Prev
Next

What is the best age for women to have babies?

Lucy Kippist

by Lucy Kippist

04 Mar 05:54am

Must Reads

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project - this is a caption

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

41

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics - this is a caption

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

60

Please enter your password - this is a caption

Please enter your password

39

Filed under: Children, Motherhood, Society, Women

212 comments

For me and my girlfriends growing up, having babies was definitely a “no-go” area. Going to university, travelling the world and starting a career were the three things drummed into our heads over and over by mothers who came from a generation that married early -  usually between the ages of 18 and 23 - quickly started a family and left their own careers to play second fiddle to that of their husbands.

What does your biological clock say? Picture: Craig Greenhill.

Almost thirty years down the track and the results are starting to show. The average age of a pregnant woman in Australia is now 29 and 25 per cent of women having their first baby are over 35. There are also more women than ever completing post graduate degrees at university and forging ahead with successful careers.

And while to some women of the “do now”, “procreate later” school of thought these statistics probably spell success, the fact that there are approximately 30, 000 Australian couples currently using IVF treatment to fall pregnant, it’s also easy to see that something is just not right.

Did our mothers get it wrong?

Enter British author Hilary Mantel who in a recent interview with the Telegraph said women need to completely change tack; and when it comes to motherhood, our generation has got it completely wrong.

“Having sex and having babies is what young women are about. And I think it is mens lives that set the timetable,” she said of the modern woman’s drive to place everything else “ahead” of having children.

While I can’t agree that mens agendas have much to do with an independent generation of women holding off on pregnancy and I’m not sure that I would pat my fifteen year old niece on the head and tell her to go through with an unplanned pregnancy; I think Mantel may have a point when she says we need to take a different perspective to motherhood when it comes to advising the next generation.

But what should that advice be?

Nina Funnell wrote in her SMH online response to Kevin Rudd’s alleged and disturbing reference to her PhD studies being a ploy for delaying family life; that she was sick of women being seen only in “light of their ability to be baby incubators”.  And she’s right, the women before us have paved the way for us to want more than just a one-dimensional life.

But the rise of IVF treatment and the plethora of stories from women who find in their late 40s and even 50s they are not able to fall pregnant after years of putting everything else first shows, there is also a real danger in ignoring maternal instincts if they strike. And to a significant number of women having children is still a priority.

Last week the Courier Mail reported the arrival of the fertility alarm clock test. It’s a blood test available through IVF clinics across Australia for around $65 and it tells you “how many eggs” you’ve got left. According to Dr Peter Illingworth, the Director of IVF Australia, it’s been designed to help women make better decisions about their future:

“For a woman who is facing decisions about how active they should get about chasing her fertility in one way or another, it’s information about what the future may hold for her,” he said.

Not only is it fitting technology for a generation of women who want to have it all, speaking to our independent streak and willingness to do things with the right information, in our own time, it’s exactly the kind of thinking that could benefit the next generation; use your natural talents, pursue your dreams but make sure you take advantage of the information available on fertility and your biology and factor that into your plan before making the right decision for yourself.

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

Get The Punch on Facebook

Most commented

431Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
336Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
266Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

212 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Luisita says:

      05:02pm | 09/03/10

      Lots of expert psychologists in here….about 206 so far….............................

      Reply

    • Jojo says:

      10:46am | 09/03/10

      Honestly, when I first read this the first thought which came into my head was my Mum.
      She’s in her 60’s now and I’m in my early 20s, reaching my mids soon.

      I realise that she might now live long enough for her to enjoy her grandchildren, even more unlikely her great-grand children.
      I realise that I will not be able to take care of her and provide for her and her happiness for those years of looking after me and the family despite having, not surprisingly these days, a dud of a father.

      She gave birth to us late because there was no IVF back and the time and she had problems conceiving. By the time she had my youngest sibling she was well in her late 30’s.

      I think women are so caught up in their superwoman life they forget that their selfishness rubs off their children. Yes, 10 post grads, 14 years experience in some corporate war zone, 5 ex-boyfriends and 1 (maybe 2) husbands and 3 children later - what would you have gained from all this?

      The point is doing all that above eats up the time which could have been spent loving and watching your children grow up, being part of thier development and growing process.
      There is no such thing as ‘quality time’, its a word used to justify and alleviate the guilt from not being able to spend time with your loved ones because your other commitments are more important than your family.
      MEN AND WOMEN, not just women.

      My Mom was a business woman who owned several businesses, brought up and paid for an entire family + 2 sets of parents, hers and the in-laws, with her money without the support of my Dad.
      As a result, my siblings and I never saw her much. House was empty when we went to school and when we came back. We had nannies and servants but they were the only ones in the house aside from our grandparents, who were busy with other families as they saw our family as financially secured enough to not need ‘support’.

      Dad went on months long business trips and we barely saw him. Mum, if not on a business trip, would be at a meeting and worked 10 - 12 hour days most times 6 days a week.
      Most days we didn’t even see her during bedtime as we were put to sleep by 8 - 8.30pm (max 9) and our Mom wouldn’t be back till 10-ish.
      We tried staying up but rule of law was applied strictly in our house.

      We had whole Sundays and Saturday nights to enjoy with our Mom but imagine we so longed for her, so desperately we would even tell her not to drive home at the end of the day and always come up with excuses to stay out and extend the outing. (Stoppng by petrol stations because we were ‘hungry’, stopping by shops to ‘look’, etc).

      The envy and jealousy of hearing a friend tell me of how their Mom was making ‘Roast chicken’ made me burn with anger and resentment at never being able to see my parents, despite wanting so desperately to be with them, to talk to them, to just hold their hand.

      You will never know how never being there for your children can hurt and shatter the most important and fragile time of their lives.
      Your “quality” time with your children isn’t “quality” enough to make up for the fact that most probably your children are dying and desperate for your love, attention and most importantly, your arms to embrace and your ears to listen.

      So I say to all Moms, think before you use your child’s life to do 10 post-grads, or work your trail-blazing career clocking up 12 hour days, etc.
      Unless you can spend time with your child, don’t use HIS/HER time to do pursue your own goals or make new commitments.

      I left my family early (by Asian standards), didn’t take a cent from my parents, funded my own studies, lived on my own, met a wonderful man, worked together for 10 years and we are going to make sure that we won’t make the same mistake our parents did with us.
      I didn’t want my life to be ‘bought’ by their money. Like throwing money at your children will make them ‘right’ and ‘happy’ and make up for the time you never spend with them.

      Don’t have children late.
      You are depriving your children of their right to spend time, love and look after you in your twilight years, and your grandchildren to know and love their grandparents.
      And don’t use your child’s childhood and time to pursue your own silly goals unless you can do it in your own time without depriving your child of their time with you.

      Ironic thing was that, when I had nannies, cooks and servants to look after me, all I wanted was to be in my Mom’s lap and all I wanted was to eat a home-cooked meal she cooked with love for me.
      But never in my life have I ever eaten something my Mom cooked.

      I would have been contented living a common middle-class life with a housewife for a mother or mom working part time, and a dad working a regular 9-5.
      All I wanted was their time.

      Reply

    • Daddio D says:

      12:13pm | 13/03/10

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

    • ceils says:

      12:03pm | 08/03/10

      It seems that all we can be certain about is that no two women have the same story, opinions or circumstances.  Using mum’s age to judge a family’s dynamic seems very limited - there are so many more factors that contribute to a healthy and happy family.  I personally chose to have babies young while I am studying, but I am aware that any choice has it’s pros and cons.  While doing my masters, I found it hard to find robust research that looks at the mothers experience when is comes to careers and children - so much focus is on the children, but we often forget to ask mum what she is experiencing.  For this reason, I began my own research on the topic of work and babies.  You can log onto http://www.workandbabies.com if you are a mum and you wish to contribute to this research.

