The baby time line question...

[TheOptimist]

Does your guy have a time line for when he thinks is a good time for to have a baby? Is he willing to compromise? How did the compromise come about?


I am asking cause BF has this set time frame of 10 years to have kids. We are in our late twenties. And 10 years is a long time, especially for women. I don't want to have my first child right before 40, if I still can at that time, that is. I think men have more flexibility, however, women do not. I feel like we (women) are on a limited time line. I know BF and I will need to discuss this but I just wanted to know if any of the other guys felt this way and then were willing to compromise. I don't want to have children right away, but 10 years is just not doable for me, especially if I want to have more than one. I want to be a fun active mom, not a mom that's almost 60 when my kid graduates from high school. I can't even imagine having more than one child if that was the case. I am trying to figure out if this is a deal breaker if he won't budge or if this is just silly boy thinking which isn't realistic to but they haven't figured it out yet

 

[CNOS128]

My boyfriend has an incredibly unrealistic timeline. He sees himself with kid(s) in 2 years. I try to bring him back down to reality. "Uh, honey, in order for me to have kids, I''d like to be married. And in order to get married, I need to be engaged. And in order for me to get engaged, well, someone needs to ask. That''s all going to take more than 2 years..."

It''s like he''s got this alternate reality.

Anyhow, my point is that he doesn''t really know what he wants or what a decent timeline is. Also, I''ve seen a zillion guys not want kids until they were 40, but then all of a sudden they turned 31 or 32, had been married for a couple years, and really wanted babies.

I''d say unless he''s absolutely SURE it''s going to be 10 years before baby, there''s room for compromise, and a biology lesson (I keep telling my BF that it takes women over 30 year old 1-2 years on average to conceive).

 

[chocolatefudge]

My SO has really surprised me. After a few years together I started talking about having babies in the future and he really didn''t seem into the idea and was saying things about 10 years or more, which was feasible as we were both in early twenties. However, his younger sister has since had two baby boys and he loves them so much and now wants kids of his own! He''s really into the idea, far more than getting married! Actually, buying a house and having a baby seem to be the things that excite him, whereas he does not seem interested in getting married one bit! He says we will get married and knows that I will not have a baby until this happens but I don''t know how long that''s going to be.

Men do seem clueless when it comes to the issue of conceiving. Before my SO was so excited about the baby idea he thought mid thirties was an ideal time and would not listen when I tried to explain that the older a woman is the longer it takes to conceive and the more likely the woman and baby are to experience problems.

 

[sandia_rose]

My mileage is a little different than most - I was 32 when I got pregnant with my son (total surprise) and I was not married at the time. I got married to my son's father when my son was almost a year old, but in retrospect, I should have kept the baby and thrown the man out BEFORE I married him. Would have saved me a ton of money and time away from the divorce lawyer's office. Having said that.....

I was the MOH in a good friend's wedding 3 years ago. At the time, she was 25 and had been dating her BF 2 years and living together with him for 1. They got pregnant with their first daughter the year after their wedding and are now pregnant with their second and final child. That timeline seems to have worked for them. They had four years of "enjoying each other as a couple" time - 3 living together and 1 as newlyweds. Their daughters will be two years apart by the time the one in the oven is born and my friend will still be under 30. However, my friend is very mature for her age. Her husband is already in his 30s and established in his career. He was ready to start trying the day after the wedding. She doesn't feel the need to "go out with the girls" and do the kinds of things where babies would get in the way, and it was important for her to be a Mom before she was 30, so their timing synched up.

I, on the other hand, was in no shape to be a Mom in my 20s. I was too busy partying and being single and having fun. I was barely ready to be a Mom at 32 - I had gotten very selfish in my Me Lifestyle - and really, really put a lot of thought into whether or not I wanted to have the baby. My son is 8 now, and I'm aware that I'm going to be almost 50 when he gets out of high school. His father will be almost 60 -- my son's conception was even more of a shock to him than it was to me, because he had never been married before and really didn't want kids or a wife. But, I don't want additional children, so that's fine with me. And in retrospect, had I not had him when I did, I wouldn't have had any children. My current BF (who may or may not turn out to be my husband or long-term partner some day) is 46, has two teenagers from a prior marriage and has said that even if I wanted a baby, it would be out of the question with him. He is "done" in that department. I will be 40 in six months and am already showing signs of pre-menopause (periods getting irregular and lighter, etc). In my family, this is normal timing....but I'd be in a world of hurt if I wanted a child and was childless at this point.

I am thankful I had my son when I did -- because I am in the mindset and have the life experience to be able to be thankful for him, as well as that I am way more mature now than I ever could have been in my 20s.

Rather than thinking of this as a dealbreaker, think about:

1) Are you emotionally ready to be a parent? I grossly underestimated how much my life would change with a child. I am very happy I have my son now -- but it was a huge adjustment.

2) Are you emotionally and financially ready to parent your child or children alone if you had to? I'm not just talking about divorce or a relationship breaking up. As horrible as it sounds, your man could die unexpectedly or become incapacitated. This happened to my ex-husband's sister. Her husband died suddenly from an undiagnosed heart defect - just died in his sleep at 34 - leaving her with a 3 year old to parent on her own. Thankfully, my ex has a huge family who help her out - because she is not educated and honestly not very mature. Her husband was almost like a "Daddy" to her, and alone, she is very helpless.

