Anonymous wrote:No, I don't believe in buying human beings.

Its their bio baby

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I did it. We adopted a baby when I was 48 (turning 49 later that year) and he had just turned 51. We are in good shape w/o any health issues. We excercise regularly and eat a fairly healthy diet.

We are able to do everything younger parents do with their kids. We don’t feel any different than the parents of our son’s kids.

We tried for a long time to have kids and love being parents. We got lucky with out son.

Finally! 3 pages before an answer from someone who actually has any experience with the situation!

One of my mom friends did this too, and they are wonderful parents and their life is awesome! They did decide they were done after one. I met the family through my kid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.

If you seriously think you have the same energy level for a child at 46 that you had at 29 then you’re delusional.

not delusional. I was working like crazy, depressed, weak and skinny as a rail at 29. I'm much healthier physically and emotionally now than I was then.

The fallacy of the sample of 1. Of course, a sick 29 year old might have more energy than a very healthy 46 year old. But overwhelmingly a 29 year old woman is going to be healthier and have more energy than a 46 year old.

But every single person trying to make this decision knows a lot more about their own health and energy than you do. Nobody makes this decision without knowing those things.

What’s getting left out to me here is that the younger partner is 43. Tons of people have kids at 43. It’s really not a big deal.

Yeah but you said "having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents." It's unequivocally untrue that having children at 46 is as easy as having them at 29. Just ask people who have had them at 29 and then again at 46. Your body ages and things are harder as you age. It might be "fine" because you really want children and you'll make it happen, but please stop this nonsense that 40 and 50 year olds are just as spry as 20 year year olds. I've been all of those ages. It's not the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good chance your child will have an extra difficult time when the sandwich generation of life hits. They will likely have very young children at home when you are needing extra time and care.

We have friends of the family who wanted kids, but decided not to as they were already struggling to manage work, home upkeep and their elderly parents who had them late in life. They had very little time for a social life and often had to cancel plans to aid parents with medical issues.

Agree with all this but assume you have $$ for tons of care and you do not have elderly parents to worry about or home care or job stress. Again, this is a couple with a great deal of wealth across multiple generations and they will not be rushing to help their parents with care (on the wife’s side, one is passed and one is very healthy but also has tons of money for the best end of life care)

If the response was from the OP, then please stop thinking about this in terms of you and your wants and wishes. Please start thinking of this in how it may impact your potential child. Not just when they are an infant, but as they become an adult as well.

Perhaps reading comp is not your strong suit. It’s not me. I’m asking about people I know who are planning this

So you’re just posting this bc you…kind of disapprove, and want to crowdsource and see if others do too? So weird

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.

If you seriously think you have the same energy level for a child at 46 that you had at 29 then you’re delusional.

not delusional. I was working like crazy, depressed, weak and skinny as a rail at 29. I'm much healthier physically and emotionally now than I was then.

The fallacy of the sample of 1. Of course, a sick 29 year old might have more energy than a very healthy 46 year old. But overwhelmingly a 29 year old woman is going to be healthier and have more energy than a 46 year old.

But every single person trying to make this decision knows a lot more about their own health and energy than you do. Nobody makes this decision without knowing those things.

What’s getting left out to me here is that the younger partner is 43. Tons of people have kids at 43. It’s really not a big deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.

If you seriously think you have the same energy level for a child at 46 that you had at 29 then you’re delusional.

not delusional. I was working like crazy, depressed, weak and skinny as a rail at 29. I'm much healthier physically and emotionally now than I was then.

The fallacy of the sample of 1. Of course, a sick 29 year old might have more energy than a very healthy 46 year old. But overwhelmingly a 29 year old woman is going to be healthier and have more energy than a 46 year old.

The question is not energy when you’re 46, but when you’re 56 with a 10 year old and 63 with a 17 year old. Some people do have that kind of energy and others don’t.
And having a baby at 50? No, you’re going to be 75 and possibly needing assisted living when the kid is trying to start their career/ get married.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.

If you seriously think you have the same energy level for a child at 46 that you had at 29 then you’re delusional.

not delusional. I was working like crazy, depressed, weak and skinny as a rail at 29. I'm much healthier physically and emotionally now than I was then.

The fallacy of the sample of 1. Of course, a sick 29 year old might have more energy than a very healthy 46 year old. But overwhelmingly a 29 year old woman is going to be healthier and have more energy than a 46 year old.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.

If you seriously think you have the same energy level for a child at 46 that you had at 29 then you’re delusional.

Money can go a long way to alleviate the more challenging parts of child-rearing. Hire someone to cook and clean so your time with your child is quality. Have a regular nanny and a night nanny for as long as needed. I have a significant age gap between mine and have more money now, and it's been much easier the second time around than it was with my first when I was in my twenties, working like a dog and financially insecure.

Anonymous wrote:Partner is 43.

Assume plenty of money on both sides to pay for care- both for the child and for adults. Big ideal obviously but there is no shortage of money

Then yes! My biggest concern would be who would care for the child if something happened to me. With a 43-year-old partner, the risk is lessened. I would want a friend or family member willing to step up if something happens to both of you. Of course, let them know they'd be financially covered if they become your child's guardian.

I absolutely would not; however, it is not my job to judge other people’s life choices.

Anonymous wrote:Yes! If I had no kids yet, I would do it, asap.

Same

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.

If you seriously think you have the same energy level for a child at 46 that you had at 29 then you’re delusional.

not delusional. I was working like crazy, depressed, weak and skinny as a rail at 29. I'm much healthier physically and emotionally now than I was then.

Anonymous wrote:I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.

If you seriously think you have the same energy level for a child at 46 that you had at 29 then you’re delusional.

No, I don't believe in buying human beings.

I had my only at 46. Its not any more tiring now then it would have been 15 years ago. having kids is a challenge no matter the age of the parents.