What is the best age for women to have babies?

bec says:

08:29am | 04/03/10

Yes, the 80-hour weeks I put into university study and full-time work are a *blast*. It’s almost as much sexy, sassy fun as injecting Cosmopolitans into your eyeballs and giving yourself papercuts with a Cleo magazine.

Womens libber from waaay back just not a feminist says:

10:41am | 04/03/10

Bec.
Who forced you to put 80 hours a week into full-time work and university studies?

All the “sacrifices” you have made are self inflicted and aimed at materialism. It ain’t martyrdom when the “sacrifices” are self inflicted and aimed entirely at self promotion and the good life.

I can’t follow your logic.

bec says:

11:18am | 04/03/10

Hi, women’s libber. Nice name, by the way: it’s not in the slightest bit disingenuous and insincere.

My “materialism” is a little different to your materialism. I work hard so that I can give money back to my parents for raising me: both of whom have lost a lot of money when their superannuation effectively halved itself during the GFC, and when both parents stopped working so my dad could care for my mum when she had her chemo. I work hard so that I am able to personally support them into their retirement - they invested their time and money into raising me, I intend to return the favour. I own a four year old computer, a fifteen year old car, and the best second hand furniture you could hunt down at a garage sale.

Secondly, you don’t know the nature of my work. I have children: over two hundred of them, in fact. I don’t earn a huge amount of money (under the Australian median weekly income, as it were), but I would spend about 60 hours a week in and out of class for the benefit of my students, coaching sporting/debating teams and giving extra tuition. Similarly, I study so that that benefit is passed onto *them*: they deserve a well-qualified, passionate, and knowledgeable teacher. Most of these kids also come from families who earn below the median salary, btw.

I don’t see why my life and vocation is seen as frivolous and materialistic when a dude doing the same thing is seen as being a hard-working provider. I too am a provider and I am prudent about my future, my parents’ future, and making sure that my fiance has security also.

James1 says:

11:41am | 04/03/10

Who ever said that having children wasn’t a good time?  I have a ton of fun with mine.

bec says:

01:00pm | 04/03/10

You’re right, James1. They are more fun than a weekend with Batman, frequently, and their imagination and energy is contagious. It’s not quite the same as a “good time”, which I imagine involves alcohol, weekends away, and shopping, but it is enjoyable in its own way.

Belle says:

01:14pm | 04/03/10

Bec, you seem to have a lot of issues.  If you’re not having a good time, doing whatever it is you’re doing, change what you’re doing.  If you’re hanging around kids and you’re not having a good time… there’s a strong chance they’re not having much fun either.  Stop guessing what other people might do for fun and figure out what it will take for you to put a smile on your face.  The choice is yours.

bec says:

01:23pm | 04/03/10

Unfortunate timing for your comment, Belle. My job *is* fun. Kids are hilarious. But it’s not frivolous, unnecessary, engaged in for selfish reasons, or solely beneficial to me.

Tim says:

01:39pm | 04/03/10

Bec,
as Dr Phil would say “what’s your payoff?”
Your first comment was a whinge about how hard your 80hr weeks are, your next comments were about how much you love doing them.
Which one is it?

blah blah says:

07:03pm | 04/03/10

Bec. Nice one mate. if thats what ur happy with go for it. Who gives a toss what other people make of ur life. as long as you, your family and ur partnet are happy. People who amke judgements or assumptions on other peoples lives iether have too much time on their hands (must be the no kids thing) or arent happy in their lives. btw, bec never said she wasnt having a good time with kids

Clarise says:

03:23am | 05/03/10

Nice sob story Bec.

The “non-feminist” wasn’t even referring to you. She was referring to the 98% of women who are career-driven so that they can support their materialistic lifestyles. Which is true, all the career-oriented women I know are exactly like that.

must be the dud bec refers to says:

01:49pm | 05/03/10

bec - wow you sound either incredibly boring or have a dark sense of humour. 80hr week my arse… based on the quality of teachers in the education system Istrongly doubt anyone studing teaching did an 80hr month. Your second post sounds very ‘manufactured’, have to side with Womens libber on this one

Gareth says:

09:27am | 06/03/10

Hey Bec,
Admirable that you want to do all this to help your parents.  It’s very selfless.  Though I notice you have bought furniture, hence you must live away from home.  I know, I know…you’ll have some story about how you are really from the sticks and you have to live away from home to go to Uni, but really…Wouldn’t it be better if you lived at home, saved money, and then you could really help Mum and Dad out?  No stigma attached to Uni students living with parents.  It’s pretty much the norm these days.

Sarah says:

09:11am | 04/03/10

Just had my first at 37, and agree he is my greatest treasure too.

I think the article misses the point on two counts:

1.  Just thinking of my own experience, and friends, timing is as much the decision of men - a propspective mum wants a supportive partner, and if the bloke isn’t “ready” for whatever reason - e.g. finances for housing.
Answer:  Bring on universal 6 months minimum paid paternity leave!  It’ll pay for itself in savings from the IVF programs

2. Late starts can be because of a first marriage breakdown (e.g. me). My friends who don’t have kids aren’t on IVF - they don’t have a partner and you can’t control that.

The article’s solution about information is a good one - but it should include boys.  Women shouldn’t end up tearing their 30 year old boyfriends away from the Wii/4WD/surfboard to educate them about fertility.

single girl says:

01:08pm | 04/03/10

What about lack of opportunity? I am nearly 30 and have been single since I was 21 not through any decision on my part, I have not been in a relationship. What am I meant to do go and have casual sex unprotected until I happen to fall pregnant as that seems to be the only way it will happen.

OldGirl says:

03:53pm | 04/03/10

Sorry girls , I was just expressing my opinion and really that only matters to me, just live your lives darlings in the best way for you. Be it mother at 16 or 60 just remember to love them allot and you can’t go wrong. Remember I never followed my own advice and by the way I was married before I had my son, I never had any teenage years at all as far as going out and having fun. I never left my son for a second but its has paid off in the end hes such a lovely bloke

Glenda says:

07:21pm | 05/03/10

In reply to OldGirl-  I agree with you.  In your 20’s is a good time to have children.  My mum was also 39 when she had me and died when I was in my early 20’s and dad was 55 (second marriage).  I think it’s unfair on the children when people decice to have children too late in life. For one, they might not be around to see the child grow up. Second, they might find it hard to relate to what their child is intersted in ( as was the case with my dad- he didn’t know who Madonna/Michael Jackson was, nor did he like any of their music).  Thirdly- old age/sickness can catch up with them.  Mum was always sick the last couple of years before she died and dad died unexpectedly 2 weeks before my wedding.  My 2 children only know their grandparents through photos.