      Reply

    • Pau says:

      01:46pm | 07/03/10

      Only natures at fault here. guess what it doesnt care that you want a career. It does see you as a baby factory and would be quite happy to see you pregant at 15. The reason you find it hard to have kids over 40 is beacuse nature thinks youll be dead by then anyway.
      This also is the reason why older men find younger women attractive its beacuse we are programmed to, thats the natural way…

      Reply

    • PauL says:

      06:38am | 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

    • Lina says:

      08:46am | 07/03/10

      I am 29 and would have a baby now if I could afford it, but the reality is that we need two incomes for at least another 5 years to cover our mortgage. Basically, it all comes down to property prices for me and my husband.

      Reply

    • dani says:

      07:45pm | 06/03/10

      i had my baby at 40yrs old…as before that i had a full on career, a home, a great social life, travelled, done lots…i met my hubby at 39yrs old, had a baby at 40 yrs old..now i am 42 yrs old…and the only thing i say is i wish this would of happened in my early 30’s unfortunately it all happened in my late 30’s…i think early 30’s is the ideal time….our little baby girl was a surprise…every thing happened fast for me at 39yrs..old..

      Reply

    • OddCreature says:

      04:19pm | 06/03/10

      In my experience it seems to be the man who puts the brakes on baby-making more than the woman’s career ambitions. Reality is that, generally speaking, you can’t have a baby unless you have a willing male participant. And so many of my friends want babies right now, but their husbands just aren’t ready, so they use a career and travel as distractions until their turn comes, and see it as an opportunity to set up some financial security so they an have decent time off when they do get to have kids.

      Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of women out there who are materialistic, self-important clones of Carrie Bradshaw. But there are also plenty of us who really want a family, but find other stuff gets in the way.

      Maybe another way to deal with the rise in age-related fertility issues is to explain to both sexes that having a child does not mean your life is over. Because it’s not. I’m 25 and a mum, I still have a career (part time), I still get to go out, and I still get to travel. Of course there are some sacrifices, but just because you become a parent, that doesn’t mean you cease to be anything else.

      Reply

    • OddCreature says:

      02:21pm | 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.

    • OddCreature says:

      01:50pm | 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.

    • Eric says:

      08:40am | 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.

    • samsung says:

      10:39am | 06/03/10

      When do people want to realise the government is the one pushing this have kids later in life crap. it is drilled in to kids heads from primary school.
      Basically it comes down to woman were going to government funded schools, uni, then give that up for family. and then they would get parenting allowance and they also live longer then men so they got the pension. And earnt no tax dollars to pay any of that back. Women were a burden on the governments coffers. Women were honestly to good and productive at home , they were tutor, sewer, chef, child minder, nurse, Gardner, cleaner, and lot more jobs.All tax free.  but getting them to go to work has created more jobs as Australian women are convinced to work in a cubicle all day, and ship their kids off to strangers to look after, eat take away food, higher cleaners, gardeners, get others to mend clothes, wash the dog. all bringing in tax.

      Reply

    • sue k says:

      06:38am | 06/03/10

      I had my first child at 43.  (There is a huge difference between having a FIRST child at that age and adding another sibling, by the way).  Physically it has been tougher, although my pregnancy was a dream.  We don’t have the family supports of our Mother’s generation (in my case, much older), when there were often other women nearby to advise and help out.  But emotionally I think I have been better able to cope than younger women, being more tolerant of silliness, more willing to get in there and get dirty with the child (especially in public), more patient. An extra 20 yesr of life experience has to make a difference somewhere.

      We only have the one, as the risks of disability and such were getting very high & I knew I wouldn’t physically cope with another baby too soon afterwards. That is a pity.  (our child was naturally conceived, IVF not an option anyway)

      There is an age that is too young, especially in this society.  But there is also an age where you are getting too old, and not just for physical reasons.  Just think on this - I will be 63 when my child finishes high school!  I may never see grandchildren.  There’s got to be ahappy medium out there.

      And all I want is to be able to be a housewife!  I have a degree, work in my chosen field part-time, I am blessed.  But much to my mother’s horror, I’d love to stay home, clean and cook, make a fabulous “nest” for my family, do volunteer work and wear an apron!!  And by the way - the time I am at home, I NEVER watch daytime TV, don’t spend exhorbitant amounts on magazines, or go play tennis.

      Reply

    • ruby says:

      06:56pm | 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.

    • Ruby says:

      05:23am | 06/03/10

      My husband and I had our kids at what would now be considered very young and we are oh so very glad we did!  No, we didn’t travel or have lots of time or money for going out having childless fun.  Yes it was hard. But learning to parent is hard at any age.  It’s a hard but rewarding job.  Now we are mid forties and the money is better and we are enjoying some travel and fun before the grandkids come along. We hope to be still young enough to be able to really help our kids out with our grandkids when the time comes.  Our kids know their grandparents really well, and knew their great grandmothers too and this has really enriched their lives. 
      Breeding young worked out really great for us. However I think the when and whether to have kids is a tougher decision now than ever before.  Society has changed, not just women.  It’s harder, much harder, to do things the way we did it now.  It’s not just a matter of women making different choices and problem is fixed. 
      I think the biggest mistake that was made in the past was to constantly tell women that they can do it all. You just can’t.  You have to make choices and for everything you choose to do there’s a cost to it. 
      The costs of delaying having children were never put up for discussion when I was coming through in the 70s and 80s. These days you’re considered a young mother if you are less than 25.  Generations of people had children young and there were just as many great parents then as there are now. Medically it is also just plain ridiculous. and certainly the medical profession has become very vocal about the issue. Our daughter is a medical student and she tells us that at the beginning of the course, the female students were sat down and a female doctor on faculty had a serious talk to them all about fertility and the need for them to plan NOW to be sure that they prioritise having their kids when they are young enough to successfully fall pregnant and deliver the child with low associated risks.  I am sure glad I’m not in my daughter’s shoes making the decisions, she wants kids more than being a doctor, but she’ll be a fantastic doctor she really will, she’s just got such a natural rapport with people… but does it make sense for her to persue a specialisation in surgery? That’s a really tough career path if you want to have babies. A female surgeon gave the advise that it is possible to juggle motherhood and being a surgeon, but you will constantly feel like both your professional life and family life isn’t getting the attention they each deserve.  If you can tolerate that, you can do it.
      I’m just glad that my husband and I are both young enough and financially secure enough to help all our kids with their kids either in loving care, or a big roof they can come live under, or help with the mortgage.. whatever… and hope that this makes the decisions at least a bit easier for them.

      Reply

    • Ben says:

      04:40pm | 05/03/10

      Who ever said quality and not quantity in time spend with kids is just kidding themselves. It’s something a guilty mother would say to assure herself.

      there is no such thing, the more time you spend with your kids the better it is for them, they bond with you, they learn from you.

      Go and read any books on raising children and see if there is such thing as quality time? all about plenty of time with them

      Reply

    • ruby says:

      07:06am | 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..

    • Jess says:

      08:51pm | 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?

