Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think my dd is very young to be pregnant

248 replies

Nantobeb777 · 01/05/2026 20:02

Just 23

OP posts:
Random321 · 01/05/2026 21:42

A gyn once told me the best time to have a baby is physically 20-25, mentally 25-34, and 35-45 financially.

His point was there's no best time, it's always a trade off. No one really has the right relationship and their physical/mental/financial position fully aline.

At 23 she's an adult and it's her choice regardless of your opinion.

As someone who can't have any and found out in my late 20s, I think 23 is an excellent time.

ForCosyLion · 01/05/2026 21:43

Twenty-three is a brilliant age to have a child, biologically. The only reason it seems young is because of the ridiculousness that society has become. We are supposed to go to university, then have a career, THEN squeeze in babies in a narrow window until we get too old, and the reason that most people can't have them right after education is because of: 1) The crazy cost of housing 2) The crazy cost of education 3) the cost of living and 4) The fact that men don't want to settle down young, they want to shag everything in sight and are encouraged in this by our over-sexualised and permissive society, where casual sex is celebrated, divorce rates are high, porn is freely available, and commitment is under-valued.

When my parents married in 1967, they could buy a family house with three double bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a large kitchen and living room for five thousand pounds. And, relative to the salaries of the time, a couple aged 24 and 27 could handle that mortgage on one average salary. And there was not a widespread requirement to spend years and tens of thousands on a university education. People trained on the job. Lawyers trained on the job, for example.

If, today, houses were much cheaper and there were more routes to well-paying jobs than just uni, and men valued commitment more, you would soon see everyone having babies in their early twenties again.

It's natural for women to pair off and want marriage and babies in their early twenties. (Obviously, not everyone wants this!) But the way society is has socialised people out of following their natural urges, for the reasons above. I think it's totally wrong and that the entire social system by which we have babies needs a complete re-think. It's just no good the way we have it now, with many women having to wait so long that they have this small window, so they end up with fewer children than they wanted, and many can't do it at all. While many are still OK to have babies later, many also are not.

If people have found a good relationship young, I think society should organise itself so that women can have babies in their late tweens and early twenties, THEN get an education. Or, have babies right after uni. You could end up having done both education/training and having your completed family, all of whom have started school, by the time you are 30-ish and THEN start your career.

It should be normal for women who want a family to start their career at 30-32, basically, instead of this expectation that women spend their twenties - their absolutely prime baby-making years - building a career. The government could offer incentives to make this happen, like introducing rent control for young families, and maybe discounted uni fees if you go after having kids, and free childcare while you're at class.

When it comes to women and biology, the current set-up is completely wrong, imo.

PyongyangKipperbang · 01/05/2026 21:43

Papyrophile · 01/05/2026 21:17

Only if you are unfit. I had mine at 44, and never struggled with running around!

Nope it doesnt work like that.

You didnt feel like it was a struggle because that was your normal, for both you and your child. I had my eldest at 17 and my youngest at 38 (yes, 21 year age gap with four others in between) and although I was still very fit and able, it was definitely harder physically when I was 38. It just was! Ageing happens, like it or not, and it slows us down.

As a pp said, you have nothing to compare it to.

Papyrophile · 01/05/2026 21:44

But it is not that unusual now to have your first and possibly only baby in your early 40s. I was born in 1956, and my one child was delivered in 1999. I was fit and solvent by then. DC is pretty robust, and very privileged, because money.

justasking111 · 01/05/2026 21:44

Nuttycoffee · 01/05/2026 21:31

Yet another thread with no replies from op.
There as been so many threads like this im starting to wonder if its the same poster, using different names.

Well could be. Spotted three yesterday. Should have checked this one first 🙄

Studyunder · 01/05/2026 21:45

YABU

Papyrophile · 01/05/2026 21:46

What does it matter? It has been an interesting chat, among internet randoms.

sunshinestar1986 · 01/05/2026 21:48

23 is normal.
I was 23 with my first.
Ah, it was so much easier with my first, I loved playing in the park with her, going down slides, just playing all day.
And it was just me and her until she turned 13, we had so much fun, I had the energy for everything and a zest for life.
I'm trying to recreate that for my 3 year old, and it's much harder.
Also, going down the slide with him, erm I just can't 🤣

Nuttycoffee · 01/05/2026 21:48

justasking111 · 01/05/2026 21:44

Well could be. Spotted three yesterday. Should have checked this one first 🙄

Its getting silly tbh.