3) Think about how important being a young parent is to you. On one hand, it's great to have kids in your 20s because you have more energy, can have more kids if you want and will still be young when they go off on their own. On the other hand, having kids in your 30s and early 40s also has benefits - you're more mature, usually better off financially, have had a lot of time to be wild and enjoy having no responsibility. The trade off is that if you start having kids older, you usually will only have one or two -- and in some cases, none at all. It's a very personal choice you have to work out for yourself.

4) Think about what means more - being married with kids or being with your man without kids. We sometimes have to make that choice, too. I was involved with a man before my ex that had been born sterile. His former wife left him because they tried for years to have kids and they learned that he had no sperm count whatsoever. Having a biological child was #1 to her. He was very upfront about this when we started dating, and I told him that if we went down that road, I'd be perfectly happy to adopt or get a dog. In other words, he was more important to me than motherhood. But only you can make that choice (and if you choose baby over man, that's fine, too).

That's just my 2¢, from my life being as it has been.

Bridget in Connecticut..

 

[TheOptimist]

Date: 4/3/2008 3:54:44 PM
Author: sandia_rose
My mileage is a little different than most - I was 32 when I got pregnant with my son (total surprise) and I was not married at the time. I got married to my son's father when my son was almost a year old, but in retrospect, I should have kept the baby and thrown the man out BEFORE I married him. Would have saved me a ton of money and time away from the divorce lawyer's office. Having said that.....


I was the MOH in a good friend's wedding 3 years ago. At the time, she was 25 and had been dating her BF 2 years and living together with him for 1. They got pregnant with their first daughter the year after their wedding and are now pregnant with their second and final child. That timeline seems to have worked for them. They had four years of 'enjoying each other as a couple' time - 3 living together and 1 as newlyweds. Their daughters will be two years apart by the time the one in the oven is born and my friend will still be under 30. However, my friend is very mature for her age. Her husband is already in his 30s and established in his career. He was ready to start trying the day after the wedding. She doesn't feel the need to 'go out with the girls' and do the kinds of things where babies would get in the way, and it was important for her to be a Mom before she was 30, so their timing synched up.


I, on the other hand, was in no shape to be a Mom in my 20s. I was too busy partying and being single and having fun. I was barely ready to be a Mom at 32 - I had gotten very selfish in my Me Lifestyle - and really, really put a lot of thought into whether or not I wanted to have the baby. My son is 8 now, and I'm aware that I'm going to be almost 50 when he gets out of high school. His father will be almost 60 -- my son's conception was even more of a shock to him than it was to me, because he had never been married before and really didn't want kids or a wife. But, I don't want additional children, so that's fine with me. And in retrospect, had I not had him when I did, I wouldn't have had any children. My current BF (who may or may not turn out to be my husband or long-term partner some day) is 46, has two teenagers from a prior marriage and has said that even if I wanted a baby, it would be out of the question with him. He is 'done' in that department. I will be 40 in six months and am already showing signs of pre-menopause (periods getting irregular and lighter, etc). In my family, this is normal timing....but I'd be in a world of hurt if I wanted a child and was childless at this point.


I am thankful I had my son when I did -- because I am in the mindset and have the life experience to be able to be thankful for him, as well as that I am way more mature now than I ever could have been in my 20s.


Rather than thinking of this as a dealbreaker, think about:


1) Are you emotionally ready to be a parent? I grossly underestimated how much my life would change with a child. I am very happy I have my son now -- but it was a huge adjustment.


2) Are you emotionally and financially ready to parent your child or children alone if you had to? I'm not just talking about divorce or a relationship breaking up. As horrible as it sounds, your man could die unexpectedly or become incapacitated. This happened to my ex-husband's sister. Her husband died suddenly from an undiagnosed heart defect - just died in his sleep at 34 - leaving her with a 3 year old to parent on her own. Thankfully, my ex has a huge family who help her out - because she is not educated and honestly not very mature. Her husband was almost like a 'Daddy' to her, and alone, she is very helpless.


3) Think about how important being a young parent is to you. On one hand, it's great to have kids in your 20s because you have more energy, can have more kids if you want and will still be young when they go off on their own. On the other hand, having kids in your 30s and early 40s also has benefits - you're more mature, usually better off financially, have had a lot of time to be wild and enjoy having no responsibility. The trade off is that if you start having kids older, you usually will only have one or two -- and in some cases, none at all. It's a very personal choice you have to work out for yourself.


4) Think about what means more - being married with kids or being with your man without kids. We sometimes have to make that choice, too. I was involved with a man before my ex that had been born sterile. His former wife left him because they tried for years to have kids and they learned that he had no sperm count whatsoever. Having a biological child was #1 to her. He was very upfront about this when we started dating, and I told him that if we went down that road, I'd be perfectly happy to adopt or get a dog. In other words, he was more important to me than motherhood. But only you can make that choice (and if you choose baby over man, that's fine, too).


That's just my 2¢, from my life being as it has been.


Bridget in Connecticut..

Thanks for replying. And to answer your questions, I do not want to have children right now but realistically in 3-5 years, I would at least like to have one by then. I have known for quite some time that I am ready, both physically, mentally, and financially. I know that my SO is working on getting financially stable and career settled and will be there in 3 years. Is he the one? I hope so. And realistically, we have talked about marriage and it seems to be where we are heading. However, I do want to be a young mom, not young in the sense of tomorrow, but in the sense of I can run around and do fun things with my kids while they are young and still be "in" enough when they get older that I am not out of touch with them. Would I be willing to be married with no children? No. I am honest with myself about that. But do they have to be biological, not necessarily. I would love to adopt one child at some point of my life.

