The advantage of doing it in the earliest decade (20's) is that you are obviously young, probably healthier than at any other time in your life. Also, you will be younger when your kid grows up!!! The disadvantage is that people generally are still improving their financial earning power so you might not have as much money in your 20's as your 30's or 40's for your kids. But, you will find a way. As far as the 50's? Save that decade (and maybe the 40's) to be a grandparent. You can spoil your grandkids as opposed to raising them!!!
2006-10-29 07:35:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
There are positives and negatives for all age groups...
My first was when I was 17. I was healthy and so was he. Financially it was quite difficult but I was in the same boat as every other first time mother as far as learning how to be a parent goes. Didn't work until he was 2 1/2 as I wasn't qualified in anything but saw him attain lots of milestones. Now he is a teenager and I can relate to alot of what he's going through and am considered "cool" by his friends. We have a close friendship.
My second was at 25. Still healthy but she was a bit smaller. Worked through pregnancy and remained stressed for most of it, which was a negative. Was in the middle of trying to do it "right" and providing better financially for two children. Back to work at 3 months and missed out on most of her 'firsts'. Still, I was young enough and healthy enough to enjoy playing together and still remember what my younger years were like.
Third pregnancy now and almost 31. Starting to feel a little older and a bit less healthy/energetic but still love to play. Will be staying home for as long as possible, at least 6 months, so I can see 'it' grow and develop.
So far its been more than 13 years of my life so the idea of continuing with children into my 40's and 50's isn't appealing. I'm looking forward to having the financial stability then to travel the world and spend time focusing on my husband and I, popping in to see how well the children are doing, wherever they may be, and even playing with and spoiling our grandchildren.
I would never want my children to feel like they could lose me to a heart attack or any number of age-related illnesses before they became teenagers. There are so many risks already in life. Why increase the odds of abandoning them when they need you so much?
2006-10-29 08:21:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by KJJx4 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Late 20s to early 30s.
2006-10-29 07:37:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by retrodragonfly 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Medically and physically the medical profession reckon that the ovum are at the peak between 24-28 which is why some medical consultants are recommending that women get their ovum extracted and frozen before 30 years of age.
Personally I had my six between 24 and 37. And I was the youngest on the ward of four with my sixth!! Good Luck...
2006-10-29 10:07:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I have 5 children I think its easier to have children when you are younger. I was 24 when I had my first child. 26 with the second 29 with the third I found it was easier to wake up in the night and care for them. My fourth I was 32 & fifth I was 33 and felt this was a shock to the system I found it difficult to wake at night and have a lot less energy and this is with the children sleeping well.
2006-10-29 09:35:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mel 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
When you are in a long term loving exclusive relationship, when you are old enough to be able to vote, marry, own your own home, have a job and when you do not have to live of the government by choice! So I would say from mid 20+
2006-10-29 07:43:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by jizzi 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
I don't think it is a question of age, but situation.
Personally I feel that you should not even consider to have a baby unless:-
a) You are in a stable loving relationship
b) You have room in your house/flat to bring up the baby
c) You are financially secure enough to support the baby
d) You are in a position where you will not have to go back to work until the child starts school.
I realise the last one is not always possible, but in a ideal world a pre school child should not have to go to childcare.
2006-10-29 07:42:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by FUGAZI 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think the best age is between 25-35 only because once you enter your 30's your health risks increase.When I was pregnant the doctors would always tell me that I didn't have to take certain test because i was under 35 or i didn't have to worry about different things because i was under 35 and that having kids before 35 was best because.
2006-10-29 10:06:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by ckieldy05 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
You need to grow up first. Late 20s to mid 30s is best. Make sure you have enough education, a good relationship and finances in order before conceiving.
2006-10-29 08:17:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by tamster 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Apparently, the best time for a woman to have a baby is when she's 23 years of age - physically best time anyway. Take finances, maturity etc. into it and I'd go for 30 years - split the difference and 26½ years is probably good!
2006-10-29 08:03:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Nicola L 3
·
1⤊
1⤋