GlendaSings (not the other Glenda who already repl says:

11:07pm | 05/03/10

I had my children in my early 20’s, and I’d highly recommend it! I kept busy while they were little, working an evening and weekend job when my husband was able to be home with the kids. I went back to work when they were 7 and 9, and now after 7 years back in the workforce and at 37 years old, I’m only one or two levels below other women my age who are having their children now. These women are trying to managed small children and very high powered jobs, and it’s hard work. They are tired all the time, and just don’t have the energy and stamina for small children that I had. While they are having maternity leave and part time work, I’m catching up again, and you won’t know who had the time off early and who had it late.

Ladies, if you have the opportunity - don’t leave it until late. Do it early, while your body is supple and ready, and accept being a few years behind. You’ll make it up!

VC says:

09:23am | 06/03/10

I echo this sentiment. I never thought about the reality that delaying childbirth meant being an older parent (all the fertility problems aside which meant we almost didn’t become parents at all). Then recently, I realised that it’s not just about me and my partner being older parents, but about my daughter (who I had at 40) not having enough years to share her parent’s lives. I was 17 when my mother turned 40. Now we are hoping to add at least one sibling (also via IVF) to our family so our little girl is not going to be alone in her later years - though both hubby and I intend to be around as long as we can be. As for grandchildren, maybe we will be fortunate to see them, if our kids don’t wait as long as we did to become parents.

Liz Smith says:

02:01am | 07/03/10

I agree OldGirl,  I was single until 30 and had my first child at 35. Although I was mature enough to cope with the challenges ( and I am not sure how I would have handled it all in my 20’s) I find now at 55 that looking after teenagers is exhausting and as much as I love them, I am looking forward to having my life back again . I wish I could have had them at a younger age.

Rebecca says:

12:44pm | 07/03/10

It really depends on your personal situation. At 19, I have found who I believe will be a great life parter, and for me marriage and kids are on the radar for the next 5-10 years. But i know that is frowned upon nowdays - even my own mother thinks that I am too young to know anything about love (she got married at 32 and had my youngest sister at 38). I think it’s a shame that it’s now the standard for women to have a career first and family later. Sure, it’s great for those who want to do that (yay women’s liberation), but why is it so bad that some of us want to settle down early?

martinX says:

04:18pm | 09/03/10

Start having them at 25, stop at 30. That way you’ll still have the energy to keep up. Take this advice from a tired dad

Julia says:

09:53am | 04/03/10

Not every childless woman is bitter or unhappy. And the last time I looked, nursing homese were full of old people who have children. Expecting the children to look after their parents? Well some do, but many don’t.

Bec says:

11:04am | 04/03/10

I agree with Julia. Having children so that you have someone to look after you in your old age is not only incredibly selfish but also not a guaranteed outcome.

bec says:

11:39am | 04/03/10

Can I start to make fun of dudes who refuse to have kids then? I mean, they’re kinda bitter and jaded too.

Kim says:

02:45pm | 04/03/10

@Julia, Formersnag didn’t really say anything about expecting your children to look after you. 

@formersnag not leftard or rightard but centerist.  ummm, I think you mean centrist rather than certerist don’t you?

wira says:

05:28pm | 04/03/10

first of all, i’m a man, i’m maried @ age 26 n my wife was 25.its been 4 years now. my boy was born 2 years n 9 months ago,me n my wife have agreat time with him, having children is not about you hoping for someone in the future to look after you…is about to pass on the family line, your own blood line…for me having children is a gift, a gift that God gave us, God gave us that gift, God trust us to take care that gift… i dont expect someday he would take care of me.

my father told me, if u wanna be respect by others then you should respect others first… i’m willing to takecare of my parent coz i see how they willingly to take care my grand parents in the past…but that just me i dont expect to much from my children,but i’ll gave them the same point like my father has told me….

for having a children…u must calculate “if i have a children right now, will i able to support them when they enter collage age (when they in their 18 - 20 something) ??? “, “will i still @ working / productive age @ that time (@ some company maybe 50 - 60 )???” just calculate the age not other factors (e.g sick, accident, war, end of the world)...

last thing… having a children of your own n take care your own children is different with take care someone’s child…believe me i know…i’ve been babysit my older sister n neighbors before i’ve married n got one of my own…so i know how that fell, the bond n the feeling when you with your own children…that is what money cant buy…

Reeya says:

06:12pm | 04/03/10

Germaine Greer was married in the late 60’s so having a husband at any point does not guarantee you wont end up alone, just as having children doesn’t guarantee you won’t be alone.
Once upon a time everyone collectively knew the earth was flat, that the future could be read in the stars and that leeches were the best form of medicine for many major ailments.
So broad, confident sounding statements like “We have always, collectively, known this, for hundreds, thousands of years.” is childish logic at the very least.
I think the real issue that needs discussing here is the role of men in child rearing and the family and why it is seen as a womens’ primary role to birth and raise a family. Perhaps it is our education levels and experiences outside the home that have us thinking that working a full time job outside the home and then working a full time role in the home on top of that doesn’t sound all that rewarding, more like very tiring.
Whilst I don’t doubt any working mothers (and solo dads) loves their family and wouldn’t give them up for the world I can’t think of too many that would pass up the opportunity to have a maid or helper come in and do some of the annoying household tasks that they also complete on top of their external workload.

ImaWestie says:

05:03pm | 04/03/10

As someone who waited until my wife & I were 30 to have kids.
You should be worried, now..

& I’m not 40 yet.

We wish we had started at least 5 years ealier.

James1 says:

11:49am | 04/03/10

I understand what you are saying stedlar, but doing it the other way has challenges of an entirely different nature - that is how my partner and I did it.  We were both young, and we have far more energy than our older colleagues and our child benefits from this.  On the other hand, we have far less money, as we are not yet well established in our careers.

I could go on all day with the relative benefits of having children older or younger, but instead I would like to summarise by saying that either way, so long as you are a good parent it works out the same in the end.  So many parents beat themselves up over how they did things, when really in the long run it does not matter how old you are, what you earn, or what you do for work; it is who you are as a person that counts.

Kim says:

02:48pm | 04/03/10

@James1.  Nicely stated.

Mum2four says:

05:35pm | 04/03/10

I had two children in my twenties and two in my thirties and all I can say is they are wonderful and worth it, but at any age it is a physical and mental challenge. I cant say that I had more or less energy when I was younger. One thing I do know is that my body handled the pregnancies better and that I conceived much more easily in my twenties, the thirties was fraught with complications for both myself and the babies. I was lucky to pull through with babies to take home in my thirties.

Mel says:

10:53am | 04/03/10

How very forward thinking. Who says you can not have a career and a baby? Or that you don’t have a “life”  when you have young children. I’m 32, have a postgrad degree, a two year old and another baby on the way yet still have a career (in reproductive medicine field actually). I believe I’m a better mother because of the quality time I spend with my son, not quantity. Amazing concept hey???????

amanda says:

01:16pm | 04/03/10

Omelette, who are you referring to as the me-generation?  I always thought that they were the baby boomers, who didn’t have enough children themselves to cover them in their old age!