 

[choro72]

I've been giving this a lot of this a lot of thought. My BF thinks it's fine as long as I get pregnant in my 30s, but I'm 27 now and desperately want one before I'm 30. I'm also worried because I KNOW I'm going to have problems conceiving.
But I do understand his point of view too, because it has to do with the issues that Sandia has pointed out.

Are you emotionally ready to be a parent?
Yes we are. It will be harder than whatever we are imagining, but I am confident that we are both capable of sticking it through together.

Are you emotionally and financially ready to parent your child or children alone if you had to?
This is the biggest reason BF doesn't think we should rush into it, and I agree in this point. I am absolutely incapable of raising a child on my own. I'm still a graduate student, and if anything happens to BF, I will be screwed.

Think about how important being a young parent is to you.
On the other hand, this is the biggest reason I want to have children soon. BF is now 33. As it is, he is already going to push into his 50s when the child enters high school. He will be in his 40s teaching them how to play ball. My parents are almost 60 now, and I don't care what people say about "people having more energy despite their age". My parents are TIRED. Even if they live an active life, there is no denying that they get exhausted easily. I worry that I am going to be an older parent than they are.

Think about what means more - being married with kids or being with your man without kids.
Being Asian, I've always thought that children are essential to a married couple. But now I'm calming down more, and have realized that if it proves too difficult for me to conceive, I'll be happy to adopt or spend the rest of my life with him alone. I've told him that to me, our lives as husband and wife comes before the children, and I believe that the bond between the parents contributes to the wellbeing of the children as well.

Bottom line: I want children. Badly. But my life with my BF comes first, and the rest will follow as fate deems fit.
But I know we need to at least try, because my BF is the oldest and only son of the family, and so is his father

I'm sure other Asians will understand.

 

[Keepingthefaith21]

Ahhhh….the great baby debate. I am convinced that this is the reason my hair is turning gray already!

Both SO and I agree we want a family but we haven’t worked out a timeline for it to happen. I certainly want to be married first and ideally I would like to feel more established at my job (I have only been in my “new” position for about a year). As much as I want a family I think I want a few more years of being able to live my life the way I want to before I have to worry about who is going to get the child at daycare etc.

Since I am staring down my 30’s I have to start to figure this stuff out sooner rather than later. It seems like when we discuss this topic we agree that we’ll be trying within 5 years. The hope is to be married within 2 years and have 2-3 years of being married and then hopefully we will be able to have a child.

I do anticipate that I will have difficulties due to past medical problems and both SO and I have accepted that we may never have a child. We are in agreement that we are okay not having children and we agree that if we really wanted a child, adoption is certainly an option. So, I’m kind of leaving most of this to the Universe to decide.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

I know many couples whose baby timelines determined the marriage timeline. I know that was the case for us--we decided that we wanted to have kids we were 29/30 and that we wanted to be married for at least 3 years before starting to try for baby #1. We'd actually created that timeline when we were 20, so LONG before any of it was to be put into action. He flaked out on me the the engagement timeline approached, but we got back on track, haha. Now that we're married I want to push back the baby timeline and he's a bit more ready...

I think you can make small compromises (pushing the timeline forward or back by a year), but a whole decade is a HUGE compromise. I know that for me, being on the same page about when to have kids, how many, where to raise them, how to raise them, etc. was critical before we seriously considered marriage. I can understand why waiting another decade for kids is not doable for you, have you outlined all of the reasons you are not willing to wait? I know that in my situation D is not comfortable with us waiting until our mid/late thirties because of the higher health risks--for him, that was a major concern. Reading studies, facts, numbers, etc. had a big impact on him. I'm wondering if you were to supplement some of your conversations about how you feel towards having a baby with some statistics, if he might start to understand that it's not just how you feel, but about your and your baby's health.

 

[moderatelypoorstudent]

Hey! This has been such a super interesting thread already! And I like seeing everyone''s responses, they''re so diverse as to planning and experience.

My SO and I are definitely not having children in the next 3 years. But I''m detailed and we haven''t yet ironed out yet if we''d get pregnant 2 years from now and have the child that 3rd year or get pregnant then and have the child in technically 4 years. I''d be under 30, but since SO is a little bit older, he''d be mid 30s. And for him, I think it''s a nice age gap we have where I don''t feel any biological clock ticking and he''s feeling ready and financially secure before we put any buns in the oven.

If my SO (god forbid) was unable to be around after I had the child, I am certain I''d have a tough time for the first two years or more, but I also realize that after that, it will become substantially easier financially. I do have a lot of family so that''s always helpful, but still it is somewhat intimidating to think that I might not be well off enough to take care of my child in the first couple of years. Still, if we waited till I was definitely out of residency, my SO may well be into his 40s and the idea of that is unappealing to both him and me. I guess we''re not 100% sure of the details.

To be blunt, I don''t even know if I''d feel the need/urge to get married if I didn''t want children. I think they are far more life altering than marriage and for someone my age, I think we should put ourselves through at least a few life altering tests before having kids.

