature marriage/child raising partnership and and well established careers with good, reliable incomes.

When I think about what my life would be like if I had kids early I feel like I dodged a bullet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My father passed away at 48 due to cancer and I am so thankful he and my mother had us early. If I were to pass away at 48 my children would be so young.

I hope you support healthy, less-processed school lunches and stronger regulations on the chemicals and food additives that are banned everywhere else.

Exactly. It will never happen in this country though - it’s all about companies making as much profit as possible and we’re the victims. If we just stop eating that stuff though change will happen and it IS happening. The head of Kraft honestly still thinks that processed cheese slices are a ‘special food’ and is confused as to why people aren’t buying it much anymore.

Keep it up.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/kraft-and-stampscom-post-big-losses-while-zillow-jumps/2019/02/22/f6f79ece-36eb-11e9-8375-e3dcf6b68558_story.html

Sorry - posted the wrong article

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/2019/02/22/krafts-iconic-american-cheese-is-losing-ground-todays-america/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because you have young kids now and feel you are old and busted, you want all of society to avoid your mistake? There is something seriously wrong with your thinking. I definitely don’t want my DD having kids until she gets to enjoy her own life first.

Yeah but if everyone does this, then no one gets to know their grandkids and vice versa. And lots of adults in their 40s-50's end up losing their parents - my own parents were in their 60's when their parents started dying. You have to wonder whether it's worth the trade off. Isn't it really family and relationships that life is all about?

My life is not about my relationship with my grandparents.

Same. My life is about ME and my choices. Not what "society" encourages. I feel for people that think they have to follow these hidden rules.

You seem confused, your attitude is exactly what society is encouraging.

You seem ignorant. The point is who cares what society is encouraging. You do you.

OP, why do you assume everyone is married by 22 but then just chooses to goof off for the next 10 years and not have kids? Are you so ignornant to not understand that most people in metropolitan areas do not get married until they are late 20s/30s? Why do you think women are the only ones in control of when they get married?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
As a biologist, I wish more people understood that fertility peaks in your early 20s. Emphasis on early.

However, that is too young for many people to have a stable source of income without depending on a spouse, parents or the government. We should not encourage people to have kids they cannot support.

It's a case of biology vs. economics.

Out parents generation depended on each other and they did it with less. They didn't have to spend money on the latest everything, or the expensive craft beer, etc. They took camping trips and stayed in motels.

Different priorities.

Lord this trope gets old.

How much, pray tell, did they pay for college and healthcare?

Exactly. And housing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the past, none of these things existed because they women generally stayed home or took lesser-paying/lower hours/more flexible jobs than their male counterparts. They are absolutely essential if women want equal pay and equal employment opportunities.

I think I'd rather know my grandkids.

Me too.

To each his own - but I think that sometimes it’s a case of not realizing until it’s too late.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
As a biologist, I wish more people understood that fertility peaks in your early 20s. Emphasis on early.

However, that is too young for many people to have a stable source of income without depending on a spouse, parents or the government. We should not encourage people to have kids they cannot support.

It's a case of biology vs. economics.

Out parents generation depended on each other and they did it with less. They didn't have to spend money on the latest everything, or the expensive craft beer, etc. They took camping trips and stayed in motels.

Different priorities.

Lord this trope gets old.

How much, pray tell, did they pay for college and healthcare?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]I hope you support paid family leave and universal affordable childcare, and candidates that push for those policies.[/b]

I do, but in the past, everyone started having kids in their early 20's and none of these things existed.

But then a family could live on one salary and women weren't suppose to have careers outside their homes. We can't live on one salary anymore.

You could, you just don’t want to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My father passed away at 48 due to cancer and I am so thankful he and my mother had us early. If I were to pass away at 48 my children would be so young.

I hope you support healthy, less-processed school lunches and stronger regulations on the chemicals and food additives that are banned everywhere else.

Exactly. It will never happen in this country though - it’s all about companies making as much profit as possible and we’re the victims. If we just stop eating that stuff though change will happen and it IS happening. The head of Kraft honestly still thinks that processed cheese slices are a ‘special food’ and is confused as to why people aren’t buying it much anymore.

Keep it up.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/kraft-and-stampscom-post-big-losses-while-zillow-jumps/2019/02/22/f6f79ece-36eb-11e9-8375-e3dcf6b68558_story.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope you support paid family leave and universal affordable childcare, and candidates that push for those policies.

This. We make childbearing very difficult on working women. If we’re not careful we’ll end up like Japan, where the birthdate isn’t enough to replace the aging population.

A big part of Japan's problem is that they are very anti-immigration. The US has a problem with an aging population but it's not as bad as Japan because immigrants have more children and they bring in younger workers. This is why we need immigration in this country.