Is it easier to combine a career and motherhood if you are a younger Mum?

[margerykemp]

Years ago I read hunger which basically said that if you want both a high powered career and to be a mother then your best chance is to have your first child before you are 26.

That's what I did and a decade on it's still to early to see how my long term career will compare to my contemporaries who start families in their late 30's.

As a feminist I dont know what advice I'd give to younger women/DD.

Anecdotally younger Mums I know seem to have more energy/drive to go back to work and have partners who are more 'hands on' Dads than men 20 years older but they seem to lose out in terms of relationships (more frequently left as single mums) and have to suffer the stigma from society of being a 'young' Mum- and I'm talking about women in their 20's not teenagers.

I didn't have any family help with childcare either, and the costs were crippling.

I could not have done what I have if I had had more than one child. It would have been impossible to do it with two children.

For me, I think it would have been harder younger. I am a lawyer and long hours are often expected (at all levels). But when I was younger I had less control over my own destiny. If someone said at short notice that they needed all juniors to work all night on a filing until it was done, everyone had to stay. I am not 35 and ttc. I am not under any illusions that it will be easy but I do have control over my own destiny at this point. I can often schedule internal deadlines to suit myself and I can work from home whenever I feel like it without having to seek anyone's permission. And whilst childcare costs won't be welcome, they won't be crippling.

Watching this thread with interest. getorfmyland seems like you work in the same sector as me (engineering consultant?) I'm amazed at what you have achieved, both in terms of your career and success with your DD.

It's something I'm personally battling with at the moment. DP and I are getting married next year. We are both 26 (will be 27 when married) and both of us are doing well in our careers, although mine more so as I have landed on my feed very quickly, whereas DP has had to work his way up slowly from the bottom.

I finish a work-related masters next year, just before we get married. DP and I have joked about trying to concieve a honeymoon baby but I wonder whether the timing is right or not. Forgetting the finances (which will need some looking at after funding a wedding), I do wonder whether I should at least give it a year or two to move up the ladder slightly before taking time off.

On the other hand, two colleagues in their 30s have had miscarriages this month, and others are doing everything under the sun including trying to realign the moon and stars to even get pg in the first place. I know that biologically, our bodies are build for making babies late teens/early 20s. Socially, this isn't that acceptable, but evolution hasn't quite caught up. I'm petrified that having been on the pill for nearly 10 years already, that if I wait until I'm over 30 I will struggle to conceive and go full term.

The romance of a honeymoon baby is winning me over so far, provided we can plan financially for it (crap maternity pay).

I will advise my DD to do the same as me and have her kids in her late 30s after doing a long stretch in her career. I have financially stability, no need to work while kids are little and former employers/clients calling me up regularly to ask me to do some work. I probably will in January but I don't need to but now youngest at pre-school I've got some time and I'm bored. I have had no family help, a DH who travels all the time and if not I would have probably kept doing some work.

If i had my children late 20s/early 30s I would have definitely kept working, I would have needed to. I probably would have had more children too but there you go, DH probably glad we don't have 4 DC .

JobCarHouse, if you're only 26 I really would give it a year or two. Fertility doesn't seriously start to decline till you're 35.

It's not just the money, it's being at a senior enough level to be able to make your own flexibility when you come back from maternity leave. If I'd had a baby in my twenties, I would have been doing it at a stage when I was entirely at other people's beck and call. I had DS in my mid-thirties, and although I still had to put in the hours I had a lot more control about where, when and how.

Tried it both ways and its hard whichever way. When you're young (I was 25 when I had my first) had less money, but more energy and younger grandparents. With younger children (one in my late thirties and one in early 40's) had more money but less energy, grandparents too old to help and running own business which means you don't 'do' maternity leave at all, and often alone as DH often working abroad. I'm sure it will be fine when they are grown up and can look after their gently declining parents!

Good thread, got me thinking. It surely depends on the type of career you find yourself in I think.

My old media career floundered when I had children in my early thirties, and would not have happened at all if I'd had my children in my twenties - I had to be very flexible in terms of hours so it would have been a real struggle.

Now I'm middle to late thirties and re-launching a new self-employed business, I'm finding the support of other women (friends, mothers, neighbours) invaluable in helping me get it off the ground.

I feel I wouldn't have had the confidence to do this in my twenties anyway, and wouldn't have had the contacts and support that I do now. I'm really loving the women helping women thing that goes on around where I live, lots of cottage industries and people going it alone.

jobcar - not so amazing really, being in the right place at the right time, a lot of luck, a lot of stamina and picking a lucrative industry (aerospace) which really embraces training (or did 10 years ago).