As for kids vs. husband idea: still sort of torn on that one.

 

[Pandora II]

Okay, here goes:

Are you emotionally ready to be a parent?

That may depends on whether I''m in the "babies are great and I WILL cope" hour or the "Oh my God I will have NO life ever, ever again" hour. There are 12 of each in every day.

Are you emotionally and financially ready to parent your child or children alone if you had to?

Pandora makes note to check FI''s life insurance cover to make sure there is enough money to cover full-time nanny and a good shrink.

Think about how important being a young parent is to you.

Too late, too late...

Think about what means more - being married with kids or being with your man without kids.

Now that''s a hard one...

In all seriousness, I''m 36 this year - in fact 3 weeks after our wedding. When I first met FI, I was unsure about kids - but more no that yes. He was 100% no.

Let''s just say we are going to TTC as of August this year - and he''s already talking about 2.

I think we will be good parents but it will be a serious shock to the system. I am also worried as I have disability issues - my back is shot to pieces and I will have serious problems carrying a child around. I''m also bipolar and have a greatly increased risk of post natal depression.

I had a long talk with my GP 3 weeks ago - he''s a good friend as well as my doctor, and understands my fears and worries. He had kids at the same age as I will be (kids are now 5 & 3) so he can tell me how he felt before, after and now, which has been very helpful.

A lot of people think it''s wrong to have kids if you aren''t gooey over them. FI and I are regarding it a bit as a very long-term experiment. We are intrigued to see what we produce and attempt various parenting techniques!

If we can''t conceive - unlikely with my genes (I have a gazillion relatives and no blood-related female has ever tried for more than 2 months to get PG) - then I will feel equally happy and fulfilled with my life as will FI. We don''t want to put ourselves through the emotional turmoil of IVF and we won''t qualify for adoption (my age and mental illness).

Yup, basically I''m terrified but I reckon I''ll cope when he/she arrives (crosses fingers, legs, toes and makes note to apply early for ''Supernanny'')

 

[Octavia]

This is an interesting post, and I think that the prospect of having a family had something to do with FI proposing when he did. He''s 3 1/2 years older than I am, and he''s definitely more enthusiastic about having kids than I am right now. We saw Juno a couple weeks ago and as we left the theatre he started talking about having a baby. I gently (I hope) reminded him that we agreed to at least get married first!

So...my answers to the bold questions:

Are you emotionally ready to be a parent?
Not right now. I''m in school and I just think I still need a few years before I can give up my life as I know it. However, a year ago I would have even thought about replying to this posting because the very thought of kids made me cringe. And even though FI likes the idea of having kids, I don''t think he fully realizes how much life will change and how much work it will be. This doesn''t seem to be something most guys think about until they absolutely have to (or at least the ones I know)...they''re fast-forwarding to coaching the kindergarten soccer team and family vacations on the beach.

Are you emotionally and financially ready to parent your child or children alone if you had to?
Well, since I''m not emotionally ready to have a child yet, definitely no to this one right now. At this point, I can''t stomach the thought of being a single parent. FI travels often for business, and the thought of parenting while he''s away stresses me out. But I also know that I can handle what I kneed to handle, and hopefully I will be gainfully and securely employed by the time we have kids, so I''m sure that if something unfortunate happened I''d be able to carry on.

Think about how important being a young parent is to you.
Somewhat. I really want to have our first kid when I''m about 30/31 and our second when I''m 32/33. I don''t want to start being a mom at 35+, and FI also wants to have kids before he''s too much older. Luckily, these ages follow our engagement/marriage/family plans well, so hopefully the biological functions will comply, too.

Think about what means more - being married with kids or being with your man without kids.
I''ve never been wild about the idea of pregnancy. It''s probably the reason I was always so negative about kids until that day (pre-)FI and I were talking and randomly, it just popped into my head that I would not only be willing to have children with him, but be excited about it. Still, I think I would be fine if I never had kids -- it''s not that tied in with my sense of identity. FI, on the other hand, would be devastated if we don''t have kids, but they don''t necessarily have to be biological. We''ve discussed what we would do if we''re unable to have our own children, and we''d do our best to adopt. Neither of us like the idea of IVF, so it''s unlikely (but not impossible) that we''d choose that option.

 

[redfaerythinker]

Being as young as I am I haven''t really thought too much about this question. SO and I know that we want one child and from our purely speculative timeline, we plan to marry at around 23, 24. We then will have time just for ourselves to travel, save money, get a house, what have you. Then at around the 28 to 32-ish time-frame we will try to have a child.

 

[MoonWater]

Well, I discussed the biological details about having a child when a woman is a certain age and discussed the risks for when women are older. As a result, I suggested a certain age and time frame and he simply agreed. I don''t think he was keen on the idea of kids at the time but figured he''d be ready by the deadline (which at the time was 4 or 5 years off). In the last few months, he''s grown fond of the idea of children and we still have 2 years left.

I think it''s important for you to make your guy aware of the risks. Perhaps that would help him put things into perspective. It also helps to tell him the costs of trying to concieve with the help of science! It''s a killer on the wallet.

 

[FrekeChild]

No kids for us unless one comes unexpectedly. Or if when we "grow up" we decide we want one, we''ll adopt.