And how are these women suppose to have children without partners mature enough to accept responsibility?  It is unfair to insist on one sex has to restrict their lives, waiting for the right man to come along and support them during the pregnancy and thereafter, while the other suffers no condemnation for waiting to start a family, nor ridicule for being single?

omelette says:

02:01pm | 04/03/10

Mel: you can believe whatever you want. Whether your belief will be evidenced by reality depends on the outcomes which won’t be known for a long time.

amanda: The me-generation would essentially be anyone born post-WW2. If you’re not finding mature men then you’re looking in the wrong places. When I was in my early 20s I knew heaps of men wanting to settle down, find a wife and make a family and life together. I still know plenty of men in that age bracket looking for the same thing.

It’s not unfair that women have to find the guy. It’s simply biology. Men can procreate well into their old age. Women have lower chances after 30 and then virtually none after 40. It’s a fact of life.

amanda says:

11:35pm | 04/03/10

Again, Omelette, how are women suppose to find a partner to settle down with unless she takes some man considerably older than herself, who will no doubt complain that he is nothing more than a ‘walking wallet’.

I appreciate that you knew men when in your 20s - I did too and married one of them.  However, that was over 20 years ago; the scenery has changed since then.  When I got married, I was a minority - most were simply living together for 7, 8 or 10 years, then moving apart and separating.  Not really secure enough to have children, and those that did have children were later condemn for being single mothers!

Oh, and yes I have children now, after almost 20 years of trying to have kids through IVF (half was saving up for the treatment) - simply being young is no guarantee of fertility.  Nor is being male a protection - men too have less quality of semen as they get older and less energy - younger women are now demanding husbands or partners that share the care; can’t get away with slippers and the paper anymore!

Heather says:

09:28am | 05/03/10

I agree with omelette; I’m in late 40s and my kids, who I had in my 20s, are employed, educated and have flown the nest, so my husband and I are free to go travelling, volunteer overseas, whatever. (Ok, we did, er, *encourage* them to leave once they graduated, we don’t believe in adults living with their parents).

Anyway, why should having kids stop you from achieving? I am finishing my 3rd postgraduate degree, have heaps of work experience, where if I desired, could work at any level in my career (however, I like quality of life, and don’t believe in working 80 hour weeks). I also compete in Masters sport, have travelled extensively (no matter how young my kids were), and write semi professionally as a hobby.

Furthermore, I did all of this mostly as a single parent, because my kids’ dad and and I split up after ten years. But so what if you marry someone when you are young and then split up? Whilst my kids’ dad and I are no longer together; we were together for a good ten years, and remain really good friends, as I am with my other long term partners. I don’t believe in happy ever after anyway, it only belongs stupid romantic fiction.

But it is every woman’s OWN CHOICE when to have babies; personally, the thought of being a 60 year old with teenagers would send chills down my spine, but that is only my opinion…besides, my sons already think I am unbelievably ancient at 47!

Lynne says:

01:27pm | 05/03/10

Think Mel may be kidding herself about raising her kids with her super career.  Quality time is simply not enough - this is a myth - they need quanity as well.  Stop kidding yourself you are doing such a good job.

Mel says:

09:41am | 06/03/10

Well Lynne, my “super” career comes second to my son. I am fortunate to work in a job that encourages “career’ women to have child, with long, paid maternity leave, very flexible working hours and I work part time. I usually work a lot once my son goes to bed etc. Also we are part of a generation that unfortunately needs to work to be about to afford our mortgage and this is a neccessity, not a “I want” luxury. Furthermore, I see a lot of my friends that either don’t work or work a lot less that me put their kids in fornt of TVs/computers etc rather than going to the park, going swimming, to the zoo and all the other things I do with my son.
And the comments about wanting your kids to fly the net as soon as possible so I can have a life again, are you kidding. My husband and I have a great life with my son.

OddCreature says:

05:44pm | 06/03/10

I agree whole-heartedly with Mel…

I too work part-time, which means I too spend quality time with my daughter rather than quantity. While I’m at work she gets quality time with her daddy or her grandparents. And my working allows me to put a roof over her head, food in her tummy and clothes on her back. I honestly can’t see a single thing wrong with this scenario.

As for basing your decision to have children on when they will “fly the nest”, I find that really offensive! I had my daughter because my husband and I wanted a child, someone to love and cherish, someone to play with, to watch them grown, and to raise into a strong adult. Our “freedom” was never a factor - mostly because we made our choice freely.

Sarah says:

09:38am | 04/03/10

Yeah special projects are crap.  But that’s a problem with the stupid workplaces.  Doesn’t have to be that way.

Sally says:

05:39pm | 04/03/10

Work / career is from when you are 20 to 60 years, families are forever, beyond the gold watch. Given that we are living a lot longer, it appears we are going to have over a third of our adult lives in retirement of some description. I anticipate this will be a time when family will definitely overshadow the career.

Dan says:

12:24pm | 04/03/10

I agree, I ‘thought’ I never wanted children and was happy with that decision (married at 23) until I mysteriously woke up not long after my 30th birthday with a ‘need’ to have a baby.
It shocked me more than my hubby!
I’m now one of those people that say ‘you’ll know when you’re ready’ even though it used to drive me crazy when said to me!!!

susie says:

03:29pm | 04/03/10

I agree also with this ‘clucky’ thing.  I had my kids when I was in my early twenties and then when I was nearing forty, I had this strange urge to have another baby.  It was like my body telling me “Do it now, or it’s all over red rover”.  I resisted the urge.  My aunt however, had two kids in her twenties and then another two twenty years later.

Ali says:

08:56pm | 04/03/10

Yep, same happened to me! Hit 32 and whammo!

expand please says:

11:34am | 04/03/10

please tell us how then to be proactive in finding a mate for life?

MelD says:

01:14pm | 04/03/10

I agree let me know how I can go about and find a husband other than hitting a random guy on the head and dragging him off to my house, I have been looking since I was 21 and am nearly 30 and been single all that time.

omelette says:

02:06pm | 04/03/10

“expand please” and MelD

Find “nice guys” with good jobs. They won’t be the ‘hawtest’ or the flashiest or whatever else on your checklist. But they will be good fathers and husbands.

Might also halp to stop trying to live in a fairytale.

MelD says:

11:31am | 12/03/10

I don’t think I am living in a fairy tale, I have tried all the dating websites and don’t judge on pictures, I just have had no takers, I have copious amount of tattoos but they are not gothic and I am not an Emo but I think maybe guys are put off by them so please give advice how I can possibly find this paragon of goodness I need to get my baby making started.

