To not really care I’ll be 60 when my youngest is 18

[Pinkco]

Why is this relevant?

Will be 42 when I have my last child and people have said the above in incredulous tones.

What am I missing?

[quote Arsebucket]@Pinkco my mother was dead when I was 11. she was 30 when I was born. My dad was 47 - he’s still alive and very much kicking pushing 90. Age is no indicator that cancer, or accident or something terrible will or won’t get to you.[/quote]
I'm sorry you lost your mother at a young age

"Age is no indicator...." Well, it kind of is. Anyone could be very unlucky at any time, but, statistically, the older you are, the more likely it is that your health will deteriorate. I think that's just common sense

My parents had me at about 32, my dad died at 56 when I was 25 and I'm very glad I wasn't any younger when that happened because this has been the most stressful 6 months of my life so far. I'm glad I'm not doing my GCSEs right now.

I had DD at 23 so hopefully she has better odds of being an adult if one of the few genetic risk factors that cropped up in the last few years get me. She wasn't planned though and I acknowledge I might be a better parent in 10 years, more patience and resources would be handy.

notanothertakeaway and if your DC also had their DC at 42 that child may never have a relationship with its grandparents.

My DDad had kids late and we were teased a bit at school because he looked like our grandad. He's still very much alive and an important part of his dc and dgc lives. He was very much a hands on dad with us and his extra life experience definitely benefitted us.

DH was born to teenage parents. His DDad has pretty much nothing to do with us as he's always working still and very much focused on his own life. MIL died young and the dc have no real memories of her. DH had a tricky childhood with lots of doing without becaise his young parents had to move a lot due to renting and trying to finish their education on with small children already around.

Things don't work out how you expect.

Oh who cares. It is what it is.

Who on Earth actually manages to choose when stuff happens?

It means you will be going through the menopause when they are a teenager. It's not a great combination.

Unless you have kids in your early 20s surely this is a possibility anyway? I had kids in late 20s/31 and think it's highly likely I'll have to deal with the menopause and at least 1 teen at the same time...

DH will have a 15 year old and an 11 year old when hes 60 but he wont gave to deal with the menpause

You may not die but will be old and need care

Tbh it's very easy to easy to be flippant about that if you haven't had to care for a sick/dying, elderly parent, so I'd imagine that's where most of these people are coming from.

That said it's perfectly possible to keep opinions to oneself and no-one knows what the future holds.

When do the posters who are concerned with my untimely death think the cut off should be, out of interest?

@Pinkco

So the arguments are

You will die

You may not die but will be old and need care

You will need money

Right!

Have you not read the countless messages in support?

This thread reminds me of a Hotel Insoector programme ages ago.

A guy was running a failing hotel. He was offering tea dances and bingo for pensioners. No one was visiting. Alex was very disparaging. She said pensioners weren’t like that anymore, and took him to meet a pensioner rock climbing club. She informed him that this is what pensioners are like now. The club was raking it in.

Some people on this thread haven’t moved with the times either.

Those poor menopausal/ 60 year olds who can’t cope with teens and should be drinking tea and biscuits.

It’s just laughable.

My younger sister is a young teenager and my dad is in his sixties. It’s a massive benefit for them both that he’s around so much more than when I was a child because he’s semi retired. And it’s been a huge incentive for him to get and stay fit.

Congrats OP, is the bottom line :)

Because it’s exceptionally hard on the child to have much older parents, particularly when they’re in their early twenties and really need guidance rather than having to look after their parents who are in a totally different life phase. If you're 20 you're in a totally different life phase to your parents whether they're 36 or 62 though, unless Mom has some late babies as the older one has her first ones.

And of course they won’t have you for as long. None of us are promised our parents or our kids

People can be so rude. Congratulations 💐

I’ll be 60 when my daughter’s 18. Like you, I don’t see an issue here.

Am 52 currently. She is sitting next to me having stolen one of my nighties to wear. She regularly steals my t-shirts and hoodies cos they’re big and baggy on her! I don’t hold out much hope for my shoes when she’s the same shoe size as me!

Screw what people think. Mil had dp when she was pretty young, he was an only child for the whole of his childhood but she ended up having more children at 40+ and now they are 20+ She has such a great relationship with her younger children, more so than dp. They are very close.

@longwayoff

My mother was 40 when I was born, my father 50. By the time I was 10, and my younger sister 5, our depressed, menopausal mum and our tired and grumpy dad, were knackered. We were gently neglected and our needs mostly ignored. People don't have such hard lives now as they did but we're still human and biology can catch us all out.

Looking at it the other way, the majority of children who are adopted have birth parents who are average or below average age. They are usually parents who can’t meet their children’s needs. The majority of adoptive parents are average or above average age (we adopted at 45 and were at the younger end of the scale). These are the parents who have to go above and beyond to meet their children’s previously unmet needs and attempt to heal the trauma it has caused.

In most cases, especially nowadays, I don’t think there’s a correlation between older parents and less ability to meet the children’s needs.

@Arsebucket

And I doubt they climbed the Great Wall of China, trekked Machu Picchu, camped in remote lands that most people haven't even heard of under a million stars, island hopped in Thailand and the rest of South East Asia etc with a baby and nappies, bottles etc stuck to their backs

@AwaAnBileYerHeid

We Didn’t do South America, but I spent 2 and a bit years backpacking the world with ds when he was little and I was in my mid-late 20s. Met many other young (and older) parents travelling with their children along the way too. Lots of people do it. I wasn’t rich or privileged either.

Clearly you were very privileged to be able to do this.

To me it is about being around for your children as long as possible and also seeing your grand children grow up. We may still feel young as we age, however teenagers and young adults no doubt see us as old. I know I thought 40 was old when I was in my twenties.

@Pinkco. No the argument is you may die and leave a child who needs your love and guidance and is completely lost without you. But you are pregnant so any arguments against older parents are pointless. I wish you a long and happy life with a beautiful baby. ❤️

@22Giraffes

I'll be 39 when dd is 18, I'm so glad I had my kids when I did.

Not sure why this is relevant? But congratulations??

No back to OP, the only trying I can think of is expensive university years coinciding with retirement.

But, like you, I am not sure what the big deal is. Lots of people have babies in their late theories and early forties. In many social circles and areas it is the norm. Particularly for women who focused on building g a career in their twenties and thirties.

I'll be nearly 67. So what.

Me too! It is as it is...

I’m 54, youngest DS is 14 😌

@crimsonlake

But what if you don’t have that choice?