Our reasons for not having kids:
a. His heart condition and heart problems in his family.
b. His family history of diabetes
c. His family history of cancer
d. My hypothyroidism
e. My totally unknown medical history due to my adoption
f. His family (that''s all I''ll say on the subject)

It''s all a very personal decision. Neither of us feel a great need to reproduce, and it''s not out of the realm of possibility that BF could pass away at a young age due to his medical issues. He will have to undergo surgery every 10-15 years of his life, for the rest of it.

Yup, no kids for me.

As for the OP, no he doesn''t, although if we''re going to do it, I want to be no older than 33. That leaves 7 years to figure it out.

 

[misscuppycake]

My boyfriend thinks that an appropriate time to have kids is within the first 2-3 years of marriage. I think this is a little soon but seeing as we''re not even engaged yet (and probably won''t be for a while), I think we still have some time to work out a compromise.

 

[PrettyBlues]

I was just speaking to my SO about a baby timeline last weekend, so it''s funny this should come up. I had asked him because it may effect what I do when we get back to Canada - will I work or go back to school? He said absolute latest to start is by the time he is 35 (so four years) but he wouldn''t care if we started right away

I didn''t expect him to say that! Of course, since we are soon moving half way across the world and are not yet married, I said that was pretty unlikely. I would love for it happen by 33, but we''ll see. I have a feeling once we start, we are going to move very quickly on the buy house, engagement, wedding and babies! But that''s good because I certainly feel ready for all of those things now. It''s funny, I didn''t really think about any of it, and then everything hit me all at once when I turned 30!

 

[absolut_blonde]

This is a really important one, to me.

My parents had a hard time conceiving me when my mom was 34. I was basically a Clomid baby and they weren't able to have any more children after that. When I was younger, before I went on birth control, my periods were always highly irregular. So, I'm pretty paranoid about being able to HAVE children. Perhaps irrrationally so, but nonetheless it's extremely important to me. I would adopt if necessary, but I really want to experience pregnancy and all of the things that come along with that.

To be on the safe side, I've always wanted children relatively young. I'm 24 now and honestly, if the circumstances allowed for it then I would be happy to be trying for a baby now. I honestly do think I am ready emotionally. It's just the financial and situational factors (LDR, newish relationship,etc) that aren't right. For a number of reasons, the timing is not right and that is fine but I really want at least one baby by 30. I don't know if I'm the odd one out but I have baby fever big time, it kind of sucks!

SO and I have set a tentative age of about 27 for me (which would make him about 29). Like someone else mentioned, though, guys tend not to realize how soon OTHER things must be set in motion in order for these things to happen. We've still got a year or so, but assuming a 1 year engagement and a few months of trying to conceive... it adds up, timewise. Again, there is no hurry but the goal of 27ish doesn't really fit in with his other (aforementioned) plan of living together for 2 years before engagement! I think he might want to start trying right after the wedding so that might be part of the reason we don't entirely see eye-to-eye on a number of things. I wouldn't mind being married for awhile first, but however it works out eventually will be fine.

 

[heather318]

This topic is definitely a big one for us.. My parents were young when they had me 22/26 (I have a sister thats a year older than me), but FI''s parents were 30/28 when they had him followed by his sister 2 years later. We''ve already decided we''re going to wait at least a year after the wedding to start trying to have a baby.. We''ll both be 25 at that time.. But we''ve also decided that we''re going to assess all of the other factors involved (i.e. financial stability) at the time before we make a concrete decision..

 

[allycat0303]

Well I have a timeline and nothing he says is going to change my mind! And it bascially is as LOONG as possible. I am thinking 36-37 if I can manage it.

I do agree that it is different for a woman because we give birth, so in many ways, I do think we should have a little tiny more say in this then the men do. That being said, I think that as a guy, they don''t necessarily feel ready and see it as a ''''in the distant future way'''' but when it does change, it changes fast, and it might be well before he thinks.

 

[anchor31]

It''s not an easy subject for us. My FI wants them as soon as possible; I''m in no rush at all. He''s 3½ years older than me and he''s had a steady job for over 3 years now, so if I got pregnant on our honeymoon in August he''d be thrilled, but I''m certainly not ready.

His ideal timeline: At least one child before he turns 30, so TTC in January 2011 at the latest.
That would mean that I would be 25, we''d have been married for less than 2½ years.

My ideal timeline: No TTC before I''m at least 28, IF I have a steady job and we have a house, so May 2013 at the soonest.
Close to 5 years of marriage seem more reasonable to me, especially given my age.

Realistically, we''ll probably be able to reach a compromise somewhere in between those two dates. Given of course that my two "if"s are fulfilled. I may go to grad school in a year, so they may be pretty big "if"s. We''ll see, I guess. Of course, if we have a "surprise", I''m sure we''ll manage!

 

[janinegirly]

You feeling that women have less flexibility in this area is not just a feeling, it''s a biological fact. I think it''s healthy to not rush into having children (and I personally was not ready in my 20''s!) but we have to be honest and realize the statistics. After 35, fertility begins to drop off and continues to do so with drop accelerating with each year. After 40, it''s quite high risk. OF course there are exceptions, but why play around with risks and chances when you have time now (and are already in a relationship with the person you want to have children with). Also if you''d like to have more than 1, it''s even more reason to start before your ultimate deadline.