Jane says:

10:55am | 04/03/10

Had mine at (just) 20 and 23.

Got all the hard stuff out of the way early, when I had energy and stamina.

Got career under way whn both the kids were at school and have never looked back

Struggled to start with but it did the kids no harm to do without the expensive stuff.  It made them more self reliant and creative.

Now, 43 years later - kids - independent, in good careers and husband and I are enjoying ALL the fruits of our labour in material things and the people who are and were an integral part of our lives, right down to the great grandchild.

Having a ball! It was worth living the simple life while we all learned to appreciate more than material things.

But, hey, it’s personal choice.  At the same time, people make “grown up” choices and can expect little sympathy from me if they have squandered their lives on being cashed up tourists.

J says:

10:23am | 04/03/10

I said they require the same amount of effort.  To find a job, you need to be proactive and submit a resume to anywhere you might be considered for a position.

To find a boyfriend/girlfriend/husband/wife, you need to date.  A lot.  The more people you meet, the more you increase your chances of meeting someone permanent.

Both require having an open mind too.

Sarah says:

12:59pm | 04/03/10

That is a lot of pressure to put on dates - that the outright intent is looking for a husband.  Although, there is something to the idea that you have to be proactive - no point sitting at home staring at the wall -being sociable helps.  But don’t blokes run amile from women as focussed as you suggest? “Submit a resume to anywhere that you might be considered for a position??”

Come on, you have to admit that finding a job is a lot easier.

J says:

01:50pm | 04/03/10

I’m not suggesting you have the marriage and kids conversation on the first date.  You can if you want (nothing wrong with it) - I had a guy bring it up of his own volition once!  All I’m suggesting is if the priority focus in life is to meet a husband and have kids, there’s only one way to do it.  Be your best self (physically, emotionally, spiritually, intellectually, whatever).  And then date.  And date.  And date. That’s it.

And always have a plan B.  If one doesn’t meet the man/woman of their dreams, then they should think about what other life goals would help fulfill them?

renee says:

12:23pm | 04/03/10

my mum was 35 when i was born.
i am now 22 and expecting my first child in June, which is also my parents first grandchild…
Now i do not mean to offend anyone having kids later on in life, nor am i saying that all middle aged mothers are the same, but for me, i always swore i would be younger when i had kids, because growing up with my mum, was like being raised by a grandmother.
When i was going through adolescence and puberty, my mum was going through menopause.
WHO WOULD WISH THAT ON ANYONE??!!!
If you wait til later in life to have kids, pray for boys, because going through your menopause and boys’ puberty at the same time is SO much easier than with girls.

But at the end of the day, i know that for me personally, i know that i can do a better job of being a mother in my 20’s than one or two decades later, which is the most important thing, as children only have one childhood.

Therefore, if people can be a better mother to their children in their 30’s or 40’s then that is the optimum time for them… but having a high flying career and rolling in cash doesnt equal being a good mum.

Louise says:

05:22pm | 04/03/10

I kind of get what Renee is saying. Both my parents were born to mothers who were over 40 (they had to stay and help with the family farms during WWII) as they married late. They were both wonderful parents, but I guess the downside was that I lost my grandmothers quite early on. I never even knew either of my grandfathers as they died before I was born. I am now 25 and would dearly love to still have a grandparent, and a bigger family. Only have 4 cousins, my wedding will be tiny!

Michelle says:

07:02pm | 07/03/10

I too had my son at 21 and it was definately worth it. He’s 16 now and my career is fantastic allowing me to raise him as a happy single Mum who, hopefully, will be around long enough to play with my grandkids. I say hopefully because all the women in my family have died young(20’s and 30’s). So if they had planned their kids later they would have missed out.
You never know how long you’ve got!

Jess says:

09:17pm | 04/03/10

Jordan, that was one of the most mature and unselfish comments I’ve read here tonight. Good on you. I am sure that even without children, there will be people all around you who have been blessed.

Bren says:

01:34pm | 04/03/10

Why are you reading this story then Bitten?
This article has really made me think (and clearly so many other people).
I’ve enjoyed reading so many personal comments, so thank you Punch and readers.

Bitten says:

01:43pm | 04/03/10

Um, the suggestion that there’s something ‘wrong’ with 30,000 couples using IVF to conceive? Why can’t they, or shouldn’t they? It’s their choice and their business. Or isn’t it. Is it your business? Should they be made to feel ‘wrong’ because they’re using a service that is available to them? Should they feel guilty? You tell me, you’re the social commentators, sorry, journalists.

Vonny says:

03:52pm | 04/03/10

But there is something “wrong” with those using IVF to conceive, it is expensive and invasive. That is what is “wrong” with it. Most who get to that stage regret not having children earlier as it would have been alot easier and cheaper to do so. It is not the actual using of the IVF that is wrong, it is the regret that they feel that they didn’t have children sooner.

Bitten says:

04:59pm | 04/03/10

Thanks Vonny, I work in obstetrics, I’m well aware of what IVF entails. And guess what: surgical repair of a fractured femur is ‘invasive’ and ‘expensive’. Is that ‘wrong’ too? What about hip replacements? Or repair of an aortic aneurism? Should patients who need that medical care not have it because it’s invasive and expensive and therefore it’s ‘wrong’?  Thanks for playing.

What I object to is the constant passing of negative judgments against other human beings by journalists.  Get over yourselves.  How many couples conceived last year not using IVF? Would you include that statistic to allow your readers to put the ‘woah, 30,000!’ into perspective? No, of course not. That wouldn’t sensationalise the information nearly enough.

Gregory says:

09:22am | 05/03/10

Wow, you all got owned by Bitten. Nice job.

Vonny says:

09:43am | 05/03/10

Bitten - I don’t think it’s wrong to use IVF so i agree with you there. With regards to the broken femurs etc - something’s broken so you have to fix it. You didn’t choose to break it earlier so the treatment could be free and uninvasive as opposed to later when it’s expensive and invasive! With IVF, it’s a choice, as with having any child. It’s almost like you missed an opportunity when you were younger and now you regret it. An analogy is like if you’re investing, you missed an opportunity of a lifetime or you didn’t buy your regular lotto numbers and they came up. The examples may be trivial there, but I would regret it if I wanted children, didn’t have them when I could do it easily (and free), then have to rely on IVF and even after all that, it’s not a certainty that I’d be able to conceive due to the problems with conceiving at an older age. It would be quite depressing if it all failed. I think though, IVF has given a choice to many women who didn’t have this choice before and in that way it’s a positive.

I don’t believe the article is saying it is right or wrong to have a child at an older or younger age or to have children at all, but more so that we have to be aware that there IS a biological clock and if you miss the window, it is very hard or impossible to conceive. If you want children, you need to take that into consideration amongst all the other things you want to fit into your under 50 life. It seems that a large proportion of childless women now turning 40 or 50 have JUST realised that time is running out (& they want kids) and that is why it’s an issue.