If I were you - I really would wait a few more years and try and get as far up the ladder as you can, it will make it easier re flexible working etc.

My first choice of career was not remotely family-friendly, as it involved spending time in war zones and refugee camps in various remote parts of the world. If I'd had children young, I'd never got to try it. I do get pangs of jealousy when I see former colleagues still doing it, but I didn't want to miss out on having a child. Now I'm 37, DD is 3, and it's off the menu until she's pretty much grown up and doing her own thing. But because I had that field experience before having DD, I can use it to do some related academic work and at least keep up with developments in the field. I also have an unrelated part-time job that I'm over-qualified for but really enjoy.

I want two things that aren't really compatible. I'm glad that my life has contained and will contain both, even if I can't do both simultaneously.

Moomit didn't explain myself properly, sorry.
I don't want to stay unemployed as I definitely thing an empty CV isn't an asset, but I am happy to be in a lower paid and not very respected position until the children are old enough for me to focus a little more on myself. So if it takes 5 yrs for that and then another 3 on average for a qualification and then maybe another 6 yrs or more to reach the so wanted well paid and high powered position , then I've still get a good few years of that "lifestyle". Maybe, or maybe not. Who knows?

Reading this thread with great interest - as is my DP.

He wants me to point out that as an older Dad (first child at 43, second at 44 - will turn 45 on Monday) he doesn't agree with the generalisations about them being "hands off". In his case, he's right. He changes all the nappies when he's around and is the primary caregiver to our elder child when not at work as I take care of our 2 month old. I also have other friends who became parents in their late 30s/40s where the men are the primary caregivers eg work part time and in two cases became SAHDs.

From my own experience - I'm yet to see how it really works as I am currently on maternity leave - but I did reach a level in my career that is deemed "high powered" and then had my children (at age 41 and 42). I did not do this specifically through choice, as I met my DP later in life, but I do know that I hugely enjoyed both my career and hedonistic lifestyle in my 20s and early 30s and did not particularly want children. I am very lucky that I have been able to have both an extended youth and a family in my time but feel very strongly that the biggest factor in all this in when you meet your lifetime partner - so effectively it is not a choice for many people.

I think being more senior can be a double edged sword.

Although you are more valuable, you are also more conspicuous and under more ongoing pressure.

I had DCs on a city graduate scheme - you rotated around the company, did extra course etc. Tbh - no one even 'noticed' I'd been away. More senior women who went on mat leave the same time as me were much more conscious of going back after six months - and found it harder to work part time (as opposed to just being paid part time!).

One of them went back to work all guns blazing, and then jacked in the whole career after a few months of her DS not settling in nursery. All her decisions felt very 'big' - since she'd worked so hard to get to where she was, and she felt responsible for her staff. By contrast - my decisions felt smaller and simpler - I knew that even after a long break I'd still be in the same basic position: young graduate.

Good thread.
Had DS at 31 and DD at 35.
Negotiated phased, part- time return after each mat leave plus working from home. Went full time when DD was about 2.5 but still with 1 or 2 days per week from home. DH does his fair share of childcare and does school run on days I'm not at home, does weekly food shop etc.
Whatever works for your circumstances really, but there's no way I would have had the same bargaining power had I had children in my 20s.

I don't think it is possible to say which is preferable in terms of a career, because it depends on the career and which part of it is the most demanding.

I think it is interesting that we're defining 'young' as twenties, even as old as 28. A generation ago that would have been considered old for having a first baby.

I wouldn't have even considered waiting until mid thirties to have a baby. I felt that I had already waited a decade before having a baby in mid twenties; I would have felt utterly miserable spending another decade with no kids. It seems to me that other women are making this decision much more rationally and don't have that kind of overwhelming desire to have a baby.

Agree a lot depends on what kind of career you're in.

Kids first, career later worked for my mother. She had 3 children between 25 and 29, and then really started her career from scratch at 34. By the time she was in her late 40s her children were all independent and she was very senior in her organisation and doing very well career-wise.

I hope to do similar, though I can't afford to spend a decade as a SAHM like my mother could. Had first baby at 26 after a few years of bumming about, plan to have my second at 28 - and by the time they are both at school I can concentrate more on career.

Had my first child at 19 while studying to be a Physio. My partner worked full-time and we juggled his career and my studies between us. Once I qualified I took a break until DS was 4 and DD was 2 only doing part-time work. Then got back into the field. I feel there is a lot of judgement to young mums (many a times I have left a parent and toddler in tears maybe i'm over sensitive)
I did find it hard early on as my friends were busy partying and I was being mum. But I wouldn't change the way I did things as I now have a clear run until retirement. Which will probably be 70 by the time I get there.