Other factors to consider are that it can take 6 mos-1 yr to conceive and the risks of chromosomal defects increases at 35 and also goes up with each year. I''m not meaning to be a downer, it''s just things we need to consider as women and I kind of think celebrities do us a big disservice by having babies very late (and seeminging so easily) without being honest about what it took to get there (often infertility treatments and lots of $$). AND for the record, I married late (35) and had all these thoughts in my head, so started TTC''ing with a few months following the wedding and got pg right away--so the scary stats aren''t always correct for everyone, but I do think it''s important to be aware and not push your luck so to speak.

 

[sunnyd]

Ah babies...

I think SO is more ready than I am right now! He''s the type of guy who waves at kids anywhere. It''s so cute.

As far as a timeline...I''m pretty sure we''ll be married in 2 years, then I''d like to be married a couple of years with house and some financial means to support a child. He said he''d wanna be 30, making me 29. 5 years from now. Which works for me, since we want to have 2 for sure, a third maybe. He comes from a family of 4 kids, I have 2 siblings. But we''ll see what happens. My mom had a hell of a time conceiving my brother, and there are 6 years between him and I. He practically rolled out because my mom couldn''t carry him anymore!!

Funny, I always thought I''d have all my kids before 30!

 

[sandia_rose]

Date: 4/4/2008 11:55:12 AM
Author: janinegirly

You feeling that women have less flexibility in this area is not just a feeling, it''s a biological fact. I think it''s healthy to not rush into having children (and I personally was not ready in my 20''s!) but we have to be honest and realize the statistics. After 35, fertility begins to drop off and continues to do so with drop accelerating with each year. After 40, it''s quite high risk. OF course there are exceptions, but why play around with risks and chances when you have time now (and are already in a relationship with the person you want to have children with). Also if you''d like to have more than 1, it''s even more reason to start before your ultimate deadline.

Other factors to consider are that it can take 6 mos-1 yr to conceive and the risks of chromosomal defects increases at 35 and also goes up with each year. I''m not meaning to be a downer, it''s just things we need to consider as women and I kind of think celebrities do us a big disservice by having babies very late (and seeminging so easily) without being honest about what it took to get there (often infertility treatments and lots of $$). AND for the record, I married late (35) and had all these thoughts in my head, so started TTC''ing with a few months following the wedding and got pg right away--so the scary stats aren''t always correct for everyone, but I do think it''s important to be aware and not push your luck so to speak.

That''s why I''d said that, in retrospect, it''s a good thing that I had my son unplanned at 32, because if I was childless now - at 39 and starting to go through menopause and with a man who does not want more children - I wouldn''t have any, period. You do bring up a valid point as far as chromosome issues. I personally know a woman who tried for years to have her own biological child. Her husband was at the point where he was fine with the idea of adopting, but she wasn''t. She conceived at 42 and miscarried, then continued trying. She finally got pregnant and carried to term at 44. That child is severely autistic with additional health issues, and he will need round the clock care for the rest of his life. Can you say for sure that it was her age that caused his problems? No....but it probably had a lot to do with it. Men make new sperm cells daily until they die. We''re born with all the eggs we''ll ever have, and like real eggs, they get stale after a while. Doctors are upfront in telling you that after 40 pregnancies are risky and have an increased chance of resulting in a child with Down Syndrome or other problems. It really p***es me off when I see another 40-something celeb with a baby. Agree - be honest about what it took for you to get there. The average woman doesn''t have those options or the funding it takes to get the best docs, the best treatments, etc. (similar to the fact that all of the celebs are size 2s, which very few real women are).

I don''t want to judge anyone, but why would anyone consciously want to risk giving birth to a child that is going to have physical or mental problems? It''s one thing if it happens by biological accident -- and quite another to be told of the risk upfront and still take the chance. It''s like someone handing you a beaker of acid and saying, "You have a one in four chance of dying if you drink this." Would you still drink it? Freke Child''s attitude towards the subject, given some of the known factors she posted, is smart and unselfish. I really wish more people with the same kind of deck thought that way. Maybe this is just my area, but I have been seeing a lot of women lately who are obviously on the dark side of 40 with Down Syndrome kids. Another woman I know and her husband are Ashkenazi Jewish. They had genetic testing after their wedding and found that they had the gene for Taye-Sachs and another bad condition. They got something like a 1 in 3 chance of having a child with one disorder or the other, and they chose instead to adopt.

I was watching a Connecticut Public TV special one night, and it talked about how the Department of Children and Youth Services in this state desperately needs foster parents and adoptive parents. There are children - beautiful children - who are older than infants, some with health issues, that need homes. If I couldn''t have a child on my own and wanted one, I wouldn''t hesitate to look into that option. Lots of people go to Eastern Europe or China to adopt babies without even looking into the kids in their own cities that need homes.

Bridget in Connecticut..

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 4/4/2008 11:55:12 AM
Author: janinegirly
You feeling that women have less flexibility in this area is not just a feeling, it''s a biological fact. I think it''s healthy to not rush into having children (and I personally was not ready in my 20''s!) but we have to be honest and realize the statistics. After 35, fertility begins to drop off and continues to do so with drop accelerating with each year. After 40, it''s quite high risk. OF course there are exceptions, but why play around with risks and chances when you have time now (and are already in a relationship with the person you want to have children with). Also if you''d like to have more than 1, it''s even more reason to start before your ultimate deadline.

