40, although I would have just had one child then. I had my kids in early and mid-30s, which was perfect for my college, law school, lawyer, get married at 29 path.

40, which I did. “Living” aside, I know that my personality has changed as I’ve grown older. I’m more patient, calm, and more easily able to let things go. I would have been a frazzled mother earlier on.

40. I had my first and only living child at 41. Sure if I could’ve had him younger but life didn’t work out like that. I spent my 20s and 30s looking for my husband and worrying about student loans. It wasn’t all great fun and such but I didn’t meet my husband until 35. I wouldn’t trade him or my specific child for my wasted youth. These questions are ridiculous— life is life and not everyone has the same choices and options or starts on the same stair.

Anonymous wrote:OMG! 20 for sure! I had my oldest at 23. My youngest at 33. I’m 53 and they are all out of the house. I have two grand babies that I adore. No way would I want little kids at this stage. I’m loving the freedom having grown kids brings. I love being a young, healthy, active grandmother. To each his own. But for me, younger was perfect.

Interesting. I'm 53 and had my oldest when I was 34. He is now 19, commutes to/from college and works part time. My youngest is 17 and still in HS. They are really great kids and I love having them at home. I probably won't become a grandparent for at least another 10 years and I'm very o.k. with that because they are nowhere ready to support a family, yet.

Your youngest kid is around 20 years old. Do you think that he/she is ready to take care of a baby now?

I had my first at 32, and second at 35. I am currently 38.

If I have to pick, I would want to have baby at 20. I feel so old & tiring at 38 with 2 young kids. At my workplace, many women around my ages have kids in middle school/high school. I am so jealous of them now. I will be almost 60 when my kids are done with 4 year college. Of course, if I can pick, I would want to be done with baby at 25.

Anonymous wrote:20. We had our first and only at 45 and I can’t stop thinking about how much more time we could have had together.

I had my first in November (he’s 13 weeks now) at 44, and had a good cry in the hospital his first day of life realizing that I won’t have many years with him and I may not be around long (or at all) with my grandchildren.

40 without a doubt, did it, no regrets.

My 20’s and 30’s was about finishing my advance degree, meeting people, making lots of friends, having fun, traveling and seeing the world, living life.

I did everything I wanted to do while at the same time establishing my career and building up financial security.

Now life is good. No worry about finances at all. No worries about funding retirement, college, and vacations, etc...Established enough in my career to be able to control my work schedule and make family top priority. I really like what I do but I arrange my work schedule around my family and not the other way around.

In retrospect, would take the same path all over again.

I had my first at 26. I would say 20 with the caveat that I would want financial stability and a guarantee that I would finish school etc.

Neither! I am 40 and my body just could not handle the lack of sleep of the newborn time! Or the backaches of pregnancy. I hurt just getting out of bed every morning now.

I worked hard and played hard in my early 20s. Lots of travel. I would not want to give that up either.

I’m so thankful I had kids late 20s/early 30s. Waited for the right partner, was financially stable, and my body could keep up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not both?

Then, you have kids and grandkids the same age.

One of my grandmother’s sisters actually did this- she was pregnant the same time as one of her children- twice!

She had 12 children total though.

I was not emotionally prepared for children and 20, and that only became moderately better in the decades that followed. My only was born when I was 41, I’d love to have had HER as a younger woman, but more like 32-34. There was no corporate ladder or big travel for me, but man I had some fun.

40. If I had gotten pregnant at 20 I would have aborted in a hot second. Even at 25, I ran from guys who wanted to get serious. I lived my youth for me and wouldn’t have it any other way. I moved in with my husband at 29 and had my kids at 36 and 38, after years of traveling, partying, building my career... so much fun being DINKs with my husband.

I have friends who had kids in their early 20s. They have a lot more freedom now because their kids are grown while mine are little. But there’s always a trade off and I chose the right path for me.

Anonymous wrote:40

Seems like several of the people answering 20 had their kids close to that age (early 20s). They have no idea what they missed out on. Having a life as a young adult free from the responsibility of being a parent is an amazing and formative time of life that can never be replicated.

I guess it just depends on what you value.

40. I was a bit of a late bloomer in terms of “coming into my own” — my twenties were filled with a lot of self-doubt, and that messy process of figuring out who you are and your place in the world took longer for me, I think, than it does for a lot of others. I would have been a total wreck as a 20 year old mom! Even 25 would’ve been majorly pushing it.

I got married at 32 and had my one and only at 35. He’s twelve now. All is (and was!) basically well. I know I would’ve had a lot more energy if I’d have had him younger, but everything else — financially, emotionally, etc. — would have been way worse.

OMG! 20 for sure! I had my oldest at 23. My youngest at 33. I’m 53 and they are all out of the house. I have two grand babies that I adore. No way would I want little kids at this stage. I’m loving the freedom having grown kids brings. I love being a young, healthy, active grandmother. To each his own. But for me, younger was perfect.