    • Sir Lower D' tone says:

      03:35pm | 05/03/10

      Hey darlins, best time to conceive is when ah’m in town. $;- ]

      Reply

    • formersnag not anti women but tired of the "all me says:

      02:47pm | 05/03/10

      http://www.the-spearhead.com/

      Katie & other single ladies out there, struggling to find a man. Omelette is correct, many of you are too picky. Oprah type journalism has for 40 years now, been sprouting fauxmanista dogma at you, “don’t settle for second best” they said. Now, many of you can no longer, “see the wood for, all the trees"out there. Half the worlds population are men.

      However there are now, also many men, like Eric, who have very legitimate concerns, about becoming another divorce statistic. One of my good friends is a CUB, cashed up bogan, a wharfie. Many young men he works with, had parents who divorced & saw first hand, the hell, their fathers were put through. Landing one of these guys is still easy however, all you have to do is sign a pre-nup, guaranteeing that after a “mid life crisis” you won’t, take away his children, home, “everything he has worked for” etc.

      Don’t forget to thank left wing fauxmanista leadership like Germain Greer & Julia Gillard for all your baby/career angst.

      Me, I’m off, to be Ms Gail Kelly’s toyboy, you know, Westpac CEO, 10 million pa. I will be her house husband & she will buy me lots of toys like surf boards, hang gliders, dirt bikes, etc.

      Reply

    • Neuraxis says:

      10:59am | 05/03/10

      My wife and I are late 20s and we got married when I was 23 she 21. We kind of wished we had kids earlier now but we couldn’t afforded to do it back then, even now it will be hard to afforded to live on 1 income, especially because my wife earns double what I do. I think for many people having kids young pretty much means you can’t affored a house, so its like house now or kids later or viser viruser.

      Reply

    • Me says:

      02:44pm | 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

    • Peter says:

      10:38am | 05/03/10

      Geez, everyone. There is no right or wrong to this question. For some, early as possible will work out beautifully. For others, leaving it as late as biologically possible is perfect. It all depends on you, your ambitions, your situation, your mindset and your body.

      p.s. My wife and I have 3 children. As for when we had them and what we think about it, well, it’s pretty much irrelevant. So I’m not saying!

      Reply

    • April says:

      09:48am | 05/03/10

      I’m career driven. I like to support my materialistic lifestyle. I’m certainly not apologizing for that.

      It’s a personal choice.

      Reply

    • hmmmm says:

      08:23pm | 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.

    • Hejira says:

      03:09pm | 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).

    • James1 says:

      02:27pm | 05/03/10

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

    • Khrystene says:

      09:39am | 05/03/10

      The best time for women to have children is when and IF they want to. Not when some wacky scientist or sociolog tells us.

      Reply

    • Fred Bloggs says:

      09:11am | 05/03/10

      We married at 22 and by the time we were 30, we had a family of 5 children, 2 daughters and three sons. As the children grew, my wife and I were still young both physically and emotionally and thus grew with the children.
      Our youngest is now 40 and there’s not a more loving group of children (adults) on this earth. We will be celebrating our 49th wedding anniversary next month as a complete family.  We heartily support starting a family in the early 20’s. The alternative is to sow ones wild oats, then start a family, usually in the middle to late thirty’s. The downside of this is that by the time a child reaches young adulthood, his/her parants are virtually grandparents, and having already done all their living , can’t interact as easily with the child.
      Better to grow with them

      Reply

    • MissA says:

      08:23am | 05/03/10

      I completely agree with this article.  My own family is a classic example.  My mother constantly drummed into my sister and I that we shouldn’t have children early, or at all if we could help it.  We are now 25 and 27, and have got ourselves into situations (ie. careers) where having children would not fit into the picture.  I wish I hadn’t listened to her.  I wish that, instead of telling us not to go down that road, she had advised us to pursue the type of careers that would fit in well with motherhood and family.  We were constantly told that we could do anything, but I wish that I had known at an earlier age that, yes I could do anything, but some careers would work out better than others in terms of fitting in a family.  I am now considering a drastic change in my life to accomodate family.

      Reply

    • James1 says:

      02:35pm | 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.

    • Sam says:

      08:18am | 05/03/10

      WOW… how pleasing it is to read about the “fairer sex” discussing motherhood. It has temporarily restored my fragile faith in humanity. By all means, pursue careers and a multi-dimensional existence, but please don’t forget your original role. In my opinion, women’s attitudes to motherhood has an effect on men’s attitudes to women. Women can lead men astray, and they can bring them back. We “the men”, need women to set the agenda for us to follow, otherwise we’ll create our own agendas that may lead us all astray.

      Parenthood brings structure to the life of an adult with too much freedom and too few responsibilities.

      Reply

    • Madeleine says:

      06:01pm | 05/03/10

      :/

      I hope you’re trolling.

    • Jezebel says:

      01:19pm | 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*

    • isis says:

      08:08am | 05/03/10

      This is ridiculous. By now you should know the risks of waiting. The question for most of you should be, “Why have children at all?”

      Reply

    • Daddio D says:

      07:30am | 05/03/10

      I agree with people who say biologically the best time is 18-28 yrs. Over 30 is a little risky for some women but more especially for the babies (Down’s Syndrome is not uncommon amongst late pregnancies) – yet most women are capable of very normal births and babies into their late 30s, especially given modern medicine. The first birth is the hardest, after that they ‘pop’ out (I was present at births). But when you think about it, most girls are capable of pregnancy in their early teens (Virgin Mary is widely believed to have had Jesus at 16, was 49 when He died – but times and societies change); nature’s clock is already ‘clucking’ amongst teenagers.

      Not mentioned in posts yet, as far as I can see, is that a man’s healthiest sperm occurs around 18-24 yrs of age. That would make me think, putting two and two together of Nature’s way, on an answer for the decision on a ‘good time for a baby’. I am mindful of those who cannot conceive or produce sperm for whatever reason, and also mindful of those who may experience SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome). Smokers, drinkers and drug-takers will have less ‘drive’ in both sexes whatever the ages and may even induce abnormalities in newborn babies.

      My wife had our babies at 26, 29 and 32 ys of age. A professional career woman before we had children, she still took a lot of time out of work when each of the children were in their early years to spend that formative time of their lives with them and between us (yes, I was a baby-caring, nappy-changing, kid-loving and football-mad husband, no harm in that) we managed to raise three well-balanced people despite difficulties of the time. My wife returned to work at what she called ‘appropriate times’.

      A very important thing to remember is that you need to be able to enjoy your children and that they enjoy you, as they grow up and get older; be a real part of each other’s lives. When you’re 55 or 60yrs old, there’s a difference between having lively sons or daughters 20yrs old and more sedate ones that are 35-40yrs old. It’s also different when you are 40-45 yrs old and they are 20 yrs old, you can be more a part of their lives then than at 55yrs of age. Your children will always need you, no matter what age you or they are.

      I don’t believe in breeding children to look after you in your old age. Life doesn’t work out that way and it is totally wrong to expect children to do that for you. One more thing I would encourage – don’t have just one child. That one child could well be family-lonely without siblings when you are sickly or dead. Don’t be selfish for yourself without thinking of that one child’s future life. The more the merrier, within all sorts of reasons - this is my recommendation but You-Choose when to Use-yr-Tubes.

      Reply

    • Laura says:

      10:39pm | 04/03/10

      Sheree your comment about “old” parents was intersting. Don’t you realise that even if you have a baby at 16 your child will think you are “old”? I think the best age to have a chid is about 30. Still young enough for fertility reasons but have also had a chance to study, travel and work.
      Laura.