Other factors to consider are that it can take 6 mos-1 yr to conceive and the risks of chromosomal defects increases at 35 and also goes up with each year. I''m not meaning to be a downer, it''s just things we need to consider as women and I kind of think celebrities do us a big disservice by having babies very late (and seeminging so easily) without being honest about what it took to get there (often infertility treatments and lots of $$). AND for the record, I married late (35) and had all these thoughts in my head, so started TTC''ing with a few months following the wedding and got pg right away--so the scary stats aren''t always correct for everyone, but I do think it''s important to be aware and not push your luck so to speak.

Ditto the above. I always try to let the women I speak to know about this. You''re right, Hollywood really is giving off this impression that you can wait until you''re 40 to start. Doctors are saying that healthy older women are coming to them in disbelief over not being able to conceive. The doctor has to tell them, it''s not just your health, your eggs have been there since you were born, not only are they getting old, but you lose at least one each month!! I''m extremely paranoid about getting pregnant and I probably have no reason to (my mom got pregnant with my last brother at 37).

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Date: 4/4/2008 11:55:12 AM
Author: janinegirly
You feeling that women have less flexibility in this area is not just a feeling, it''s a biological fact. I think it''s healthy to not rush into having children (and I personally was not ready in my 20''s!) but we have to be honest and realize the statistics. After 35, fertility begins to drop off and continues to do so with drop accelerating with each year. After 40, it''s quite high risk. OF course there are exceptions, but why play around with risks and chances when you have time now (and are already in a relationship with the person you want to have children with). Also if you''d like to have more than 1, it''s even more reason to start before your ultimate deadline.

Other factors to consider are that it can take 6 mos-1 yr to conceive and the risks of chromosomal defects increases at 35 and also goes up with each year. I''m not meaning to be a downer, it''s just things we need to consider as women and I kind of think celebrities do us a big disservice by having babies very late (and seeminging so easily) without being honest about what it took to get there (often infertility treatments and lots of $$). AND for the record, I married late (35) and had all these thoughts in my head, so started TTC''ing with a few months following the wedding and got pg right away--so the scary stats aren''t always correct for everyone, but I do think it''s important to be aware and not push your luck so to speak.

Not to threadjack here, but I didn''t know you were pregnant, Janine! Congrats!!! I should really check in on the pregnancy thread so I know these things!!

Also, I completley agree with Janine about everything she said and it''s what started our "when should we have babies" conversation many years ago. After we read up about the health risks of pregnancy after 35, we used that as a starting point and started working back chronologically. We knew we wanted to 2 chldren, so we wanted to start TTC for baby #2 around the age of 32/33. That meant we needed to start trying for baby #1 around 29/30. Then that drove our wedding timeline, the engagement timeline, etc. Not that any of that really worked out just as we planned, but we needed SOME plan and making that plan around what was healthiest for me and our potential children seemed logical to us.

This is also why it''s so important to talk about alternatives in case you can''t conceive or have health risks. In my case, I will have a high risk pregnancy and will have to be on bed rest "for as long as I can bear the pain" (as my doctor put it). This prompted us to do research on premature children and the health problems associated with it. I basically told my husband that I was going to stay pregnant for as long as I possibly could despite the pain so that I could get to as close as full term as possible. I think my husband was a little relieved I was willing to do that since he didn''t feel okay with asking me to, but in my mind it is my responsibility to put the baby''s health first. That was the basis for how we put our timeline and plan together.

 

[sandia_rose]

Date: 4/4/2008 5:12:58 PM
Author: MoonWater

Ditto the above. I always try to let the women I speak to know about this. You're right, Hollywood really is giving off this impression that you can wait until you're 40 to start. Doctors are saying that healthy older women are coming to them in disbelief over not being able to conceive. The doctor has to tell them, it's not just your health, your eggs have been there since you were born, not only are they getting old, but you lose at least one each month!! I'm extremely paranoid about getting pregnant and I probably have no reason to (my mom got pregnant with my last brother at 37).

The thing we forget, I think, is that even though medical science has gotten more refined and older women can now look younger than ever before (the whole trend of "50 is the new 30"), that doesn't change basic biology. I was telling a girlfriend a couple weeks ago that my GYN told me that I was starting to go through menopause, and my girlfriend said, "But you're so YOUNG." Um....I look like I'm in my late 20s/early 30s because I've taken good care of myself and live a clean lifestyle (exercise, no smoke, don't drink excessively, no drugs, no tanning) but the fact is that I'm going to be 40 in September.

40 is not old nowadays...but a hundred years ago, people's life expectencies were much shorter. One of my great aunts got married at 15 in 1922, and she was completely finished having children by the time she was 25. My mom had my brothers and I at 19, 22 and 23. It was almost unheard of, even 50 years ago, for a 40 year old or beyond to have a child. It happened, but it wasn't common. And menopause? Most women start by 45, with some being done and over with by then (personally, I am looking FORWARD to never having to buy another $4 box of Tampax again!).

The youthful appearance that a lot of us have - even non movie stars - is deceptive. This carries over to a lot of other things, too. I've been a runner since I was an older teenager. A few years ago, I started having knee pain. Come to find out, I have an MCL tear in my right knee. Even if I get it repaired, I can't run with the same intensity as I did when I was in my 20s. The sports medicine doctor that looked at it told me that I'm lucky to have kept it up this long. Competition-wise, you occasionally see runners in their 40s and 50s, but the majority of people who do the marathons and team running are in their teens and 20s. When I hike or do outdoor work, I'm finding that I get tired faster and can't go as fast or as long as I used to. It frustrates me sometimes, because I feel so young (like I say, "Too young to feel this old"). I have to be reminded that the body basically wears out like any other machine, even with good care. Older cars can run a long time if you care for them properly, but even they are going to start to leak oil and not run at peak performance once they get to the 150K mile mark.