LilWoosmum82 · 01/05/2026 21:51

Me and my friends all had ours in our 30s, we all had problems getting pregnant, staying pregnant. Our one regret as a group and especially my friend who waited until she was 38 to start trying and now at 43, hasn't managed to have children. We should have probably been having them in our 20s and for one reason or another we didn't. So good on her and i hope all goes well with her pregnancy, ending with a healthy mum and a healthy baby xx

DreamyScroller · 01/05/2026 21:51

Lol. I thought you were going to say 15.

In some cultures, women are considered 'past it' if they haven't had a kid by 24.

23 is the height of fertility and youth, while still being firmly footed in adulthood. It's a great time to get pregnant.

MutherTrucker · 01/05/2026 21:52

I agree it’s young. I’d be a bit (secretly) disappointed that my daughter hadn’t had a bit more time to enjoy being young and carefree.

Papyrophile · 01/05/2026 21:56

ForCosyLion · 01/05/2026 21:43

Twenty-three is a brilliant age to have a child, biologically. The only reason it seems young is because of the ridiculousness that society has become. We are supposed to go to university, then have a career, THEN squeeze in babies in a narrow window until we get too old, and the reason that most people can't have them right after education is because of: 1) The crazy cost of housing 2) The crazy cost of education 3) the cost of living and 4) The fact that men don't want to settle down young, they want to shag everything in sight and are encouraged in this by our over-sexualised and permissive society, where casual sex is celebrated, divorce rates are high, porn is freely available, and commitment is under-valued.

When my parents married in 1967, they could buy a family house with three double bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a large kitchen and living room for five thousand pounds. And, relative to the salaries of the time, a couple aged 24 and 27 could handle that mortgage on one average salary. And there was not a widespread requirement to spend years and tens of thousands on a university education. People trained on the job. Lawyers trained on the job, for example.

If, today, houses were much cheaper and there were more routes to well-paying jobs than just uni, and men valued commitment more, you would soon see everyone having babies in their early twenties again.

It's natural for women to pair off and want marriage and babies in their early twenties. (Obviously, not everyone wants this!) But the way society is has socialised people out of following their natural urges, for the reasons above. I think it's totally wrong and that the entire social system by which we have babies needs a complete re-think. It's just no good the way we have it now, with many women having to wait so long that they have this small window, so they end up with fewer children than they wanted, and many can't do it at all. While many are still OK to have babies later, many also are not.

If people have found a good relationship young, I think society should organise itself so that women can have babies in their late tweens and early twenties, THEN get an education. Or, have babies right after uni. You could end up having done both education/training and having your completed family, all of whom have started school, by the time you are 30-ish and THEN start your career.

It should be normal for women who want a family to start their career at 30-32, basically, instead of this expectation that women spend their twenties - their absolutely prime baby-making years - building a career. The government could offer incentives to make this happen, like introducing rent control for young families, and maybe discounted uni fees if you go after having kids, and free childcare while you're at class.

When it comes to women and biology, the current set-up is completely wrong, imo.

Edited

You are right, but it ain't going to happen. My parents, who had me when they were 22 and 21, were the perfect biological age, but too young to have enough life experience to know that they would loathe each other by their early 30s.

ACatCalledPuss · 01/05/2026 21:58

I'd prefer it if my dd (19) was older than 23 when she has her first baby. I'd just prefer her to have more time with no responsibilities as I don't think you are ever free of worry to some extent once you have a child. I had her when I was 31 and still think that was a great age to have my first child.

tsmainsqueeze · 01/05/2026 22:00

If this happens when my daughter is 23 and happy with her partner then i would be very happy, it wouldn't have been for me at that age but as a mature mom of 3 i now know what's important in life and i don't think women should chance it by waiting til later if the opportunity is there when younger and you want children.

Plummagic · 01/05/2026 22:00

ACatCalledPuss · 01/05/2026 21:58

I'd prefer it if my dd (19) was older than 23 when she has her first baby. I'd just prefer her to have more time with no responsibilities as I don't think you are ever free of worry to some extent once you have a child. I had her when I was 31 and still think that was a great age to have my first child.

Doesn't matter what you prefer. Her life is not yours.

