Would you call 22 years old

[Vivana]

Very young to have a baby. Was talking to a friend who said I was to young back then to have a baby at 22 years old. Now early 40s and did not have any more children.

Why is everyone answering a different question than the one in the op btw? She said her friend said it was "very young", not "too young". There is an enormous difference between those two phrases in this context.

Your first baby at 22, these days, not 20 years ago, is well below average. That is a fact.

It isn't an insult. It isn't a compliment. It is a fact. That is very young to have your first baby. That doesn't mean you are any better or worse a mother for it.

How the friend said it makes a difference though. It's about tone.

If she had said "that's too young", that would have been undeniably an insult / criticism.

My opinion, way too young.

There’s a world out there to explore freely with no ties.
There’s a lot of money to be made, clothes to buy, foods to try, cultures to explore, education to persue, life to soak in.
For me, I’m 20’s we’re my selfish years when I had me and only me to think about.

After that, I was ready to be consumed by the total love and devotion to someone else.

Parenthood to me has been a tough, challenging and most trying time in my life, I am so glad that I have never felt robbed of sleep, joy, me time or tethered.
I’ve had all the joy, sleep, me time and freedom for 30 years, I’ve got it all in the bank.

Never enough in the bank to account for 5 full years of ZERO sleep though.... 😯😳

@LadyPrigsbottom Why is everyone answering a different question than the one in the op btw? She said her friend said it was "very young", not "too young"

Try reading it again.

Admittedly op used 'to' rather than 'too', but she did say her friend said she was 'to' young.

Why is everyone answering a different question than the one in the op btw? She said her friend said it was "very young", not "too young". There is an enormous difference between those two phrases in this context.

From the OP....(yes a typo for too/to, but very clear what it means)

Was talking to a friend who said I was to young back then to have a baby

There’s a world out there to explore freely with no ties
Not everyone wants to explore though.
After working with young people for just coming up to 35years the vast majority of those young people are now parents and many are grandparents.
A lot are happy with their lives.
I know most take pride in their family units and arent interested in globe trotting or exploring other people's cultures. Or wanted kids first 'while they had the energy'
Theres nothing wrong with that.
Sure it's not for everyone. It's not what I would have wanted for myself but if others are happy having their families at that age, fair enough.🤷‍♀️

I'm a midwife. It's young in the area that I work in. The vast majority of the women we care for are in their very late 20s - late 30s. I see far more women in their 40s than I do women in their teens.

22 is young, but not too young.

Unlike my generation, a huge number now go to university and, therefore, don't finish their education until they are at least 21/22. This means that 22 is early to have 'settled down'.

When only the top 5% went to university, the majority left school at 16/18 and would have been working (or what my DC call adulting) for at least 4 years so by 22 were more likely to have been getting married/starting families.

Thanks @ChangeThePassword! Not with it today

My mum and dad had their kids at 21-24 - they were married and owned a (small) home which was normal amongst their friends. This was back when you could have a mortgage on a normal starting salary!

@crosser62

I disagree that it is way to young.

Being a parent taught me so much, and I am a much better adult because of it. I got to be a mum when I had loads of energy to balance motherhood, work and studying. My kids have grown up to be fabulous people, and now in my forties I get to explore the world freely - and sometimes I get to do it with one or both of these fabulous people I have birth to in my twenties.

My mum was older when she had me, and I can tell you that my relationship with my kids is much mote dynamic and interesting and equal than the one I have with my mum.

Being a young mum was absolutely right for me, and I wouldn't change it for the world. Its not right for everyone, and that's okay. But I wouldn't dream of telling my friends that had their first chosen in their mid to late thirties that they were 'way too old' to have kids at that age, just because it wouldn't have been the right choice for me at that age. Why is it okay the other way round?

I was 20, had 3 by the time I was 24. Not intentionally, really, but it was normal in my circle of friends.
My mother in law was married at 19 and pregnant at 20 back in the 70s.

I look forward to spending my 40s having some freedom and the money to afford to do stuff with it, which I didn't at 20!

No worries @LadyPrigsbottom, I'd be lying if I said I'd never misread a thread!

I would have been too young at 22, others probably not. It's an individual thing.

I am almost OP’s age and even 20 years ago it would have been very young to have a child at 22. Even the women I know who didn’t go to uni, within the Pakistani / Bangladeshi / Indian communities where marrying and having kids while young is commonplace most of my friends wouldn’t have thought of having kids until 25. I presume to get themselves financially ready for babies.

The ones who had kids younger didn’t really give them the best childhood they could due to money issues etc (and most tried to ‘fix’ this by having kids later too) - but these are my friends. Your circumstances may be different.

But you had them now and you are didn’t have any more so you have to feel happy with your choices. I had mine later due to infertility issues and stressing over my age when I had them was making me unhappy so I just embraced being an older mum and all the advantages as they are now. You should do that too.

I had DS at 22 he's now one.
We both have good paying jobs, we recently brought our own house but had been renting before then.
DS doesn't 'want' for anything
I find it ridiculous to say that we are too young to have DS. We pay our own way; we haven't asked for anything from anyone and I had finished university and had over a year in a job. DP has been in a stable job since 18.

I was 21. There were no other mums my age in any of the groups, they were all 30's and 40's so I didn't have any young mum friends and I worked full time further alienating me from mum's groups.
It was very lonely especially as I looked like a 14 year old at that age and everyone used to ask me if my DS was my brother.
But....now I'm 58 I was free by 35 to do pretty much whatever I wanted as my son had lots of friends and was very independent and getting into his artwork in a big way (he's a professional artist now) so I've had most of my adult life being able to do my own thing without being tied down by kids.

Young by today's standards but nothing wrong with this. Hopefully brought up in a loving home.

I think where you live and how long ago you had a child makes a big difference. When I was 23 having DS 16 years ago my rent was £450 a month for a two bed maisonette. I live on SW/Midlands border so housing is not too expensive. My nursery fees were not too much either (iirc around £25/30 per day).
If I did it over again now, with current rental prices and nursery prices I probably couldn't have afforded it to be honest

Dd was brought up in a loving home but that could be said of any age really.

Personally I'm glad I had a child young but we never wanted another.

@WaffleCash

*Nobody I know who had children in their early twenties got to enjoy being 'child free' again in their 40s like they planned/hoped for. Why not? What happened?*

A mix of things, children with disabilities, adult children still living at home due to struggling to find work, wanting to provide financial support to their own children due to cost of housing etc.

This is the same with my friends who had kids young. I think some of them expected to travel in their 40s but they don’t have money for that because their kids need support to go to uni / do masters etc and so need financial support. Some expected to be ‘young and fit / active grandparents’ but have not been given a hands on role by their kids for various reasons. Many of them had a period of life where they were caught at a loose end before chosing to have a late in life baby.

I think this middle class falacy that having kids young means you get your life back needs to end. You only get that if you spend some part of your 20s-40s getting qualified and being able to take up decent job opportunities and basically ignoring your children and expecting them to be self-sufficient by 18-21.

Exactly as a PP said the freedom I have now got is great and can do whatever I please now in regards to work etc no school runs etc.

No I class anything under 18 to young.

Young but not very young. It’s probably the ideal time to have your first child if you can afford it.

I think this middle class falacy that having kids young means you get your life back needs to end

I'm not middle class, and my life is not a fallacy.

No not too young I was younger