Enjoyed reading this thread. I had a dd when I was 25 when I had just begun a new job after completing an MSc. I had maternity leave but went back fulltime, company made life very unpleasant so I left and wen tinto research where I've now been two years and have nearly finished a PhD part-time. It was easier being in a public sector low-grade job I think as I've not been expected to work more than 8 hours a day which has allowed me to go home and spend some hours with dd, do the bedtime routine and dinner before spending a few hours on my thesis. If my work had required 60-80 hours then I would not have been able to look after my dd nor do a PhD, if I had then not been able to keep up with women/men my age but without children I'm sure my career prospects would have suffered.

My dd is now 3 and given recent public sector cuts my contract ends on Friday. I've got a new engineering consultant job starting after I complete my thesis though with potential to climb the ladder. So while my last two years have not been high powered my CV has not been damaged by having a child.

I think it depends on both the career and the nature of the person. I got to the top of my profession first and then had first dc in mid 30s (2 years ago) and second one a few months ago. I spent my 20s and early 30s being totally devoted to my career. Sadly, only 10% of us in senior management in my organisation are women (I work in the City for a well known global organisation). Being senior means it is easier to make working life work for me rather than grind me down as it does for so many working mothers. I called the shots on how I wanted to structure my maternity leave and return to work. I am about to return to work and have already had my PA build in my 2 expressing breaks each day as non-bookable time in the diary. I did this last time and so was able to carry on nursing until my baby was 1. I personally would have found it a lot harder in my 20s to breezily announce to everyone that I was off to express and didn't want to be disturbed. Also, I curtailed my travelling until my baby was a year old and made people come to me or did things by conference call. These are just a few examples, but they add up to what has made being a mum be very enjoyable while continuing to enjoy a challenging and rewarding career.

I think I have taken a traditional path and so to have a baby at 26 in my industry would just make the rise to the top so much harder. There are women in my industry who have got there while having kids young but they are known only because its so rare. Having said this, one of the women I really admire on here is GOML who has had a different path to me and I think someone like her with sheer determination would still make it in my industry.

Depends, depends, depends...

Having ds at 34 worked for me, although I didn't plan to have my first child so late - I'd have much rather have been 5 years younger or so. I was well established in my profession, promoted to a relatively well paid and autonomous role and it was much easier for me to request flexible working/part time hours than it would have been for someone on a lower rung.

I was earning enough to pay for childcare, although my SIL who had her children much younger has been lucky enough to live near GPs (her mother is a SAHM, and my brother is older so our parents are both retired) so got "free" childcare - she wouldn't be working now if she hadn't.

I suspect that, unless I have another child (which I would love but is getting more and more unlikely), the impact of ds on my career will have been minimal. It's definitely easier if you've only got one set of pre-school years to pay for.

As far as younger dads being more hands-on goes, that's not my experience at all. The younger couples with children that I know seem to have much more traditional roles - carer/breadwinner. That's possibly a coincidence, or maybe because the younger women weren't so established in careers so their work takes a back seat. They certainly seem to do the vast bulk of the care. Friends in their 30s/40s are more likely to be sharing care/domestic life far more equally.

Just thought I'd throw into the ring something I heard once on the radio - that the best age to have your first baby according to reported happiness and life satisfaction for the mother was 34 - which is the age I had my first - dd - which of course is why I remember this statistic.
I did do quite a lot of good stuff beforehand - but it wasn't all career related

• more about traveling including living abroad, making lots of good friendships, and lots of life experiences. Was happy too to begin to establish some sort of career working with children and their families. Not sure how this will develop now going forwards after having my two DC's. But feel that whatever else life and career offer from here onwards will be something of a bonus !

milly - no, I feel like that. Yearning? Not very fashionable to admit to, but I don't fancy waiting around until I'm 35.

I don't think for most people there is a genuine choice whether to start a family at 25 or 30 or 35 - surely it just depends when you meet the right person?

The best time to have children is when you are in a stable loving relationship and able to provide a home and support a family. Only very few people achieve that when they are young, so usually the choice has been made for you.

The vast majority of my friends are having kids in their thirties, because they have waited for the above.

WilsonFrickett - I agree about being shocked at the frequent assumption that the GP should help with childcare. In most cases they sacrificed a lot to bring up their own kids and should not have to do it all again. My parents would laugh if I asked them to look after my baby on a regular basis and quite frankly, good for them!