      Reply

    • melissa says:

      10:27pm | 04/03/10

      I also think it is fantastic that women can choose when and if the want children but its also sad that our mothers/fathers are like no no kids uni and careers first, children later. I was married at 24 and had my first baby at 25 (which I thought at the time was bad timing) and then my second at 28. I have many years a head to go back to work when the kids go to school etc. I gave up my career as a nurse to be home with them as my husband works long hours and has a good salary, we dont have alot but we get by. I feel extremely lucky and I am sad that my mother is like “...but you went to uni why kids now?” People will say how young I am ( i am turing 30) but then I think why did you leave it so long (of course there are many other reasons etc) but when they are in there late 30’s and 40’s just yearning for a baby. Yes they may have their careers and money but now its all spent on IVF and other options. I am a young proud mum, its a hard job and so worth it!

      Reply

    • katie says:

      10:26pm | 04/03/10

      I have difficulty with this subject, personally. And I don’t know why there is the need for so,any people commenting here (for or against) to be so judgmental.

      I am 27. I have not apparently fritted away my life so far on partying it up, but I have wasted it on my “self-imposed” choices to get an decent education and start work. The simple matter is that my parents, who could barely afford to finish high school, really wanted to see me have a degree. So I did. And I liked it, I like learning. It just meant I didn’t emerge until 23, past the age of some of the ladies here when they had kid #1.

      Then came the obvious step of getting a decent job, another thing that was sort of expected within the family. I didn’t mind, I was sick of having no money, so I got a decent job. I wanted to repay my parents for the work they put into my education and save to buy a car and house. I wasn’t a career power woman, nor I am still. I was just practical.

      So I’m only a few years into the working thing and *boom* I’m 27. Apparently near the washed up age for having kids. I am having lots of problems balancing the fact that the ideal age to have kids was years ago, which would have caused me to give up what I had accomplished so far and forced me to rely on either a) a man or b) family. My mother was forced into this arrangement by lack of education and she vehemently raised me to be opposite. A man does not need to make this decision, how can any man make a comment on this choice for a modern young woman? I have more education than a lot of men and yet I am blamed for making this choice (and apparently am destined to do more housework than men though I hate housework as much as the next man).

      Then there’s the finding-a-man thing. I’ve had a boyfriend for much of the past 8 years or so, but they were/are far from ready to talk about kids. You can’t just conjure a man up when YOU want kids or expect your partner to be ready for kids when you are.

      I applaud you ladies who have had the kids and built up a career. I really do. But you know you needed the support of a man or family when you have kids at a young age and I had neither. My family would have looked on me as a failure if I had had kids before I finished uni and Dad could barely support us on his sole income.

      I don’t think there’s an easy answer to this question. Us females obviously can’t have our cake and eat it too. I just hope that a kid will come my way in the next few years and if not… oh well.

      Reply

    • ruby says:

      06:06am | 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.

    • Cathy says:

      04:02pm | 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.

    • Vonny says:

      09:36am | 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…

    • Cookie says:

      10:12pm | 04/03/10

      It’s your story. Your brain. Your body. Your life. Go for a career. Go for a family. Babies alone? why not. Go for travel and excitement. Go for same sex, or opposite sex or no sex. Cats/dogs over kids? no worries. Work for money. Work for passion. Work for the poor. Live in a commune. Live in palace. Live in tent. It’s all OK. Situations and goals change. People develop and mature. They move unpredictably. They work to find their own truth. Their own, individual happiness. And we own our mistakes. We own them alone. So much blah blah and social comment now.  Whatever this, or any other blog/mag says about babies/careers/eggs/blue stockings/PHD’s/breastfeeding vs bottle feeding etc etc, none of it matters. It’s all just fluff, written to make you feel anxious, and come out fighting. I won’t tell you about my life, because it has no bearing on yours smile Choice - now THAT is feminism.

      Reply

    • Brett L says:

      09:29pm | 04/03/10

      Father of 3 boys, first one at 21. My answer the younger you have kids the better.
      1: you can relate better to them and their mates. 2: you can relax earlier in life.
      3: you get to meet all the hot mums while you still have the energy.

      Reply

    • Michellemac says:

      09:26pm | 04/03/10

      I’m in my mid 30s (2 kids) and would suggest that the overwhelmingly vast majority of my female friends in the same age bracket, without children, are also without partners. You need both and egg and a sperm to make a baby! I don’t buy into the career thing as an reason for higher maternal birth ages. I had kids when the urge took me and because I was “lucky” enough to have also met someone who I wanted to have kids with and he wanted them too.

      On the other hand, the men I know who are childless at the same age have, in the main, made a ‘lifestyle choice’ (usually a teenage boys fantasy lifestyle choice!! but a lifestyle choice nonetheless) and then one by one - usually between the ages of 32 and 36 -  have literally looked at themselves in the mirror one day and decided they DO want kids/marriage etc afer all. And literally months later they are walking down the aisle and choosing prams and car seats.

      Just my experience, hugely generalised and totally anecdotal but I would suggest higher maternal ages are actually still more about when men decide to ‘settle down’ than women ‘choosing’ careers/travel/study etc over relationships and childbearing.

      Reply

    • Jess says:

      08:50pm | 04/03/10

      And my mother had her children at…...19, 21, 25, 27,29, 31, 34, 36, 39, 41, 45, 47. She’s 54 now with 5 kids still at home. This was her dream since she was a little girl. She put her all into it and is reaping the rewards. Not physical - she is worn out. But all those things that count…those who know them too will understand. Motherhood is a great career. I hate seeing it so constantly denigrated. I am proud that my mum was “Only a Mother”.

      Reply

    • Jezebel says:

      01:32pm | 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.

    • Jess says:

      08:35pm | 04/03/10

      Married at 20. Children born at 21, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30. Now 35. Homeschooling. One income. Worth the investment (eternal), but damn hard work.

      Reply

    • Sheree says:

      06:36pm | 04/03/10

      I agree with Jane. I had my fist chid at 21, 2nd at 22 and third by 24. Now i am 36 and I am in a good job that i dont have to leave because i have already had a family. yeh we did without but I think its better for the kids to grow up not having everything given to them. I can not see how people marry in their 20’s and then take 10 or so years to have children. what a waste of time. People need to think about the child not the material things. A child doesnt need old parents if it can be avoided. I know there are people who dont have the opportunity younger but the ones that do and dont take it are selfish. We are supposed to have children in our 20’s not 40’s that is for Grandma’s. I could be a grandma at 42. That would be awesome!!!

      Reply

    • Eno says:

      06:08pm | 04/03/10

      I’d have thought it quite simple - some women are ready for a baby at 18 some at 38. If they ain’t ready it’d be irresponsible to have one. Lighten up people..

      Reply

    • Cathy says:

      04:04pm | 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.

    • MnM says:

      04:55pm | 04/03/10

      And who precisely are we to reproduce with? Men in their 20s are (for the most part) interested in having their cake and eating it too, not settling down to play daddy.

      The “have children earlier” campaign to women needs to go alongside a “grow up and learn to be responsible” campaign for men.

      And don’t bother telling me my kids will be sick/obese/whatever because I waited until I was in my 30s to have them. At least they have a decent father, not the irresponsible man-children I wasted time with in my 20s.

      Reply

    • OddCreature says:

      06:13pm | 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.

    • MnM says:

      06:57pm | 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.

    • Eric says:

      06:46am | 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.