Biologically, we haven't evolved much in the last hundred thousand years. We're still the same animal whose life expectency was 35 in the Middle Ages.

Bridget in Connecticut.

 

[MoonWater]

This thread is so enlightening.

Freke I commend you on your maturity in your decision. I don''t think a lot of people would be as thoughtful and selfless as you and your BF!

NewEnglandLady I may have missed a thread where you dicussed this, or perhaps you don''t want to share the details, if not ignore this question. But why will you have a high risk pregnancy?

Bridget you said what I''ve been saying for years. The fact that biology just hasn''t caught up with technology!! It''s so damn annoying. I''ve complained often that I don''t think we should start our periods so early lol. I would probably put off having kids for a while longer if it weren''t for all the risks!

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 4/3/2008 7:02:54 PM
Author: redfaerythinker
Being as young as I am I haven''t really thought too much about this question. SO and I know that we want one child and from our purely speculative timeline, we plan to marry at around 23, 24. We then will have time just for ourselves to travel, save money, get a house, what have you. Then at around the 28 to 32-ish time-frame we will try to have a child.

Same here, except we''d really like to start 27-28ish if possible. I actually think a lot about this though because I worry about law school affecting our time line, but we''ll figure it out.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Date: 4/4/2008 5:58:45 PM
Author: MoonWater
This thread is so enlightening.

Freke I commend you on your maturity in your decision. I don''t think a lot of people would be as thoughtful and selfless as you and your BF!

NewEnglandLady I may have missed a thread where you dicussed this, or perhaps you don''t want to share the details, if not ignore this question. But why will you have a high risk pregnancy?

Bridget you said what I''ve been saying for years. The fact that biology just hasn''t caught up with technology!! It''s so damn annoying. I''ve complained often that I don''t think we should start our periods so early lol. I would probably put off having kids for a while longer if it weren''t for all the risks!

All but 3 vertebrae in my spine have been fused. I underwent the fusion when I was 12 due to extensive scoliosis. The problem is that a.) fusing my spine halted all growth, so essentially my torso is the same size it was when I was 12, which means my heart and lungs have been somewhat compromised. I work out every day to keep them strong (doctor says it''s mandatory), but it''s still a concern. and b.) my spine doesn''t bend, nor do I have any cushion between my vertebrae because of the fusion. This means I can''t carry my weight in my lower back the way most women do. This is apparently what will be painful for me--they want to see how long I can go carrying my weight forward, but estimate that around the 5 month mark I will be put on bed rest and by month 6 or 7, I will have a hard time moving. My orthopaedic surgeon and ob/gyn have both ruled out the option of going to full term. Obviously, using a surrogate mother is an option we are seriously considering.

 

[sandia_rose]

Date: 4/4/2008 6:25:29 PM
Author: NewEnglandLady

All but 3 vertebrae in my spine have been fused. I underwent the fusion when I was 12 due to extensive scoliosis. The problem is that a.) fusing my spine halted all growth, so essentially my torso is the same size it was when I was 12, which means my heart and lungs have been somewhat compromised. I work out every day to keep them strong (doctor says it's mandatory), but it's still a concern. and b.) my spine doesn't bend, nor do I have any cushion between my vertebrae because of the fusion. This means I can't carry my weight in my lower back the way most women do. This is apparently what will be painful for me--they want to see how long I can go carrying my weight forward, but estimate that around the 5 month mark I will be put on bed rest and by month 6 or 7, I will have a hard time moving. My orthopaedic surgeon and ob/gyn have both ruled out the option of going to full term. Obviously, using a surrogate mother is an option we are seriously considering.

You might want to look into some of the research that has been done on people with dwarfism. There are women with that condition who have carried pregancies successfully. It's considered high risk, but not as high risk as you may think. One that I am thinking of is the couple that have the show on TLC - the man and woman both have dwarfism and they have (if I remember right) 3 kids. They're not rich by any means - just regular people who don't have the money for expensive treatments or specialists (like the celebs we were complaining about earlier). I like that show, because it shows what is possible when faced with what a lot of people consider disabling.

What some end up needing to do is to go on bedrest, which takes the burden of the weight off. I just got that thought when you wrote that your torso is smaller than average. A lot of people with dwarfism also have spinal problems, which is also what gave me the idea.

(By the way, I sympathize with you. Not that this is the same thing or even comparable, but when I was pregnant with my son, I carried very low and around my 7th month, he parked himself in such a way where I had constant sciatic pain. I had severe lower back pain 24/7, with the shooting sharp pains that felt like someone was constantly kicking me in the butt, and that went down one leg. I asked my midwife what I could do to get rid of the pain and she said, "Deliver." There was a period of two days where the pain went away because he moved....but that was not scott-free. His feet were right over my bladder and he kicked me unexpectedly and made me pee myself in work. Fortunately, I was wearing black at the time.

. Anyway, the sciatic was terrible, and from that time on, I have a special understanding for anyone who has back issues)

Bridget in Connecticut..