Parents - How old were you when your first child was born?

[D.P.]

Wife 33, me 32.

We were amongst the youngest of our peer-group to have a children, most have been a few years older.
We had been together well over 6 years.

This was good age IMO. We would have waited a little while but at the time were living opposite sides of the US and so had less opportunities to, well, you know, get it on. So we were worried it might take some time to succeed (turns out I score 1 for 1).


By this point we had just started to settle, had careers sufficiently progressed, enough savings to buy a house, and a few years just to ourselves.
In an ideal word I would have waited another 10 years but biology does play a part.

 

[John40]

Me 24 wife 20.

 

[the_worrier]

20, girlfriend was 19. That child is now nearing 20 and we have been happily married for nearly 18 years. Had 2 more kids and they have all followed me around in my RAF career over the last 18 years.

 

[atpbx]

I was 20, my wife was 26.

My son is 18 in july.

I can't imagine having kids at my age now, I would be in my 50's just when they are beginning to get interesting.

 

[D.P.]

31 (both - 32 now). While we weren't 100% sure if we were ready, in hindsight, I'd like to have done it a bit earlier, maybe 3 years or thereabouts. Mainly because I think about my age later in their life.

We're in the north (Cheshire).

People say this but it doesn't make any sense.

The fittest people I know are all in their 50s and 60s.

A work colleague is 58 and ran 72 marathons last year (try working out the logistics). A friend of the family is a mountain guide in his mid 50s and led a part up Everest not long ago.

 

[D.P.]

Also you need to remember, making a decision to try doesn't mean you will instantly fall pregnant. For many people it will take up to a year to conceive, the odds are something like 20% within 2 months and 85% will conceive by the end of the year.

Equally, don't expected it to take long either. As I said above, we also heard these odds and since we would have relatively possibilities at the right time (there is really only a few days in the month that matter) we thought the odds would be very low of success within a year.

In the end it took just 1 ejaculation, which was kind of disappointing form a sexy-time perspective

 

[Arcane]

Handling a teenager when you are in your fifties? Rather you than me!

Don't say that, I'm tired already.

 

[Xordium]

People say this but it doesn't make any sense.

The fittest people I know are all in their 50s and 60s.

A work colleague is 58 and ran 72 marathons last year (try working out the logistics). A friend of the family is a mountain guide in his mid 50s and led a part up Everest not long ago.

Just because the fittest people you know are in their 50s and 60s doesn't mean that is necessarily correct across the whole population. Do you think that maybe is more indicative of your social group? I'm very fit and always have been but I have complete hell trying to keep up my lad and his mates at football it's like playing a bunch of Jack Russells the little blighters are everywhere nipping at your ankles.

 

[Lifelong]

Equally, don't expected it to take long either. As I said above, we also heard these odds and since we would have relatively possibilities at the right time (there is really only a few days in the month that matter) we thought the odds would be very low of success within a year.

In the end it took just 1 ejaculation, which was kind of disappointing form a sexy-time perspective

maybe there was some help on the side?

 

[Andybtsn]

I was 27, wife 26.

2nd one was born a couple of months ago. Tired times.

 

[AmyS]

My first was born when I was 23, husband was 33. I've just had my second at 34, feel more confident/laid back being older than I did in my early twenties.

 

[Sandycheeks]

I was 22, wife was 20, second one was 5 years later.
We been married now for 8 years but been together since I was 20 - I turn 38 this year.
TBH the first one crept up on us but I'm glad he did. The second was planned (I caved in)
I plan on being mortgage free by 45 so can then start to enjoy the freedom that brings when the kids are old enough start out on their own.
I will also be in a lot better place financially to be of assistance when called upon and young enough to enjoy grandchildren - should they arrive.

My lad turned 15 a couple of days ago, my girl is 10 in August.

Win Win !!!

 

[Burned_Alive]

People say this but it doesn't make any sense.

The fittest people I know are all in their 50s and 60s.

A work colleague is 58 and ran 72 marathons last year (try working out the logistics). A friend of the family is a mountain guide in his mid 50s and led a part up Everest not long ago.

Not just the fitness, but for example (Age you have children at, given the average parent age is increasing);

20 - You'll be 40 when they're 20. 50 when they're 30 and having kids?
30 - You'll be 50 when they're 20. 60 when they're 30 and having kids?
40 - You'll be 60 when they're 20. 70 when they're 30 and having kids?
50 - You'll be 70 when they're 20. 80 when they're 30 and having kids?