    • CandySplitz says:

      04:46pm | 04/03/10

      I was always open to the possibly of having a baby in my 20’s, but unfortunately the opportunity just never arose. 
      It wasn’t because I was gunning for a career or traipsing around the world. Its just that men that you meet in your 20’s also have it drummed into them that they are too young. I do not necessarily mean men in their 20’s, but in their 30’s as well. Well, in my experience anyway. And no, I’m not a psycho who chased down innocent men to gain access to their DNA. If I was, I would of succeeded in my endeavours.
      But of course,  biology and evolution is much more kinder on the male species in this regard, and apparently now that I’m 30, I’m well and truly have been screwed over.

      Reply

    • Kate says:

      04:43pm | 04/03/10

      Why hasn’t anyone raised the issue of parents having a decent knowledge base from life experience and education prior to having children?  I certainly experienced the benefits of learning from older parents (Mum was 35 when she had me).  I am 30 now and not planning on having kids for another couple of years, because I like doing what I want when I want, and I’m not financially ready.  At 25 I would have been a fun Mum, but at 30 I’m going to teach them something about the world and about how to make a difference in it.

      Reply

    • Mrs Mum says:

      04:35pm | 04/03/10

      The “have it all” motherhood dilemma is so middle class.  Most people do not have fulfilling, exciting careers, they just do jobs.

      Reply

    • Mrs UnMum says:

      01:17pm | 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.

    • Older mum says:

      03:29pm | 04/03/10

      I had my children at 35 and 38.  If I could go back in time I would have had them at 25 and 28.  I had difficult pregnancies with complications.  You also have more energy in your twenties to run after young children.

      Reply

    • Hayley says:

      02:59pm | 04/03/10

      Look, there are a few things you need.

      1. A man (ok you could go to a sperm bank if you really wanted)
      2. Money to set up for the baby and a stable income thereafter
      3. A motivation to have children (because lets face it, they are pretty time-consuming!)

      Not everyone gets all of these things at once in life, and if you do and you happen to be under 40 when 1,2 & 3 are all in your life, then good luck and start trying!

      Reply

    • Me says:

      02:50pm | 04/03/10

      My mum had me when she was 33, another at 36 and another at 38. She was exhausted and could not keep up. Even now at 57 she still has a kid at home and she is really feeling the strain. Not to mention she had complications will the last two pregnancies due to her age.

      I am 23, been with my partner for 5 years and my clock has started the tick. We are going to try next year (I will be 24, he will be 28). My mum cannot push us to do it faster. She regrets waiting so long. So what she had a career? She doesnt care now, looking back she would have given up the flash clothes and holidays once a year to have had kids in her mid 20’s so she had the energy to enjoy them (not to mention eventually have the energy to enjoy grand kids!)

      Reply

    • Badger says:

      02:45pm | 04/03/10

      Biologically speaking, the best time to have children is 14 - 16 years old.

      Reply

    • Bujiwara says:

      05:44pm | 04/03/10

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

    • Bob H says:

      03:52pm | 04/03/10

      Of course it is - the taxpayer foots the costs

    • catherine says:

      02:42pm | 04/03/10

      Hi All,
      I have been reading most comments in response to this article.

      A little info on me, married at 21, husband 27, married for nearly 10 years ,fighting to become parents from day one up until now has been nothing but a BATTLE and reading this article about age - only puts us people down who cannot strive to have the family they’ve always wanted. Neverthelss my mother had me at 19 y.o. and i always wanted to become a young mother.

      As i have unexplained infertility (from 19), do not produce many eggs… i guess is my problem (32 y.o. now) but instead of putting pressure on us (if the shoe fits) write about other things please

      no offence

      Reply

    • tash says:

      02:41pm | 04/03/10

      I read all these comments about women who “leave it too late, have children over 35, more interested in career than children”. I have never been like that, i don’t have a serious career that i would value over having children. i would love to meet a guy who wants to have kids and isn’t afraid to say it.

      I am 33, but i would love to have a child, i don’t have a partner, hopefully soon.

      A quick check of a popular dating website, most guys over 30 are interested in travelling or a casual relationship and have no interest in finding a relationship and having kids.  I don’t want to miss out on having kids, really don’t want end up being the crazy cat lady, so i keep positive, stay away from cats and am always hopefull that i won’t have to look for too much longer.

      Reply

    • Jezebel says:

      02:30pm | 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?  wink

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

    • omelette says:

      04:06pm | 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.

    • DINK says:

      02:13pm | 04/03/10

      I’m 29 happily married for 5 years with a wonderful husband, house, career family the lot. I am one of the last of my friends to have a baby and sometimes I am made to feel like the leper of the babyshower/catchup cause i dont have a bub in tow and cant join in when they talk about raising baby; my clcok just isnt ticking yet. I defintly want kids as does my husband and people have told me over and over ‘you’ll know when your ready.. just dont leave it too long’. But the longer i do leave it all the risks of miscarriage increase (50% chance after 30) and then birth defects and labour problems pop up and getting pregnant beocmes a battle ground—that’s why there are so many people on IVF! Its my choice yes, but sometimes i wonder if i am being selfish to my own health/body/eggs/chances for putting it off to continue as a DINK…?

      Reply

    • ruby says:

      06:19am | 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.

    • Macca says:

      02:09pm | 04/03/10

      Why does everyone insist on giving their resume (university acheivements / income / hours worked) as proof they are ‘succesful’ and their decision to have / not have kids was justified.

      Seriously, if you’re happy, that is success, whether you’ve had a couple of ankle biters of not.

      @Lucy, when it feels right. Shame such an innocent topic when south so quickly

      Reply

    • Bitten says:

      10:41pm | 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?

    • Me says:

      02:58pm | 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.

    • J says:

      02:32pm | 04/03/10

      Because secretly, they doubt their decision.

    • sherry says:

      02:02pm | 04/03/10

      i love how there are so many comments about women ‘leaving it too late’. i am 26 and would love children very very soon but unfortunately i don’t have a partner at this moment!! hopefully soon! smile

      Reply

    • Mel says:

      10:28am | 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.

    • Kenny says:

      01:12pm | 04/03/10

      Married at 18 25 now and 8 children (3 sets of twins). Probably better off starting at 35.

      Reply

    • James1 says:

      01:29pm | 04/03/10

      Mate, you need to buy a television or something.

    • More 2 life says:

      01:07pm | 04/03/10

      Girls—- don’t be pressured into having children,as they did in my day..            You only have one life - enjoy it to the full!!                                        The world is grossly over populated as it is!

      Reply

    • Eric says:

      12:57pm | 04/03/10

      In our matriarchal society, women have all the reproductive rights and opportunities. Men have only obligations and responsibilities.

      A child, with today’s family laes, is merely a tool by which a woman can separate a man from his income and assets. Many hundreds of thousands of men have been victimised this way.

      People may debate about the best time for women to have children, but for men the best time is never.

      Reply

    • Macca says:

      02:07pm | 04/03/10

      Oh dear Eric, not today mate,

      ... did she hurt you?

    • Marina Go says:

      01:44pm | 04/03/10

      That is so sad.

    • GP says:

      12:32pm | 04/03/10

      Kids, there’s no need to bicker.  Why not just apply this simple mathematical equation to work out the perfect age for you! Surely it’s different for everyone:

      (babies - no babies) x ((degree + (travel – experience))  x finance /  relationship – (stay home ‘soccer mum’ / need to have kids to look after you when you’re older - career) +  health – support / size of home x (ideal # of children x 1/2) / sacrifice +- joy = 32.