Bufftailed · 01/05/2026 22:01

I think it is very young, doesn’t mean it is wrong though

Toooldforthisshit49 · 01/05/2026 22:04

I don't personally think your daughter is too young. I had my first child at 22 and my second at 25. Why do you feel she is too young? Is she not mature enough in your eyes? Is your daughter happy about her pregnancy?

Calliopespa · 01/05/2026 22:16

EhRightOkkkkk · 01/05/2026 21:31

I was 22 when I had my first.

I asked my health visitor if there was any young mum groups to go to, she said because I'm not 21 and under I'm not classed as a young mum.

Shes not too young. In fact it's none of your business.

In fact it's none of your business.

Why do people say this kind of thing?

It's really normal to take an interest in one's children and worry about their decisions.

Hedgehogbrown · 01/05/2026 22:17

Yeah it's young. At that age you don't have the emotional intelligence or patience required in my opinion. She would be a better parent later. But lots of people have babies at that age and it's lovely to get to be a grandparent.

YankSplaining · 01/05/2026 22:17

My MIL was born when her mother was 21, and my kids have had the privilege of actually knowing their great-grandmother. It’s a type of relationship I never got to have; when I was born, I had one living great-grandparent, and he died when I was two.

Your daughter having a baby at 23, as opposed to 33 or even later, means you get more years as a younger, healthier grandmother than a lot of women get.

TheOnlyOneLeft · 01/05/2026 22:19

I had my 1st baby at 22, 2nd baby at almost 25. I'm in my late 60s now and so glad I had them at a "young" age.

Calliopespa · 01/05/2026 22:20

ForCosyLion · 01/05/2026 21:43

Twenty-three is a brilliant age to have a child, biologically. The only reason it seems young is because of the ridiculousness that society has become. We are supposed to go to university, then have a career, THEN squeeze in babies in a narrow window until we get too old, and the reason that most people can't have them right after education is because of: 1) The crazy cost of housing 2) The crazy cost of education 3) the cost of living and 4) The fact that men don't want to settle down young, they want to shag everything in sight and are encouraged in this by our over-sexualised and permissive society, where casual sex is celebrated, divorce rates are high, porn is freely available, and commitment is under-valued.

When my parents married in 1967, they could buy a family house with three double bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a large kitchen and living room for five thousand pounds. And, relative to the salaries of the time, a couple aged 24 and 27 could handle that mortgage on one average salary. And there was not a widespread requirement to spend years and tens of thousands on a university education. People trained on the job. Lawyers trained on the job, for example.

If, today, houses were much cheaper and there were more routes to well-paying jobs than just uni, and men valued commitment more, you would soon see everyone having babies in their early twenties again.

It's natural for women to pair off and want marriage and babies in their early twenties. (Obviously, not everyone wants this!) But the way society is has socialised people out of following their natural urges, for the reasons above. I think it's totally wrong and that the entire social system by which we have babies needs a complete re-think. It's just no good the way we have it now, with many women having to wait so long that they have this small window, so they end up with fewer children than they wanted, and many can't do it at all. While many are still OK to have babies later, many also are not.

If people have found a good relationship young, I think society should organise itself so that women can have babies in their late tweens and early twenties, THEN get an education. Or, have babies right after uni. You could end up having done both education/training and having your completed family, all of whom have started school, by the time you are 30-ish and THEN start your career.

It should be normal for women who want a family to start their career at 30-32, basically, instead of this expectation that women spend their twenties - their absolutely prime baby-making years - building a career. The government could offer incentives to make this happen, like introducing rent control for young families, and maybe discounted uni fees if you go after having kids, and free childcare while you're at class.

When it comes to women and biology, the current set-up is completely wrong, imo.

Edited

One of the big problems in women having babies straight out of school or uni is that it requires them to identify a father. Finding a life partner and decent father isn't a great thing to rush into. Too many people rush this process as it is imo. Just look at the blended family boards. I don't believe just getting the biological repro over is the important bit: it's building a family that works for everyone in it.

Teado · 01/05/2026 22:20

Someone upthread has a friend who deliberately waited until age 38 to ttc. So risky. I have friends who didn’t meet their partners until they were around that age so had no choice, but it’s mad that someone in a committed relationship waited until age 38. I suppose we all take fertility for granted.

HotChocolateBubbleBath · 01/05/2026 22:22

I know it was different times then but my mum had me when she was 23 and I have a sister 5 yrs older, lol. The point is, she’s been a fantastic mother to me and if I’m half the mother she is then I’m happy, plus my parents are still together after 65yrs.