At what age should we give up on having a family life?

[Mrlonelyone]

At what age should one just give up on the notion that they will, or should have a family life?

 

 

This may sound depressing but in times past after a certain age late 20's to early 30's with no marriage or serious prospect of it at least people did just give up on family life.

 

 

I both ask for a general answer and based on taking stock of my own life.

 

 

When I think of how old my parents are and how hard it is to have to care for them while I am trying to get my own life going I would hate to have a child only for them to deal with that.

[Disillusioned]

It depends on the individual.

 

My spoiled and stupid grandmother thought of old age as a kind of Life of Riley you get just for being old. She died feeling gypped and miserable because she never got the Life of Riley she wanted. She ran my poor mother ragged and treated her like a personal slave.

 

So, it really depends more on the individual than on their age.

[veggirl]

Late 20s, early 30s seems way too early to me. A single, no prospects woman, maybe 38? A man...I think they get a little longer, maybe 45?

 

I can't imagine someone "giving up" at 28. Or 32, 33, 35...no, not when there are still legitimate years left.

 

for the record, I am 30 and feel too young for kids or marriage

[Art_Critic]

I got divorced after years of marriage with a step daughter, no child of my own by the age of 39/40.

 

Got married to a wonderful woman and had a beautiful bouncing baby boy when I was just turning 45... that to me is about the outer limits.

 

I'd love to say that you can never be too old but I think you can...I'll be almost retirement age when he graduates high school... perfect...

 

My wife was under 40....

 

Chin up...

[Mrlonelyone]

Thanks for the honest answers.

[theothersully]

I'd say 40. Would not want to be 60 when the kid is going to college.

[man_in_the_box]

Rather a 43 year old dad at birth than never have existed at all.

[mammasita]

I dont think there should be an age limit on it either. If you are physically and mentally able and have a willing partner, why limit yourself?

[Mrlonelyone]

I dont think there should be an age limit on it either. If you are physically and mentally able and have a willing partner, why limit yourself?

 

 

Out of consideration for your unborn kids. Having kids when it means they will be burdened by you in your old age is selfish.

[carhill]

At what age should one just give up on the notion that they will, or should have a family life?

 

Well, I came from a family with older parents, dad being 43 when I was born, so I kept my hope alive during my 40's and it died with that marriage. I think, with people living longer and increasing alternative methods of having children, there shouldn't be any particular age as a rule, rather one for individual circumstances. As an example, I'm far healthier and energetic at 54 than my dad was at 43 and enjoy playing with friend's children and grandchildren, as well as being capable of the constant physical work, since my life's work is very physical. I know some guys and gals in their 60's who could say the same. That said, I don't have the mental interest anymore. Someone else, comparatively, could be very passionate and determined. We're all different.

[man_in_the_box]

Out of consideration for your unborn kids. Having kids when it means they will be burdened by you in your old age is selfish.

 

By that logic having kids is immoral per definition.

[GorillaTheater]

I'd love to say that you can never be too old but I think you can...I'll be almost retirement age when he graduates high school... perfect...

 

Right there with you, pal. I'll be 66 when my youngest is theoretically graduating from college. It casts an interesting light on things when one of your big goals is to live long enough to retire.

 

So yeah, I agree, mid-40s is about the upper limit.

[normal person]

Having kids at an older age affords you the opportunity to develop some financial stability that can give your kids a better life and better opportunities. Very generally speaking, you can have kids at 25 and spend a sizable portion of your income on raising them. Or you could wait on kids, invest and reinvest that money you would have spent, let it grow exponentially, then have kids at 35 and be much better prepared to pay for their college or whatever else they need. That sounds like a much better plan to me. Kids cost a ton of money, and I would guess that the older you are, the more money you're likely to have made/saved.

 

Yes, you might be some of the older parents but that's sort of irrelevant as they're going to have to deal with you dying eventually. They'll be capable of handling it any time after they reach adulthood.

[man_in_the_box]

I agree that late forties and over fifty become questionable - for biological children. It's never too late to start over with a new man/woman to just enjoy life. I'm a bit divided on the issue of adoption - is it necessarily wrong to adopt after the healthy age for getting biological children?

[Shepp]

I don't see theres much of a limit...

 

I always wanted to be a young dad (young enough to relate to my kids, and coach the football team etc) and to have a big family (a full house, always people around, I want my kids to always have people there for them).

 

My gf's pregnant with twins now so when they're 18 I'll be...37, I think that's nice. And say they have kids at 25 then i'll only be turning 60 when my grandkids are turning 16. Again I think that's nice, health willing, i'll still be fit enough to really do things with my grandkids and be a big part of they're lives for a long time.