      Reply

    • Jess says:

      08:28pm | 04/03/10

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

    • Happy Dad says:

      12:20pm | 04/03/10

      My Wife and I married at 21 and decided to start a family straight away.

      We have 6 children now, my wife has a double degree and couldn’t be happier.

      We always made sure we only depended on my wage (she has worked on and off) and never lived beyond our means. I dont see the point of having children then farming them off to childcare so you can go back to work.

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

      Reply

    • Bored House Husband says:

      03:38pm | 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.

    • georgie says:

      12:08pm | 04/03/10

      Let me tell you from experience, you need to want to have a baby first. When that kicks in, then have a BEX and a lie down. After that, if you still want that baby be prepared for it to take over your life for at least 20 years. The fertility test is great, but if the indicators say you only have a few eggs left and you are not ready for it - really really think about it.Motherhood is really hard work, under-estimated by everyone. Only do it if you really want it - you can’t take it back.
      20s, 30 s or 40s it really doesn’t matter, you will always mourn the loss of your old life what ever age you have children. There are pos for waiting 3Fs- freedom, finances and fun and the cons for waiting are is the big F the risk of infertility. Good luck to you all.

      Reply

    • Super D says:

      11:54am | 04/03/10

      If women weren’t so fussy they’d be getting married and having kids in their early 30’s rather than going on solo IVF adventures in their early 40’s.

      Reply

    • Super D says:

      02:19pm | 04/03/10

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

    • Julia says:

      12:39pm | 04/03/10

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

    • Tory Maguire

      Tory Maguire says:

      12:17pm | 04/03/10

      How many women do you know who have done that SuperD?

    • Razor says:

      11:52am | 04/03/10

      It is not that difficult to work out:

      Biologically the best time is 18 to 25.

      Socio-economically and psychologically it is when the potential mother and father are ready.

      It is society’s responsibility to somehow communicate to both young men and women the risks, costs and benefits (biologically, economically, socially, psychologically, relationships) of having children both early and late.  Neither is better - just different decision matrices.

      If the government does want to continue to encourage younger people to have children then they need to help to lower the relative cost of first homes.  This can be achieved by both reducing planning restrictions on new developments and increasing the local, state and federal government infrastructure spending in new developments - the problem at the moment is that developers are forced to put ina lot of infrastrucutre that reallhy should be a government function and subsequently this is passed on in the cost of blocks.

      Fecundity rates for young women will continue to fall as their level of education continues to rise.  There is a direct inverse relationship between the two.  If government wishes to actually encourage younger mothers they need to reduce the opportunity costs of having children early.  One suggestion for doing this is introducing income splitting between married couples for the purposes of reducing marginal tax rates.

      Reply

    • Razor says:

      05:11pm | 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.

    • Sarah says:

      12:15pm | 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.

    • Brad says:

      11:39am | 04/03/10

      As a father of 2 children I must say that my wife and were both in our early 30s when we started a family. Neither of our wonderfull boys were planned but both are loved just the same. We stopped after 2 as my wife who is now 36 is getting into danger territory for bith defects and other accociated problems. My wife put her career on hold to have our 2nd child, and just now (2 years later) getting back to the same level she was when she stopped to have # 2.

      We both work fulltime and sometimes wonder what life would be without our boys, but then we love our boys and dont nkow what we would do without them. Women need to “understand” that career can be placed on hold for a family. They dont need to be “Susie Homemaker” forever, and you can get back to work and build your career up.

      The later you leave it girls, the more chance you will have of NEVER having the joy of pregnancy and having a child. I also highly reccomend watching the movie “idiocracy”. it is a stupid movie, but the plot is very close to society today when you sit back and really watch the movie.

      Reply

    • PK says:

      09:07pm | 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?

    • nitpicker says:

      10:53am | 04/03/10

      The IVF stat is interesting but should not be taken as a simple reflection of older mothers. IVF wasn’t available to previous generations. many couples remained childless or adopted. As much as IVF is undoubtedly helping older couples (who - it should be noted have not simply been having fun, but have probably been working hard and spent years contributing to the economy and tax pool) reproduce it’s also an amazing technology that’s helping anyone unable to conceive - regardless of age.

      Reply

    • Em says:

      02:40pm | 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.

    • Marina Go says:

      10:33am | 04/03/10

      My mother was 19 when she gave birth to me, her second child, and I don’t remember a time when she wasn’t working.
      Why do we believe that it’s all or nothing? I had my first son at 28 (on my 28th birthday actually), following four years as Editor of Dolly magazine (my career goal as a teenager). I also had a communications degree and journalism cadetship under my belt by then. I was one of the first to have a baby in my group of friends, some of whom have waited till their late thirties and focused on their career. My second child was born a few months shy of my 32nd birthday, when I was two years into an MBA and on a career high as Editor-in-Chief of ELLE magazine. Both sons are now in high school and I’ve just turned 44. Our boys will have graduated from school by the time I’m 50.
      It’s been a massive juggle; certainly no picnic all of the time: the boys haven’t always understood when I’ve had to whip over to Europe for a week’s work and my CEOs have tried to understand when I’ve had to leave ‘early’ to attend a parent-teacher interview.
      Would I have done it any other way? No way.

      Reply

    • Simon the Pieman says:

      02:20pm | 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.

    • Marina Go says:

      01:37pm | 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:

      01:26pm | 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:

      12:58pm | 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:

      11:13am | 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.

    • Wendy says:

      10:23am | 04/03/10

      Each to their own.  How about having children when you (and your partner!) want them, when you feel you can be the best parent you can, and don’t spend time wondering ‘I wonder if I should have done it differently’ .  There are pros and cons of all the choices.  What suits one person, won’t suit another.  Enjoy all your life experiences, kids, no kids, stay-at-home parenting, career, travel, ALL of that, regardless.  Sure, fertility rates are better if you are younger, and there are probably fewer risks, (although most people still have healthy babies even when older), so if babies are critical to your life, do it sooner, if not, wait, life is about all kinds of experiences, pick which ones are a priority at the time that suits, and try not to judge others for their choices.

      Reply

    • Janie says:

      12:32pm | 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.

    • Wendy #: 2 says:

      11:55am | 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.

    • Brad Coward says:

      10:20am | 04/03/10

      Personally, I feel that whenever a woman feels that it’s the “right time” to have a baby…then it’s the right time !

      Just please don’t expect the rest of the community to pay for your right to give birth.  You know what it costs, so start saving !

      Don’t expect professional educators to teach the fruit of your womb manners, self control, respect for others and their property and other simple social skills.  This is the responsibility of yourself and your husband, boyfriend, girlfriend or life partner.  I don’t expect to have it demanded of me that I change your fourteen year olds nappy !  Sure, it takes the village to raise a child but the task is made easier for the village when it starts in the home.

      Reply

    • sally says:

      11:12am | 04/03/10

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

      Kudos to you!

    • Mr Pastry says:

      10:14am | 04/03/10

      There is something strange about drumming into young women that getting pregnant early when the body is young and healthy is a negative and then spending vast amounts on IVF when the body is old and needs artificial help.  A side effect of humans becoming economic units for generating tax revenue rather than creating little tax expenditures, serves us right for letting accountants take over the world.

      Reply

    • ED says:

      10:08am | 04/03/10

      How are women supposed to have children when they are young, if men have had the same sort of “not now, you are too young” ideas drummed into them?

      Is the only option to have a baby with someone significantly older? I don’t know many men my age (22) who are interested in having babies just yet, and I am not sure if you know this but you need sperm which usually comes from a dude to get knocked up.

