I'm surprised how negative some people are about the issues involved in caring for elderly parents. Isn't part of being a civilised society that we take responsibility for and care for the elderly,nfirst and foremost those in our own families. All of us will need care one day and we'd hope our families will be willing to be involved in that in some form and also that they will willingly do it. Yes, it does create burdens and inconveniences, but I'd hope most will shoulder those when their Mum and Dad is involved. And bearing those burdens can be tricky if you're in your 20s and probably without children yourself, or if you're in your 40s or 50s with children of your own to fit in too, or if you're in your 60s or even 70s dealing with very elderly parents, when you're not so fit yourself perhaps.
Caring for elderly parents or arranging care for them at whatever age they need it has different burdens and pressures according to the stage of life the children are. To me, the fact that having a child at 45 meaning my children will be 25 when I'm 70 or 30 when I'm 75 (and both of those are younger than average age of needing lots of care and finally death ) aren't factors strong enough for me to say it would be wrong for me to have them and place that burden on them at that point, even though they are more likely to have to undertake this burden at that age rather than in their 40s.
Perhaps our attitudes towards this, reflect the fact that as a society we are increasingly uncomfortable with caring for the elderly or needy in our lives and it's a reflection of individualism and wanting to do our own thing.....and because we feel like that, the idea of burdening a child with caring for us feels uncomfortable.
In the past, when people lived shorter lives and there was less welfare provision, it was absolutley the norm for people in their 20s to look after their parents who were ill and reaching the end of their lives in their 40s. They were able and capable to do it then and they are now. Do we have some kind of golden view of the 20s or infantilised view of 20s which says they are still children and can't take responsibility or aren't capable of things or need protecting from any harder realities of life? I think there's an element of this here.
Of course all the pros and cons and issues of having children at any time of life should be considered. Most people will choose to have children at some point. Great for those who managed it younger - no doubt, in many ways IF there is that choice, it is better in a number of ways (although not all as head been clearly stated). But for those who haven't managed it by 30 or 35 or 40, are some of you saying, that despite it being a physical possibility, those adults have missed the boat and shouldn't respond to their creative urge to procreate - that they are not entitled to do this or that it is wrong or selfish to do this and they should remain childless - because remaining childless it what this amounts to for many people. There's a difference between saying it would be preferable to have children a bit younger, to saying you shouldn't have children if you are older. There's a difference between saying 'I wouldn't have wanted to have children beyond 30/35/40' and saying it is therefore wrong for other people to do it, particularly when it is forgotton that many people aren't in a position to have children before 40 and certainly not before 30.
Children never have any choice about who their parents are or the positive and negative circumstances they find themselves in. We all make the best of our lives and most are pleased with most of what their parents did for them. Most are sorry when their parents are ill and die and most would like to have had more time with them, regardless of the age of parents or children.
Personally, I don't consider having a child in your 40s selfish and find it even more understandable if it's a first child. If it's physically possible and especially if it's naturally conceived, it's hard to see any real arguments of value against it.
Perhaps we should say that all parents have a duty to be the best parents they can, to engage with their children, and to provide for them as children and prepare them for life as adults.....some of which includes ensuring alternative care would be available if something happened to the parents at any point, and putting some kind of measures in place which show some kind of thinking about older age in a timely fashion (although we know illness and death can occur at any point and can't always be planned for). Both older and younger parents might be good or bad in meeting these duties and it isn't age that makes them good or bad at carrying out those duties. Perhaps all we can say ultimately is that every parent should be aiming to be a good parent in these senses (or whatever else you would add to the list) and that is more important than the age you are.