Bitten says:

10:52am | 05/03/10

Vonny, you can attempt to back-pedal however much you want when confronted with a logical argument against your statements however, I reiterate, THIS is what you said:

“But there is something “wrong” with those using IVF to conceive, it is expensive and invasive. That is what is “wrong” with it.”

Not the brightest stick in the bush, hey?

Othello Cat says:

02:09pm | 05/03/10

If this is the same “Bitten” that I have seen across the internet fora, then I remain, as ever, in awe.

Bitten says:

03:19pm | 05/03/10

Why thank you Gregory and Othello Cat - I’m an admirer-from-afar of yours as well.

OddCreature says:

06:15pm | 06/03/10

Way to miss the point Bitten…..

There is nothing wrong with using IVF if that is your choice. There is nothing wrong with waiting to have kids until you’re older, if that is your choice.

The issue here is past generations were told to settle down early, but ours was told to wait, to chase a career and travel because we can always have kids later. And now our generation is plagued with fertility problems, caused by waiting until we’re older. So there is every possibility our generation was given bad advice, and for many people it’s now too late to do anything about it.

For me personally, the great part about this is that I’ll be able to offer my daughter much better, sounder advice than what was given to me.

Othello Cat says:

11:11am | 12/03/10

“generation is plagued with fertility problems”

Bit of an over statetment there, OddCreature. It is my understanding only a minority of assisted fertility patients are the stereotypical hedonistic mature nullagraviadaes who have left things too late. A considerable number of IVF users are young and suffer from polycystic ovarian syndrome or PCOS.  PCOS and obesity often (not always) tend to go hand in hand and fertlity can return to sufferer if they lose just 5% of their bodyweight. The jury is still out over whether PCOS causes obesity or vice-versa and whether rising rates of obesity and PCOS are linked. Other assisted fertility users have impaired fallopian tubes due to pelvic inflammatory disease which can be attributed to the rates of unchecked chlamidia in the human population.

Radical Chick says:

01:48pm | 04/03/10

This is such a wonderful story S.L. Thank you so much for sharing…
At the moment I am feeling awfully cluck. My husband doesn’t care one way or another but I am in between jobs and worried about my career plus I will have to do a elective surgery soon…so once all that is sorted I am keen on the idea of having a baby.
I feel very scared as I am 40 years old and already have two kids. You hear so much about the difficulties….but kids are special blessings aren’t they??I don’t think there is nothing that can compare to having them.
Anyway thanks to share your story once more.
Radical

stephen says:

02:18pm | 04/03/10

Why not adopt ? You can still love them and support them.

hmmmm says:

08:55pm | 06/03/10

Jordan, I do feel immensly sorry for people who cannot concieve for whatever the reason. And its not just age!
However how can you say that its only 2 sorts of people that have kids. I agree with the second group and a law should be passed to allow all parents to prove themselves as such. However I come from a large large family, but do you think I get any help.
I have four children, of which the oldest is currently 5, i’m tired and exhausted. I love my children, but sometimes i just don’t see the light at the end of the tunnel and its all because theres nobody to help. Or you get to the point that you don’t want to ask for help, because you dont want the criticism that comes with asking.
BYW I had my first at 25, I don’t regret any of them. I can concentrate on a career later, and it will probably be around helping children.

Jess says:

11:40am | 04/03/10

I completely agree!! how many guys say “I dont want to get married now, or even think about it, im too young” and they are 25?! Its just crazy. It seems guys never want to grow up, never want responsibility (the ones I know anyway) and just want to live a carefree life. Its a bit hard to find a partner in your mid twenties who would want to start a family.. unless you went for a much older guy… I think most of it comes down to guys being told that 30+ is the way to go… the older the better.. they dont want to - and are not made to grow up. In todays society it seems to be fine to be 25-30 single boozing every weekend and having no future thoughts.

Tim says:

04:35pm | 04/03/10

Its simple Jess.
The enlightenment of women through the struggles of feminism has allowed men to have sex with different women pretty much whenever they want.
Why would men want to settle down early when there is really no such thing as a biological clock for men?

Mrsmum says:

09:38am | 05/03/10

Jess I am smiling here, my husband is 55 and I can tell you love hes never grown up at all and I doubt he ever will.  Women seem to do the nurturing for life, not only for their children but for their partners as well. You need to nudge them along the right path. I found a bag of Jaffa’s works well for my husband (he does not smoke or drink but is lolly addicted )

ED says:

10:29am | 05/03/10

Tim, men have always been able to find girls to have sex with before marriage, well before feminism.

I don’t have any great desire to have children or any intense maternal instinct, so I couldn’t care less whether they have sex with everyone or get married at 20. And since as I said guys have always found a way to have sex before settling down, you cannot just point the finger at women for not having babies early enough.

And maybe if men would get a little enlightenment, they wouldn’t treat women who they have sex with as receptacles, but as you know people who also happen to enjoy sex, their wouldn’t be a problem, but as your statement highlights, dudes still think that they are like totally awesome for boning as many girls as possible.

ED says:

01:32pm | 05/03/10

Apologies for the appalling spelling and grammar errors.

hmmmm says:

09:09pm | 06/03/10

I come from a middle eastern background, it is drummed into boys and girls that their priorty in life is to get marreid and have children, preferrably in that order.

It is very very uncommon to hear any one getting married beyond thirty. Most try and have children immediatley and don’t necessarily care about money, mortgage, careers as the belief is god will provide is also drummed in.
Most do not have fertility problems, as most people who started trying to have children did so within 2 years of getting married.

I only know of two couples in Aus who have had trouble concieving, one very young early twenties couple concieved successfully through IVF the other it was the males problem and ufnortunatley no amount of IVF will help.

My point is, middle eastern people will continue to produce children and successfully because we do not care about career, having a home (renting is preferable) and money. This advice is passed down from generation to generation.
Money comes and money goes, the stress of young children will wittle away, old age will come upon us, but we’ll have our children and hopefully their children, our neices our nephews, our cousins children to keep us close and entertained for years to come. Not to mention all the loud crazy social gatherings.

sally says:

12:12pm | 04/03/10

Finally! A response in this mess that I can agree with.

Kudos to you!

Wendy #: 2 says:

12:55pm | 04/03/10

Not only do we have the same name, we have the same opinion.

My son was born when I was 20.  Many years on, I am a single mother, working 2 jobs and studying part time.  I wouldn’t change it for the world.  I love being busy, I love a challenge, I love my son. And yes, I did eventually start the ‘travel thing’ (with my son in tow - he loves it) and own a house.  I would shoot myself if I was a stay at home mother to 5 kids, but I certainly don’t look down on those who do it and love it.