      All the blame, all the “silly feminazi’s have brainwashed you” crap is meaningless because pregnancy ain’t a one person job…

      Reply

    • hmmmm says:

      08:09pm | 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.

    • ED says:

      12:32pm | 05/03/10

      Apologies for the appalling spelling and grammar errors.

    • ED says:

      09:29am | 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.

    • Mrsmum says:

      08:38am | 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 )

    • Tim says:

      03:35pm | 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?

    • Jess says:

      10:40am | 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.

    • claudia says:

      09:50am | 04/03/10

      i think women were just so adament to lead a completely different life to their mothers and grandmothers that they have taken on the historically male trait, selective hearing and have switched off to the tick tock of her biological clock. being in my early twenties and having always said i don’t want children, i have recently found out that i might not be able to have children, it certainly changes your perspective on the subject. making the decision yourself is completely different to having it made for you. in summary, women need to worry less about what generations before us have done and think about ALL of the possibilities. things may not be what they seem.

      Reply

    • Jordan says:

      09:44am | 04/03/10

      I should also add that not a day passes when I don’t feel the most crushing sadness that the 2 of us have not had children and now due to age, financial issues and age related health issues will never have children. Because we both were struggling so hard to survive for so long now we have to deal with this as well.

      Seems like 2 sorts of people have children these days, those with parents and families that love them and support them and the ones that have children for the 5k bonus and cause its all that they know in those communities.

      Reply

    • hmmmm says:

      07:55pm | 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.

    • stephen says:

      01:18pm | 04/03/10

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

    • S.L says:

      09:43am | 04/03/10

      Well I suppose my partner and I won the lottery. When we met my partner was in her early 40s and I in my late 30s. She always wanted a big family but her ex husband never wanted kids. Begrudgingly he agreed to one then three years later an “accident” occured which her ex never really excepted. As we looked like we were going to be a long term proposition I suggested she go off the pill and see what happens if she was sure she wanted more kids as her two older ones were late teens by this stage. Our daughter was concieved naturally when my partner was 44. We counted back and worked out it took a week off the pill to do it. Being glutons for punishment our son was concieved and born when mum was 45!

      Reply

    • Radical Chick says:

      12:48pm | 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

    • Bitten says:

      09:38am | 04/03/10

      Well apart from the fact that ‘social commentators’ need a job, I think it’s actually no one’s business but yours whether you have children, whether you don’t have children, and whether you have your children early or later on. That’s not great news for ‘journalists’ thugh (sorry, this isn’t journalism in my opinion, it’s just space-wastage). What on earth will you all be poking your noses into and calling a ‘crisis’ tomorrow?

      Reply

    • Othello Cat says:

      10:11am | 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.

    • OddCreature says:

      05:15pm | 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.

    • Bitten says:

      02:19pm | 05/03/10

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

    • Othello Cat says:

      01:09pm | 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:

      09:52am | 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?

    • Vonny says:

      08:43am | 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! raspberry 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.

    • Gregory says:

      08:22am | 05/03/10

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

    • Bitten says:

      03:59pm | 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.

    • Vonny says:

      02:52pm | 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:

      12:43pm | 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.

    • Bren says:

      12:34pm | 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.

    • Tory Maguire

      Tory Maguire says:

      10:41am | 04/03/10

      Hey Bitten, could you point me to where Lucy said there was a “crisis” or did anything resembling telling people what to do with their lives?

    • R.E.L. says:

      09:34am | 04/03/10

      I know plenty of young couples who married in their early twenties either just after their first degrees or even in some cases married during uni.
      They are happy and both partners work and even the women pursue further study all the while raising a baby or two.
      We often forget that family is there to help; I doubt these guys could really do it if the grandparents/aunt/uncles weren’t there to babysit often while the young parents pursue their careers and further educations.

      Reply

    • Jordan says:

      09:31am | 04/03/10

      If I was to have my life over again I would have children between the ages of 18 and 25.

      Too bad I had no parents and was living on the street when I grew up and even though I have been in a relationship with the same person for nearly 20 years now, since we were both 23, it would have been terribly unfair too have children when you have a poor education, issues with finding employment and housing and when just keeping yourself alive and semi-respectable takes all your energy.

      Oh well, at least better than the constant bashings and abuse that was the daily trade in a home with one parent that would let her male friends make my life a living hell.

      Not everyone has the support they need to have children but if you do have parents that care for you and have had a decent start at life have your children when your young! Much more fun and you have them in your life for longer as they have you.

      Reply

    • Jess says:

      08:17pm | 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.

    • Gsydney says:

      09:31am | 04/03/10

      I am 21 i have a 9 month baby boy, I have had to sacrifice alot but all worth it would not change it for the world

      Reply

    • Michelle says:

      06:02pm | 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:

      09:07am | 04/03/10

      I was lucky enough to meet my soul mate at 19 and we married and had our first child when I was 21 (he was 26).  We have had 2 other children since then.  I am about to turn 30 and I in no way regret having children young.  It was the right decision for us.  I think it is a personal decision though and there can be no right age for everyone.  Let women and men to be make up their own mind when it is the perfect time to have their baby, or not have one.

      Reply

    • cityboy says:

      09:06am | 04/03/10

      Don’t leave it until you are 40! Could you really cope with a 20 yo when you are 60??

      Reply

    • Louise says:

      04:22pm | 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!

    • renee says:

      11:23am | 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.

    • P says:

      09:04am | 04/03/10

      I had my first child and 42 and my second at 44.  Why did I wait so long, I wasn’t waiting, I wasn’t planning or predicting or thinking about my maternal clock - I just always knew I would have kids and when it was time it would happen.

      To all the older parents out there that say they get tired, they should have had them sooner, etc. etc. I for one, never get tired (hmmm, I wonder why) I am an extremely healthy vibrant person and shall be even at 80.  It is a mind set, you can be old at 20 if you want to be.  Do I wish i had them young so that when I am 40 I can be free of kids - no - I don’t think of such ridiculous things, I am happy, pure and simple, I love my kids, so why on earth do I want them to be out of the house, why on earth would I be worrying or thinking about ‘the future’, I concentrate on the here and now and always have done and always will.  So here is to having children ‘at any age’, just be happy, love them, enjoy every moment - and if anything asks you any silly negative questions - just do as I do, smile and walk away - that is their problem not yours!!!

      Happy to be a mother at any age!!

      Reply

    • AdamC says:

      08:54am | 04/03/10

      The best age for a woman to start having kids is her mid-twenties. That is where the differing influences, biological and social, are at their most favourable equilibrium. One of the problems, though, is having kids at this age normally requires a partner who is a little older and more financially established. For high school and uni sweetheart couples, it is probably not feasible to have kids until the late twenties. That is probably OK though – it is when you enter thirtyville that problems seem to start.

      Reply

    • Sarah says:

      08:41am | 04/03/10

      With all respect J, “finding” a husband is not QUITE the same as finding a job.
      But, agreed, prehaps we should tell kids to just go with the flow… life just doesn’t work out the way you want it to. (Am I channelling Doris Day?)

      Reply

    • J says:

      12:50pm | 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?

    • Sarah says:

      11:59am | 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:

      09:23am | 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.

    • Von says:

      08:32am | 04/03/10

      Once they got on with it without fuss and fretting because they had to.Too many destructive fertility choices out there nowdays.
      Ps Had mine at 39 and it was a great success

      Reply

    • Jane says:

      09:55am | 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:

      08:31am | 04/03/10

      If having children is a top priority, a woman needs to invest as much time and effort in finding a husband as job seeking, study, and social pursuits.  For women fixated on husband and children, a certain amount of effort is required.  You can be proactive finding a job, you can be equally proactive in finding a husband.

