Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Im tired at 42. Hope it works out for you but remember those sleepless nights! People forget.
I never understood women complaining about being exhausted with a baby. It’s a baby! I was never tired having two babies in mid to late 20’s. We did everything, went everywhere. We walked for miles, sledding, skiing, kids activities, meeting up with single friends and other new members.
We didn’t have the fancy equipment that the 40+ year old mothers had but our children grew with us from apartments to homeowners to cars that didn’t break down, things like that. I don’t think I would want older parents.
Did you breastfeed? Formula feeding allows you to sleep a good nights sleep while someone else looks after your baby. Breastfeeding moms get literally no rest for like a year. That’s really hard.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Im tired at 42. Hope it works out for you but remember those sleepless nights! People forget.
I never understood women complaining about being exhausted with a baby. It’s a baby! I was never tired having two babies in mid to late 20’s. We did everything, went everywhere. We walked for miles, sledding, skiing, kids activities, meeting up with single friends and other new members.
We didn’t have the fancy equipment that the 40+ year old mothers had but our children grew with us from apartments to homeowners to cars that didn’t break down, things like that. I don’t think I would want older parents.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This sounds like flying too close to the sun. You have two perfect kids - why risk having a complicated pregnancy or a kid with disabilities?
I’m not op but I want one more too. Imagine you had one less than you wanted. Would you just be able to just forget it and move on?
Sometimes you just have to. We wanted 4 kids and have 3. 4 wasn't possible (we tried) so we left it alone after our failed pregnancies. I'm now 44 and would never dream of it. OP has two healthy kids. She should count herself lucky
Anonymous wrote:Im tired at 42. Hope it works out for you but remember those sleepless nights! People forget.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This sounds like flying too close to the sun. You have two perfect kids - why risk having a complicated pregnancy or a kid with disabilities?
I’m not op but I want one more too. Imagine you had one less than you wanted. Would you just be able to just forget it and move on?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This sounds like flying too close to the sun. You have two perfect kids - why risk having a complicated pregnancy or a kid with disabilities?
I’m not op but I want one more too. Imagine you had one less than you wanted. Would you just be able to just forget it and move on?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's just so unbelievably arrogant and myopic. A third child at 45 is just a truly dick move to your kids.
I'm certainly not a traditionalist, but the trend of waiting to have children until you are in your 40s is not good. And yes, it is a trend. Reinforced by some kind of weirdly specific competitive streak (There is a running competition in the PAW - princeton alumni weekly - for "oldest mom" in the class notes section) in women and laziness in men.
for one, I'm worried that the genetic material is just subpar. All these ancient eggs and sperm, they just aren't the best. Getting around this issue with PURCHASED generic material - eggs, sperm or womb - is not the solution, it's a second problem.
Then of course....everyone "thinks" they are impervious to aging, illness, dementia, cancer, bad luck - but you aren't. Even something as simple as a bad back or bum knees. Those things are annoying when you have teens or college age kids, but will be a game changer if you have a five year old. Early onset dementia is more common than you'd like to think. And again, a problem when you are retired, but a life-altering complication if you have a teenager at home.
In the end, the real losers in this "trend" are the kids.
all of this.
+1000
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's just so unbelievably arrogant and myopic. A third child at 45 is just a truly dick move to your kids.
I'm certainly not a traditionalist, but the trend of waiting to have children until you are in your 40s is not good. And yes, it is a trend. Reinforced by some kind of weirdly specific competitive streak (There is a running competition in the PAW - princeton alumni weekly - for "oldest mom" in the class notes section) in women and laziness in men.
for one, I'm worried that the genetic material is just subpar. All these ancient eggs and sperm, they just aren't the best. Getting around this issue with PURCHASED generic material - eggs, sperm or womb - is not the solution, it's a second problem.
Then of course....everyone "thinks" they are impervious to aging, illness, dementia, cancer, bad luck - but you aren't. Even something as simple as a bad back or bum knees. Those things are annoying when you have teens or college age kids, but will be a game changer if you have a five year old. Early onset dementia is more common than you'd like to think. And again, a problem when you are retired, but a life-altering complication if you have a teenager at home.
In the end, the real losers in this "trend" are the kids.
all of this.