Janie says:

01:32pm | 04/03/10

Totally agree Wendy, so many of these comments are making assumptions and judgements about other people’s lives when they don’t know why people made the choices they did or even if they had a choice.

Simon the Pieman says:

12:13pm | 04/03/10

WOW,  impressed with your resume - high flyer (money does help, doesn’t it) motherhood, goal driven, international jetsetter and then you had to ruin it with an MBA.  Oh well no-ones perfect.

Marina Go says:

01:58pm | 04/03/10

so Simon the Pieman, women can’t do it all? Should I have dumped the career I love at first sign of baby and listened to the male boss who told me not to bother with an MBA?  My point was, and still is: why do we still believe that women must make a choice? Men don’t turn themselves inside out wondering when’s the best time to have a child - impressive resume or not.

Simon the Pieman says:

02:26pm | 04/03/10

Mairina Go - Calm down, who said women cannot have it all? you wanted it - you got it - be happy.  I was side swiping MBAs (certificates for people that need to be shown how to do things)  your achievements indicate you do not need such nonsense.  As to men not being troubled with what age to embark on parenthood, what a sexist remark, I can only assume you think child rearing is just for women

Marina Go says:

02:37pm | 04/03/10

No but unfortunately child-bearing is just for women and unfortunately men don’t have the same tick-tock of the biological clock.  Lucy and the women who have commented above are only wondering aloud about the ideal age to have a baby because for women there is a time limit to this decision that has nothing to do with lifestyle, careers, partners assisting or otherwise. And guess what: the time limit is still there if you are earning a lot of money or if you are on the bread line. Biology wasn’t my subject (as I discovered when my HSC results came through) but I don’t recall there being the same time limit for men. Maybe that is sexist but who am I to argue with science?

Simon the Pieman says:

03:20pm | 04/03/10

Men do have sell by dates:
Studies are now showing “babies born to older men carry a higher risk of having genetic problems and male infertility shoots up after the age of 40 ”  When involving the word science, always a good idea to check on the science.  Also, being an aged parent also affects both partners and needs consideration but in the end it is a personal decision and decisions are never right or wrong, you just try to make them work the best you can.

Em says:

03:40pm | 04/03/10

Finally someone making this point.  Thank you. I was 28 when I did my first cycle of IVF.  Not every IVF patient is 40+, too busy having fun or following a career and just put it off.  In fact all of the IVF patients I’ve met were in their mid- late twenties when they starting “trying” and late twenties, early thirties when they have finally had to use IVF technology.  Many IVF patients have fertility problems that are not related to age.

PK says:

10:07pm | 04/03/10

Geez Brad, it’s not only up to the WOMEN!!!!

Alot of men say they want children and know you want them young, you marry them and you wait, you ask, and they put off trying for children constantly.

What are you supposed to do then? My heart breaks that I am 31 and turning 32 this year with no interest from my husband about children.

He tells me we have plenty of time but quite frankly, I don’t want to try for my first when I am 35 and he is 42 for personal reasons.

It breaks my heart that everyone thinks it is up to the woman - it’s often not!

I got married at 24, am 31 now and still waiting, hoping that he will change his mind. He sometimes gives me some hope by some of his comments but I hate the assumption that the public makes that I have put off kids because of wanting a career.

Sure, I have a career but what else would you do while waiting for your husband to decide?

Sarah says:

01:15pm | 04/03/10

You must be one of the accountants that Mr Pastry said has taken over the world.  (I think economists have taken over, and accountants are their footsoldiers)

On your assessment of infrastructure costs, are you saying that there is a broader public benefit from those infrastructure costs, so it shouldn’t be pushed onto the home-purchaser via the developer?

Family Tax Benefits and the Baby Bonus are supposed to mimic income splitting for household income up to a relatively high level - about $100,000 I think :-?  Direct payments also mean that the main caregiver gets the money direct rather than having it come off the tax paid by the main income earner. I don’t think family payments should be means tested at all.

Razor says:

06:11pm | 04/03/10

Sarah,

Yes there is a broader social benefit of the infrastructure - everyone drives on roads and uses footpaths and public open space.  The health benefots from sewerage and water supplies are plentiful.  Energy supplies and communication are a foundation of our economy.

I have a background in economics and accounting.  I read Mr Pastry’s comment and don’t see how my comment in any way treats people in the manner he suggests.  The facts are that the issues I raised are important influences on fecundity rates here and globally.  They are measurable and action can be taken to influence them depending on your policy stance.

Julia says:

01:39pm | 04/03/10

I know one, Tors. I know of two others who would if they had the financial ability to do it too.

Super D says:

03:19pm | 04/03/10

@ Tors 2 so far, and they each regret passing on some very marriagable chaps back in the day.

Bored House Husband says:

04:38pm | 04/03/10

“IF my wife wanted to work fulltime I would gladly put my career on hold for quality time with my children”

My wife wanted to get back to her career after 5 years of motherhood and got a better paid job than I had.  So I left my job and became a house husband, we did not want to get into before and after school child care.  I sort of enjoy it but I would advise any males that it is a solitary existence without the benefit of being able to join in with the mums and of being shunned by males as an unnatural waster.

Jess says:

09:28pm | 04/03/10

Isnt the answer to every question in the universe…....42?

Marina Go says:

02:44pm | 04/03/10

That is so sad.

Macca says:

03:07pm | 04/03/10

Oh dear Eric, not today mate,

... did she hurt you?

James1 says:

02:29pm | 04/03/10

Mate, you need to buy a television or something.

Mel says:

11:28am | 12/03/10

I’m with you Sherry, I would love to have kids now, I work full time but would gladly be a stay at home mum but no partner, have done all the dating websites and have been single for so long, am pushing 30 now and no hope in sight.

J says:

03:32pm | 04/03/10

Because secretly, they doubt their decision.

Me says:

03:58pm | 04/03/10

Damn right! So what you work 80 hours a week? The people I know who work that hard are miserable and have stomach ulcers.

Success should always be measured by the joy in your life. If work gives you joy, yay you are successful. If it doesnt, not amount of money can convince me you are.

Bitten says:

11:41pm | 11/03/10

I don’t know Macca, but an awful lot of people batting from the other side want to tell you about their age, age when married, age when had kids and number of kids. Isn’t that the same sort of ‘resume’ of sprogging? How about noting the same behaviour from both camps? Or is that too balanced for you to manage?

ruby says:

07:19am | 06/03/10

I think the advice that “you’ll know when you’re ready” is just plain wrong.  Especially if you have a challenging career that you enjoy your life will slip by.
Having kids is hard in many ways.  Your clock is ticking and ticking loudly.  Be ready for a whole new sort of challenge unlike any you’ve experienced before and just do it!  If it’s definitely something you want in your life. Do it and do it asap. Don’t waste your chance.

omelette says:

05:06pm | 04/03/10

The only single women I know over 30 who are still single are too picky, or partied too much and are too picky or work too much and are too picky.