      If you don’t wish to live your life by a biological timetable, then don’t.  There’s nothing wrong with not having children.  We obsess about procreation and leaving something behind after we die because it’s been drilled into us from day dot.  But it doesn’t mean it’s the right way, and it’s definitely not the only way.

      Live your own life, make your own decisions.  smile

      Reply

    • MelD says:

      10:31am | 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.

    • omelette says:

      01:06pm | 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:

      12:14pm | 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.

    • expand please says:

      10:34am | 04/03/10

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

    • Vicki PS says:

      08:30am | 04/03/10

      I have absolutely no scientific evidence for this, but I firmly believe that the well-known female phenomenon of “getting clucky” is exactly that—your body and brain telling you now is the time.

      I’d be the last person to suggest that women should narrow their choices, but the inescapable fact is that all choices have a cost.

      Reply

    • Ali says:

      07:56pm | 04/03/10

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

    • susie says:

      02:29pm | 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.

    • Dan says:

      11:24am | 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!!!

    • jojo says:

      08:16am | 04/03/10

      I know it seems a hard decision to have children young but it is less frustrating and disappointing than building up your career and then returning to work as a part time member of staff working on ‘special projects’, meaning:  they couldn’t find anything else for you to do and were hoping that you really didn’t come back.  I did it the other way around.  Children in my mid 20’s and then uni when they were little, then post graduate studies when they got a bit older, then my own business.  It is hard to make the decision to have children whether you are younger or older.  It changes your life, but in a good way.  Makes you step back and see that climbing over each other to reach the top of the corporate ladder isn’t all its made out to be.

      Reply

    • Sally says:

      04:39pm | 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.

    • Sarah says:

      08:38am | 04/03/10

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

    • omelette says:

      08:12am | 04/03/10

      Do it soon and they have left the nest by the time you are 40. You could have started on your career once they started going to school. You also had them when you were at your most fertile and the risk of problems were lower and chances of conceiving were higher.

      Have them later and they won’t be leaving the nest until you’re too old to remember what to do with free time. You’ll have started your career only to stop it, and then go back to it only to find that a lot of younger and hungrier men and women have taken your place and your skills aren’t as fresh and relevant anymore. Plus there is less chance of conceiving when older and greater risk of complications.

      The choice is yours to make but biological facts are difficult to ignore.

      I’ll leave it up to others to argue against the ridiculous assertios re “second fiddle” (yeah, because husbands truly had to rule of the roost and lay of the land), “baby incubators” (all humans are designed to reproduce, it’s how we came to be on this planet) and the selfishness of the me-generation who are deluded enough to think they can have it all.

      Reply

    • OddCreature says:

      04:44pm | 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.

    • Mel says:

      08:41am | 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.

    • Lynne says:

      12:27pm | 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.

    • Heather says:

      08:28am | 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!

    • amanda says:

      10:35pm | 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!

    • omelette says:

      01:01pm | 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:

      12:16pm | 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?

    • Mel says:

      09:53am | 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???????

    • stedlar says:

      08:10am | 04/03/10

      I was married at 23, my wife had our first at 35, then another at 37 and the last at 40. So I guess given the age, we were lucky
      The 12 years before kids was great. Having the kids is wonderful, but tiering, relentless. My career is in its stride, and I’m dealing with babies. My wife thinks it would have been easier if she had them when she was younger. She would have had more energy. If our kids wait like we did, I’ll never see grand children.
      But we have the money to deal with things now like toys and school fees and medical, when we first started out we had nothing.
      My older brother had his first when he was 22. A long time ago he was boasting how he had them young and he would have his freedom later. But his oldest is 23 now, and still at home and still needy as kids are want to be.
      I wish I was smarter.

      Reply

    • Mum2four says:

      04:35pm | 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.

    • Kim says:

      01:48pm | 04/03/10

      @James1.  Nicely stated.

    • James1 says:

      10:49am | 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.

    • NJ says:

      07:53am | 04/03/10

      I have never met anyone who I would want to father my children. Well, perhaps “never met” is an exaggeration. I have never fallen in love with and become romantically involved with anyone who I would want to father my children. Although at only 28 I am not too worried. Yet.

      Reply

    • ImaWestie says:

      04:03pm | 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.

    • formersnag not leftard or rightard but centerist. says:

      07:46am | 04/03/10

      Dear Lucy, all young ladies of this post feman-nazism age, Your fauxmanista sistas in da hood lied to you, about a great many things. The hard medical science, dictates that the best age is late teens to early twenties. After age 27 the stats on bad health problems for both you & your baby “go south”. At age 33 the graph starts to look really ugly, exponentially.

      Not only however, is this, recent knowledge, coming from modern medicine, in recent years, but “old wives tales” from mothers, grandmothers, Mid Wives. We have always, collectively, known this, for hundreds, thousands of years.

      Do want to end up a bitter old crone, like Germaine Greer, child-less, husband-less, in your old age, no grandchildren to tell your lifetime of stories, wisdom to, no grandfather to hold your hand or cuddle you on the sofa, while the two of you, pass on the family history, to your grandchildren, together?

      Reply

    • Reeya says:

      05:12pm | 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.

    • wira says:

      04:28pm | 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…

    • Kim says:

      01:45pm | 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?

    • bec says:

      10:39am | 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.

    • Bec says:

      10:04am | 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.

    • Julia says:

      08:53am | 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.

    • OldGirl says:

      07:21am | 04/03/10

      Don’t leave it to late to have children, its not only the risk of disability. It would be nice to be still around to see your granchildren.  In my opinion in your 20’s is great. My mother had me when she was 39 by the time I was 35 she had died. I had my son at 17 (different world and different times) I am 55 now and he is 38, hes had me alot longer than I had my mum. 17 is way to young to have a child, but at the time it was acceptable. I look at 17 year olds today and think “I was a baby myself” But I would never trade him for anything in the world, he’s been my greatest treasure.

      Reply

    • martinX says:

      03:18pm | 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 grin

    • Rebecca says:

      11:44am | 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?

    • Liz Smith says:

      01:01am | 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.

    • VC says:

      08:23am | 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.

    • GlendaSings (not the other Glenda who already repl says:

      10:07pm | 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!

    • Glenda says:

      06:21pm | 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.

    • OldGirl says:

      02:53pm | 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

    • single girl says:

      12:08pm | 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.

    • Sarah says:

      08:11am | 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 smile

      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.

    • Steve says:

      06:01am | 04/03/10

      oops, I forgot to have a baby - give me a break, if you are too busy having a good time, it’s better you don’t breed.

      Reply

    • Gareth says:

      08:27am | 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.

    • must be the dud bec refers to says:

      12:49pm | 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

    • Clarise says:

      02:23am | 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.

    • blah blah says:

      06:03pm | 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

    • Tim says:

      12:39pm | 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?

    • bec says:

      12:23pm | 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.

    • Belle says:

      12:14pm | 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:

      12:00pm | 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.

    • James1 says:

      10:41am | 04/03/10

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

    • bec says:

      10:18am | 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.

    • Womens libber from waaay back just not a feminist says:

      09:41am | 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:

      07:29am | 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.

 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:27PM

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:11PM

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:00PM

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 08:57PM

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

by David Penberthy

0

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

by Paul Toohey

0

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

by Angela Mollard

0

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed