Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Pure curiosity as I’m bored …

121 replies

Ifyoudid · 23/07/2022 21:00

If you had to choose a baby at 20, or a baby at 40, which would you go for?

Assuming that you had no issues conceiving either time.

OP posts:
MyHusbandTheIdiot · 23/07/2022 22:20

40 100%. I say that having had two in my mid to late twenties, so the ‘prime’ age for many - what I would give to have been able to live my life and pursue my career like most of my peers have in my twenties. Now in my early thirties and I’m so far on the back foot it’s not even funny, not sure I will ever catch up.

I would absolutely have started 10 years later given my time again. And I’ve no bloody energy anyway!!

NotRainingToday · 23/07/2022 22:24

I think the conclusion here is:

  • any time that works for you is good
  • 30 is better than 20 or 40
A very interesting thread 🙂
TeapotTitties · 23/07/2022 22:25

20 definitely

SugarAndSpiceIsNice · 23/07/2022 22:26

40
Even 1 child accelerates your ageing let alone multiple children. I'd much rather look old in my 40s than in my 20s.
Also I spent my 20s discovering myself and finding my voice and confidence.
Children are better off raised by a self-sufficient and confident mum.

nomistake · 23/07/2022 22:32
  1. Tbh kids when you're 40 means the majority of the rest of your healthy, energetic adult life will be taken up by raising them, and it's all consuming.
bumblefeline · 23/07/2022 22:36

20 that's when I had my first. Aged 40 now and exhausted most of the time.

Mycatsgoldtooth · 23/07/2022 22:38

Hmmmmm, I would have been a shit mum at 20 but it would have given more time with my kids. Had mine at 32, 35 & 38. I’m much calmer at 38 then 32. So in an ideal world where I was in a village surrounded by my family living a wholesome life I choose 20. But living in a big city with no family support living the party life I choose 40. Great thread, love everyone’s answers.

BellaLab · 23/07/2022 22:40

20, I had 3 by the time I was 27. I never wanted to have children when I was over 30. It’s a very personal choice when you have children though! After our first child I went to Uni, graduated then went on to do my masters after the others were born. After I had DC 2 DH’s career took off. This allowed us to have a full time nanny which made it easy for me to study and build my own career as DH was often away months/over a year at a time.

RobynNora · 23/07/2022 22:42

Younger ideally but I’d say 40 because I would have struggled with money.

Unless living with parents like a kid yourself and disrupting their lives too, it’d be seriously tough.

Throughtheroof · 23/07/2022 22:45

20 and like other posters, I did.
No regrets.

shinynewapple22 · 23/07/2022 22:46

Ideally early 30s - it was late 30s for me so out of your choices I would say 40. No way was I ready for a child at 20.

Lovelystuff · 23/07/2022 22:47

I think 40. I think being able to travel or have a career would be great. saying that, I wasted my child free 20s by doing bugger all so maybe 20 is better

ChiefWiggumsBoy · 23/07/2022 22:56

I would be childless probably.

But then I can only picture myself when I actually was 20, and I turn 40 this year. I can't imagine having a baby now - but maybe I would if I'd never had the sleepless nights and potty training?

Can't imagine a baby at 20. Anything under 25 I just feel like shouldn't tie you down.

newhere989 · 23/07/2022 23:02

40

KylieCharlene · 23/07/2022 23:05

If I'd been a more mature 20 year old who wasn't completely wild then definitely 20 when I had much more energy and oomph.
I'm early 40's and don't think I could begin the baby years again now although life experience makes me think I'd be a much better new mother than I was even a decade ago. I'm looking forward to having some 'me time' as I get older.
Had dc early 30's.

CbaThinkingOfAUsername · 23/07/2022 23:12
  1. My 20s were spent doing uni, backpacking round the world and working abroad for a few years, coming back and getting my career on track. However there are pros and cons to babies at both ages.
knackeredagain · 23/07/2022 23:15

20 - I have late teens and find this part of parenting exhausting. I can’t imagine it in my 60s. And I want to be a nana and still be able to enjoy it.

Antarcticant · 23/07/2022 23:16

Childfree here, but if I had to have one, definitely the younger the better, so I'd be in peak health and fitness to cope with the demands of pregnancy/baby/child and then still have lots of my life left after the child became an independent adult😀

Alfixnm · 23/07/2022 23:17

mnahmnah · 23/07/2022 21:14

40

I spent my 20s partying, travelling, getting my career on track. Once the first two were out of my system (a bit 😀) and my career was where i wanted it to be, I was ready for kids. Would have been totally different if I had a child at 20.

This!

NuffSaidSam · 23/07/2022 23:19

I'd have been a TERRIBLE parent at 20! I'm so impressed that so many people were together enough to have kids at 20.

YourUserNameMustBeAtLeast3Characters · 23/07/2022 23:22

40 without a doubt

(had mine mid 30s). I worked hard and played hard in my 20s. In theory you can do all that once the DC are grown and you’re late 30s, but then all your mates are settled down and personally I’m a bit more dull in my 40s than in my 20s.

Happymum12345 · 23/07/2022 23:25

Ideally somewhere in the middle. But otherwise, 40

HalfBrick · 23/07/2022 23:28

20

Runoutofusernames · 23/07/2022 23:29

40
You seem to gain more patience the older you get!

hubadub · 23/07/2022 23:30

20! I had my first at 22, they are now nearly both teens and my friends are only just settling down now. Honestly im so glad I did it all sooner, they have to take breaks in careers and hobbies and I’d hate to do that now!

Swipe left for the next trending thread