Names Searched Right Now:
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 6 to 10 of 16
  1. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,109
    Personally, I believe being a younger parent is better in general. You have more energy, you're young enough to really enjoy your grandchildren and be involved in their lives. I was 24 when I had Rowan, and the second child will probably come when I'm 26-27. But my husband was 33 when Rowan was born so he will be 35-36 when the next one comes along. From my personal experience, my mom was 37 when she had me and I feel like she was much older than all my friend's parents. I feel slightly cheated out of more time with my mom. My husband's mom is only 52 and he is almost 10 years older than me.

    I want to have my children (2) now so I can fully enjoy their adult lives, as well as mine. I still want to travel the world!
    My cherished daughter, Rowan Jane. ~b. 10/2011~


    Sawyer ~ Aven ~ Elowen ~ Sage ~ Eilonwy ~ Eleanor
    Morgan ~ Asher ~ ___ ~ ___ ~ Currently trying to fill the blanks...


    Trying for #2 in January 2014.

  2. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    778
    I'm 32 and pregnant with my first. For me, having a baby 10 years ago, or even 5, probably would have been a disaster. I certainly wanted to finish school first and experience life some. I've definitely matured a lot but I still feel youthful and no less energetic than I did in college. Sure I could party all night then, but I think it's not that I couldn't now, just that somewhere along the line stuff like that lost its interest for me. (and I'm glad it did well before becoming a mom) I have no doubts I'll be able to chase this kid around, and another after him.

    I think it depends so much on who you are. It depends how mature you are, how stable your life is, what else you want out of life beside children, how many children you want to wind up with.

    Of course, I'm thinking of all of this in terms of early 20s as "young mom" and early 30s as "old mom". All the differences become much more extreme when you get into teen moms and moms in their 40s. And focusing on first-time moms. Some women have their first child and last 20+ years apart, with or without others in-between. I know several families where there's at least a decade between the planned family and the surprise last baby.

  3. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    32
    I don't really think it matters. A young woman could be more financially and emotionally stable to support a child, old or young, than a older parent, or vise versa.
    Mom to Olivia Anne with another baby on the way!

  4. #12
    My mom was 30 when she had me and that's quite average..I think. I would say that 35+ is pretty old. Personally, I want to have my first when I'm around 29-30. At that age you are financially stable and you have seen quite a lot of the world, so you're ready to mature and settle down.

  5. #14
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    366
    Unless someone has experienced raising a child at both ends of the spectrum, I think it would be hard to judge which is better. I personally have no idea what it would have been like to have had a child at a young age as I can only speak for my current experience, and if most people think mid 30's is pretty old then I guess I am ancient. Although there are specific issues/worries with being an older parent and ideally I would have preferred to be a little younger, life doesn't always go as planned.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •