2006-11-11 07:56:54 · 9 answers · asked by Alex 2 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Other - Pregnancy & Parenting
I meant childbearing not rearing. SORRY for stupid mistake
2006-11-11 07:57:43 · update #1
YES.
Plus it does wonders for the parents' sanity. Imagine having a kid at 45. When they're 15, you're 60. And what 60 year old wants to deal with a teenager living in their house?
2006-11-11 08:01:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
First of all, this question is a stupid mistake. Having said that let me say that I didn't marry my husband until I was 30. So for not finding Mr. Right I shouldn't have kids? I know, only 30, well I didn't want to have kids right away. We didn't live together first so we had a lot to get used to. Then upon starting to conceive, at 33, we find my husband has a low sperm count. Now at 35 we are still 'trying'. I will take this child and love it as much, if not more, at 40 as I would have at 25. I have a friend who had a child with downs at age 25 and a perfectly healthy child at 38! I planned on being done having kids at 30, and yet I haven't even started at 35. So, NO, no one should tell anyone at what age to have a child.
2006-11-11 08:05:17 · answer #2 · answered by miss_fred 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think anyone has any right to impose their personal views on anyone else and therefore I won't say what I think is right or wrong. I will say that I am 46 and my kids are 13 and 16. I have many friends in their early and mid 40's with children anywhere from three and on. I am so glad that I don't have young children. I'm worn out!! I couldn't possibly face having a young child and having to face several more years of having children at home but I have made it thru those years. Someone who hasn't done that yet is probably more open-minded.
2006-11-11 12:29:41 · answer #3 · answered by porkchop 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really don't think this should be an issue. It should be about what the parents of those children are willing to live with and cope with.
A better question someone should ask is should it be mandatory for ALL people wanting to have children to take parenting classes before the children are born. How many people do you know that should've had these? I see plenty every day.
2006-11-11 08:11:39 · answer #4 · answered by country girl 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think its different for each couple. If they met earlier in life, 40's could be very late. If they didn't even meet till mid 30's, then 40's might be a consideration.
For me, I've known my husband since I was in 8th grade. We married out of highschool and are now in our late 20's. At 30 I'm done having babies and he agrees with me. But we had our first when I was 18. So for me, 12 year gaps is the most I'm willing to consider.
2006-11-11 08:03:32 · answer #5 · answered by Velken 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, while it is more common for birth defects to occur after age 40 many advances in OB/Gyn practices have made it more acceptable for women 40 and over to have children. Early intervention, more accurate amniocentesis procedures, etc. Also many women find they are more secure financially, mentally and emotionally when they have their children at an older age.
2006-11-11 08:06:42 · answer #6 · answered by All I Hear Is Blah Blah Blah... 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes! the closer to forty you are when you get pregnant the higher the risk of downs syndrome babies.That does not have anything to do with the men, however.They can father babies well into 70's or more with the only complication being they might not live to see the child grow up.
2006-11-11 08:10:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont think it makes a difference. So long as someone is healthy and viable theres no reason they shouldnt have children.
2006-11-11 07:59:19 · answer #8 · answered by amosunknown 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, to be on the safer side.
2006-11-11 08:26:04 · answer #9 · answered by Kria 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