There are thousands of eligible bachelors around. It shouldn’t be that difficult to find one. Personally, I know dozens of men looking for a long-term relationship. Also, why are you restricting your search for men in their 30s? This sin’t high school anymore, no need to be paired up based on a narrow age range.

Jezebel says:

03:30pm | 05/03/10

Tash, I am not saying that you are a liar so bear with me here. My experience of online dating was the reverse. It seemed that, as a childfree post-grad educated woman, I was embraced with messianic fervour by men wishing to convert me.

I thought a quick tick-in-a box made my reproductive choices clear but eventually I had to resort to all-caps and list 5 various references times to indicate in my profile that I did not want kids of my own nor kid-burdened date/partners.  Despite this, I was besieged by daddies or wannabe daddies (looking for a long term relationship) who clearly demonstated either a complete inability to read or were possibly in the “oh-but-you-will-love-MY-kids” camp.

*shrugs*  Perhaps this a tactic to try Tash? 

I sincerely hope you do find someone but, at the same time, cats are damn fine company too.

Bob H says:

04:52pm | 04/03/10

Of course it is - the taxpayer foots the costs

Bujiwara says:

06:44pm | 04/03/10

No, it’s early 20’s. I ‘ve had mine when I was 20, 21 AND 24

Mrs UnMum says:

02:17pm | 06/03/10

Yes, there is more than a touch of class warfare narrative in the “mummy wars”. Across many fora one can observe the shrill demands for middle class welfare; taxpayer-funded maternity leave at **wage replacement**, subsidised child care, various tax benefits—the perverse justification is that supplying all these “needs” will be the magic silver bullet to make babies appear and produce perfect parents who will breast feed and bond with their little angels and society will be perfect.

Of course, someone has to pay for all this. What it really means is that the well-paid sheilas get plenty and the working-class sheilas get next to nothing. But today middle-class welfare it most certainly is – for the working rich – at the direct expense of the working poor. How disgusting and shameful. And yet, these wealthy people who feel so hard done by seem to have no shame.

It seems that too many modern Millies are wanting to have it both ways - they want the affluent lifestyle delivered by two incomes, they want kids, they want (or at least take) the perks given to them for having kids (both in the workplace and on the tax returns), they want the “gun” job and be fast-tracked to the corner offce and cry “discrimination” if their parenting means that cannot commit to their jobs AND they want to “spend quality time” with the kids. Life has opportunity costs: you can’t have it all.

One writer on this forum has rightly observed; success is measured in happiness and not how many kids you have or don’t have, the number of degrees or who much you earn.

Eric says:

07:46am | 05/03/10

Women lobbied for, and got, all the rights and choices as far as children go.

Men got the short end of the stick - nothing but obligations and responsibilities and abuse.

Now women are all surprised when men no longer want to step up and be their sperm donor and walking wallet. Too bad.

MnM says:

07:57pm | 05/03/10

Don’t give me that garbage Eric. Did you read what I wrote? I *have* children, it’s just that I had to wait until my late 20s to find a man who wasn’t full of bleating excuses like yours.

Your “walking wallet” comment made me laugh. I am a stay-at-home mother and still earn more than my husband working from home. Not that it’s a competition, mind you; it’s a partnership. As mentioned above I married an adult male, not a man-child, so unlike you he doesn’t feel that his masculinity is threatened just because a woman stand up for her “rights and choices” not to be treated like an idiot and abused, which was historically the case for many unfortunate women.

OddCreature says:

07:13pm | 06/03/10

Eric what woman made you this bitter, twisted shadow of what used to be a man?

I’ll have ou know my husband wanted a child, he chose it. In fact, he was the one who talked me into it. He enjoys being a daddy, loves his daughter to bits, loves buying her presents and spoiling her, plays with her all the time.

It’s not all about responsibilities and obligations, there is fun to be had as well. And women aren’t devoid of obligations and responsibilities either. Being a working mum is not all fun and games, like you seem to think.

Cathy says:

05:04pm | 05/03/10

Yes, but what this article is saying is that it is unreal to simply expect to have a baby at 38.  It just isn’t that easy.  IVF is not a miracle fix.  I think it is important that we are finally facing reality with this issue.  Too many women I know have believed the lie that medicine can do anything, and it can’t.

Jezebel says:

02:32pm | 05/03/10

“I hate seeing it so constantly denigrated”

Well, I hate seeing non-motherhood denigrated.

Baby bonuses, Fam Tax A and B, child-care allowances and rebates, assistance for sole parents,  parental parking bays, legislated flexible working arrangements only for people with kids, the second-highest cash handouts for families in the OECD, child-centric Family Law, child-friendly PUBS and BARS?  Tell me again about motherhood being “constantly denigrated” please.  Sheesh! There was no such thing as child-friendly pubs a generation ago.

By all means, encourage and celebrate **good**  motherhood and fatherhood—in all its forms and not just “nice” white, heterosexual, married, middle-class parenthood— but non-parenthood (by choice or circumstance) should also be destigmatised.  People should feel adequately comfortable about their choice not to be parents.

Vonny says:

10:36am | 05/03/10

“I’m 27. Apparently near the washed up age for having kids.” Is it? I never thought 27 was the washed up age for having kids….I though it was at least 10 years older than that…

Cathy says:

05:02pm | 05/03/10

I think when you fall in love and you believe he is the ONE, and he think you are the ONE, don’t miss that moment.  I have seen young women in their early twenties break up with a wonderful boyfriend because he wanted to get married, and she didn’t.  I believe in fate, and it could be that you need to change your plans if Mr. Right comes along.  I’ve seen girls emerge in their late twenties, and thirties ‘ready to marry’ but guess what?!  can’t find Mr Right.  Guys in their thirties are usually pretty ‘worn out’, divorced, self-satisfied, ... not the kind of marrying kind!  I say, keep you options open in your early twenties… AND, if you want to stay married: don’t live together.  Statistics say this is a marriage killer.

ruby says:

07:06am | 06/03/10

Katie, you’ve summed the dilemma up beautifully…. and I’d like to say I agree with Cathy’s comments too.
As a general comment on the discussion, I think that the general approach that having kids is a woman’s decision needs to go out the window.  While women have been encouraged to be independent, the role of men has been denigrated.  There is absolutely no denying that if women are to have kids when biology says it’s sensible - ie late teens to early twenties - and the family is to be stable and financially viable it REQUIRES a partner to make it possible and beyond that it requires a society that is geared up to make it possible and underwrite the risks that are involved in a young woman making the choice to breed young.
I did it and I know that if you are 19 and pregnant you are very very much at the mercy of others if you have any expectation to be able to care for the child personally for a few years.  I have a great partner. Together and with help from the broader society we were OK and it worked out great. I’m more than happy to pay taxes now to have support provided to young families. Goes around comes around.  but my point is, it’s a societal decision as well as a decision for the young people themselves.  There is a lot of risk for young women if they decide to have children when biology says it’s best.