 

BUT, if it was have kids at 43 and be 61 by the time there 18, 84 when my grandkids are 16..........well then id still rather that than never have someone call me there dad, never be able to say "this is my son/daughter", never be able to impart my wisdom of how to build a shelter if your stranded on a desert island.

[Mrlonelyone]

Good discussion so far, lots of different POV's.

 

 

My perspective comes from my parents having been in their 60's when I was in my 20's and in their 70's now that I am in my 30's. All this time I had to deal with a gradually increasing ammount of their business.

 

 

My father became disabled at about 50, blindness, so I had to deal with him.

 

 

My mother's memory has been failing for a good long while and has only gotten worse.

 

 

Even when I do find someone who might be a good partner, they are confronted with the burden of instantly being a caretaker to my parents*. As much as I say they would never be in that position, in the best case, they become part of the family which in my families very Amerindian influenced culture means caring for the old and young. That in addition to having kids is a lot to deal with.

 

 

It makes me think my window has closed and I should just forget about anything permanent or family like of any kind.

 

 

Rather than burden any possible kids with an old infirm parent, I would just not have them deal with it. People in general are not so understanding of those of us who's lives revolve around elder care. But, "Oh the right person will..." I'm done dreaming of this mythical "right person". If they haven't come by the time I'm 35 then to hell with them.

 

 

 

 

Try as I might the idea of adoption etc. does not appeal to me. I am my families unofficial genealogist. I know just how historical my ancestors were. (Early colonial settlers, soldiers of every kind and color in the Continental army, frontiersmen, free people of color, and Indians.). If I cannot pass on that tradition to a biological child, then I will just set it down in writing for my relatives children. As much as I admire those who do adopt, I just can't say that I would be truly satisfied with that.

 

 

All of that and I would like for my children to know their grandparents. My parents won't last long enough for that to happen.

 

*as well as a grand aunt/uncle to the children of my nieces and nephews. If they are young it's too much for them, if they are a bit older many in their 30's don't like to think of themselves as great, or grand anything's.

[TintedChrome]

I'm dealing with this issue myself.

 

When I was born, my mom was 40. My dad was 47.

I always hoped I'd get married around 30 and have children around 35. Well, life is all the stuff that happens to you while you were planning other things. Now I'm 45 and seeing my situation sinking like the sun at dusk. Being male grants me some extra time, to a limit. Who knows where that limit is.

[iris219]

As a man, you have many years left before it's probably not going to happen. I guess you can start worrying some around 50, but even then it could still happen.

 

Giving birth to children is not the only way to have a family. A hair stylist at the salon I get my hair done is a 45 year old, single gay man and he adopted a child from Africa last year. He is so in love with that baby, I get teary eyed every time he talks about her. :) My boss is 48 and single. She fostered a child for a couple of years and finally adopted her recently at the age of 12. The child calls her mom and they ARE a family. The two of them.

[Mrlonelyone]

As a man, you have many years left before it's probably not going to happen. I guess you can start worrying some around 50, but even then it could still happen.

 

Giving birth to children is not the only way to have a family. A hair stylist at the salon I get my hair done is a 45 year old, single gay man and he adopted a child from Africa last year. He is so in love with that baby, I get teary eyed every time he talks about her. :) My boss is 48 and single. She fostered a child for a couple of years and finally adopted her recently at the age of 12. The child calls her mom and they ARE a family. The two of them.

 

 

I am not just talking fertility. I am talking about what kind of life I would wan't for my kids. A 20-30 year old should not have a parent in diapers.

[iris219]

I am not just talking fertility. I am talking about what kind of life I would wan't for my kids. A 20-30 year old should not have a parent in diapers.

 

It's possible at any age to develop an illness that leaves you incapacitated and dependent on others.

 

People now live longer, healthier lives than even before. My mother was 35 when she had me. She is 70 and healthy. She refuses to retire and still works full-time. My grandmother is 90 and still lives alone and drives.

[man_in_the_box]

Try as I might the idea of adoption etc. does not appeal to me. I am my families unofficial genealogist. I know just how historical my ancestors were. (Early colonial settlers, soldiers of every kind and color in the Continental army, frontiersmen, free people of color, and Indians.). If I cannot pass on that tradition to a biological child, then I will just set it down in writing for my relatives children. As much as I admire those who do adopt, I just can't say that I would be truly satisfied with that.

 

Off-topic but can you expand on this? The most common argument for people to have biological children is because they feel the need to pass on their genes. I've never heard someone argue it from this angle.

[Disillusioned]

Anthony Quinn supposedly fathered a kid in his 80s.

 

But yeah, I think in the next few decades we'll see more people regretting being alone and kidless because they wanted to party it up when they were younger.

 

Personally, it makes no difference to me because I knew even as far back as age 12 that I didn't want to be a dad (I was an old geezer trapped in a boy's body).