How much of their life do you want to be around for? And what about your grandchildren? And maybe even great-grandchildren if you do it early enough?

I'd rather be around for more of their life than less.

 

[LordSplodge]

Don't say that, I'm tired already.

Small babies and toddlers are hard work too!

How much of their life do you want to be around for? And what about your grandchildren? And maybe even great-grandchildren if you do it early enough?

I'd rather be around for more of their life than less.

Indeed, hopefully I'll get great-grandchildren and be of an age where I am not infirm.

 

[Smit]

I was 29, wife was 24

 

[HangTime]

33 (both) in the South.
Felt a bit early as I would have liked another couple of years enjoying life (from a freedom perspective, I'm not implying that children don't bring joy!) and to have got a better idea where our careers were heading (and hence where we need to live) before having the child. In other words:

-A bit more travelling
-Work out where we are likely to be working in our 30s/40s and move there before having the child (so mum and baby get to know local families rather than learning in one place and then having to re-lean following a move)
-More staying up late playing computer games rather than babysitting or being so knackered I need to go to bed early

On the flipside, the 'biological clock' was ticking and probably best to be under 50 to have the energy to keep up with a growing child.

 

[D.P.]

Not just the fitness, but for example (Age you have children at, given the average parent age is increasing);

20 - You'll be 40 when they're 20. 50 when they're 30 and having kids?
30 - You'll be 50 when they're 20. 60 when they're 30 and having kids?
40 - You'll be 60 when they're 20. 70 when they're 30 and having kids?
50 - You'll be 70 when they're 20. 80 when they're 30 and having kids?

How much of their life do you want to be around for? And what about your grandchildren? And maybe even great-grandchildren if you do it early enough?

I'd rather be around for more of their life than less.

The 50 year scenario is anyway basically impossible from biological perspective. The 40 year scenario seems perfectly reasonable to me, and is basically where me and my partner are at. Our parents are almst 70 and we have the first child., what is the big deal?


That is nothing you can control anyway. When I hit 18 I left home to go to uni, left the country at 22 and see my parent once every few years.



The converse is that I hope to retire in my mid-40s, and then look at all the time I will have with the children when they are old enough to go on adventures together. Do you want to be 25 and locked down in your family life or still free to live your life?

 

[D.P.]

33 (both) in the South.
Felt a bit early as I would have liked another couple of years enjoying life (from a freedom perspective, I'm not implying that children don't bring joy!) and to have got a better idea where our careers were heading (and hence where we need to live) before having the child. In other words:

-A bit more travelling
-Work out where we are likely to be working in our 30s/40s and move there before having the child (so mum and baby get to know local families rather than learning in one place and then having to re-lean following a move)
-More staying up late playing computer games rather than babysitting or being so knackered I need to go to bed early

On the flipside, the 'biological clock' was ticking and probably best to be under 50 to have the energy to keep up with a growing child.

I'm the same, would have loved another 10 years of living my life and doing the things I wanted to do, freely traveling the world , progressing the career, getting finances in order. But you have to compromise.

 

[Spacedeck]

We actually have 2 girls, 16 months apart, thats proper hard work.

Me and my brother was born 16 months apart (me being the youngest). Always seemed a little too close. Is being born so close together that hard? It's 9 months isn't it? So it would make resting for 7 months while looking after the newborn, before going through it all again...

I'm actually pleasantly surprised at the ages people here are mentioning. I currently haven't a kid and I'll be 25 this year. My sister is now 30 (I think) and she has 3 kids...

Plus the fact around here, you see a lot of these young mums....

 

[Burned_Alive]

The 50 year scenario is anyway basically impossible from biological perspective. The 40 year scenario seems perfectly reasonable to me, and is basically where me and my partner are at. Our parents are almst 70 and we have the first child., what is the big deal?


That is nothing you can control anyway. When I hit 18 I left home to go to uni, left the country at 22 and see my parent once every few years.



The converse is that I hope to retire in my mid-40s, and then look at all the time I will have with the children when they are old enough to go on adventures together. Do you want to be 25 and locked down in your family life or still free to live your life?

At the end of the day, there's no right or wrong answer. You just have to decide how you want to balance it.

For me, 31 is a good middle ground, but I would've chosen to do it earlier in hindsight.