Jezebel says:

02:19pm | 05/03/10

“need women to set the agenda for us “

Oh yes, yes, women ought to be the gatekeepers of moral virtue, ‘specially with sexual matters. We know that men are just incapable of making any decision about matters like this. They are all just fiends with a never-ending sexual appetite that needs to be controlled.

Goodness me, we ALL know that them GOOD womenfolk are not all that fond of sex and they really only begrudingly comply with sex to please men and make babies. Imagine if women started to actually enjoy sex and want it all the time like men do!  Give the women “too much freedom” and they might—heaven forfend— avoid motherhood and have sex only for fun. They might *gasp* start to demand that men please them sexually and compare their performances! This can only be prevented if women are rightfully forced into motherhood and recind their freedom and lack of responsibility.
*scoffs*

Madeleine says:

07:01pm | 05/03/10

:/

I hope you’re trolling.

James1 says:

03:35pm | 05/03/10

While my partner and I had children young, most of our friends have done exactly like you, MissA.  At some point in their lives though, when the urge to have children became so great, they did decide to leave work (or their partners did) so as to have and raise a child or two (and in some cases three).  It sounds like that urge may be starting to hit you, and the only thing you can do is what you think is right.  Never let anyone tell you what you can and cannot do with your life.

James1 says:

03:27pm | 05/03/10

Still, it is interesting that you feel the need to justify your choice.  Why is that?

Hejira says:

04:09pm | 06/03/10

James1: Possibly because everyone feels they have the right to question people who make the choice not to have children (when in my mind there are a lot of questions which could be directed at some of those who do choose to have them).

hmmmm says:

09:23pm | 06/03/10

James1, there are a lot of people out there who know and rightly so that they are to selfish to have children, that they can not envisioning themselves giving up their current life to children.
This is not wrong, and congratulations to them, they should be applauded for having the courage to speak their minds, unlike the scum who have kids for welfare, which lot would you prefer.
One of my siblings cannot envision herself having children and she is quiet awkward around them, god love her she does try, i just can’t see her feeding, changing nappies and so on, and good on her that she admits this.
also congratulations to fredd bloggs above on his 49th wedding anniversary.

Me says:

03:44pm | 05/03/10

We are at that stage of buy a house and have kids mid 30’s or have kids mid 20’s but rent (cannot afford a baby and a mortgage without scraping by and living off family charity which is something I want to avoid if I can). We are leaning towards kids now, house once I am back at work… will let you all know in 20 years if I still think it was the right choice lol

Jess says:

09:51pm | 05/03/10

I agree. Kids mostly just want us to be there to turn to when we are needed. They just want us around. Its safe.

Dont most of us (who are blessed with good parents) do the same? Who do we call when we ................. just need mum?

ruby says:

08:06am | 06/03/10

I absolutely agree. “Quality time” as an adequate substitute for quantity of time is a complete myth.  You need lots of time and you need to be really engaged and to be constantly developing your interpersonal and parenting skills so that it is lots of quality time. 
The other great myth is that it’s easy to go back to work and persue your career once the kids go to school. Its absolute rubbish. Yes you can do it, but you will be very short of time, patience and energy.  In my workplace heaps of the working mothers freely admit that they have no time or energy for dealing in the best manner with their kids and their kids problems. They go home, get through the night and just hang on until it’s time to head back to the relative sanity of the workplace.
My kids are all young adults. I stayed at home for about 10 years after swapping roles with hubby in the beginning, then I worked once our youngest was 8 and my experience is that teenagers need just as much time and attention as a preschooler.  A teenager with a problem doesn’t just choose to open up to you about it in the 15 mins of “quality” time you’ve diarised.  You have to be around enough, and have a strong enough relationship to allow the spontaneous discussions to happen. ..and teenagers problems are far more difficult and serious too. .. you have teenagers after at least 12 years of parenting experience, thank god for that because the challenges just get harder..

ruby says:

07:56pm | 06/03/10

I hear you sue k.  I would love to go back to being a professional home maker.  My daughter would love to do that with her life too.  Majority view though is that we are either crazy or lazy.  Both are rubbish of course.  Takes a huge amount of self discipline to do home making well. It’s not all roses whether you stay home full time or work. Each has their challenges.  One of the biggest challenges to being a full time home maker is that you CONSTANTLY have to justify your decision. It’s not so bad when the kids are pre-school, but it gets worse and worse the older they get. 
A friend of mine (degree qualified) and her hubby agreed when they married that they both wanted the wife to stay home with the kids. Turned out one of their kids had a medical condition where that was pretty necessary anyway, but now the kids are almost grown and she gets so much flak that she’s “only a housewife”. Financially they don’t need for her to work, the hubby is a great “provider” and wonderfully supportive on all fronts.  It is SO unfair. I thought women’s lib was about giving women choices.  The choice to do things the traditional way is being steadily removed.

Eric says:

09:40am | 07/03/10

Yep, it’s all men’s fault.

Women demanded choices, and they got them. But somehow it’s still men who are to blame for what women choose.

OddCreature says:

02:50pm | 07/03/10

Contrary to what you appear to believe Eric, not all women are soul-sucking sucubi out for whatever they can get. Maybe the women you deal with are, but perhaps you should try picking someone up somewhere other than the bar in the seventh circle of hell?

My point, if you’d actually bothered to read what I wrote, is that both perticipants need to be on board. I had a child with my husband when he was ready. Just like most normal women do. Because I have enough of a sense of morality not to trap someone into having a child with me. Also, my husband is not a walking wallet dumped with nothing but obligations and responsibilities. We are both responsible for our daughter, we both pay the bills, and we both get to play with her and have fun with her. And we both chose to be her parents. The womens libbers had nothing to do with any of it.

So take your “woe is me for I am a man” speech and tell it to someone who gives a hoot.

OddCreature says:

03:21pm | 07/03/10

I might also add that from where I’m sitting, you have plenty of choice in the reproductive process. If you choose not to have a child you can choose to wear a condom.

If you choose not to wear a condom then quite frankly you made a stupid choice, and you have to live with it.

PauL says:

07:38am | 08/03/10

dead right on all counts. Especially about the younger female thing. Men can and sometimes do breed right up to their 80’s while women are all done by 40 in the natural world. I’m always surprised at how many young women find older men attractive…. though its probably just the old blokes wallet that is attractive

Daddio D says:

01:13pm | 13/03/10

Thank you Jojo for that input. I couldn’t agree with you more.