I read an article in Time magazine that involved the story of the woman Ginny mentioned in the Why do we have children thread. It started me thinking about the age that some men and women start their families. I know a woman who's parents were in their mid to upper forties when she was born. By the time she graduated from high school, her parents had reached retirement age. Her father died soon after she turned 20 (she is now 25), but her mother is still alive and in her early seventies.

So, do you think there is a certain age in which people should stop considering having children? What about celebrities like Cheryl Tiegs or Adrienne Barbeau who had kids (via surrogate) in their late forties/early fifties, or celebriteies like Tony Randall and Larry King having children in their sixties and seventies? Is it fair to the kids to have parents whose life expectancy is less than 25 years? I know anything can happen and we can't predict at 30 if will we be here in 40 years, but shouldn't they take their ages at the child's birth into consideration?

By Nancy on Thursday, March 7, 2002 - 06:05 pm:

Boy this is a tough one. I'm an older mom. I was 38 when my dd was born. It took many years to concive her and I'm sure it would take many more to have another. So at 41 we are happy with our little family of three. Heck I will be 58 when she is out of high school. Is that good or bad I don't know. I didn't have a choice in the matter. I concived when it was my time. Now if I was 40 we would have given up and we were ready to accept that. For me I did not want to try past 40. I think there is so much that factors into having a child(ren) and age should be one of them. Along with income, stablity of the relationship, time to give, etc.

By Karen55 on Thursday, March 7, 2002 - 09:02 pm:

I think everyone has the right to decide for themselves when the time is right to have kids, BUT, I agree with Nancy, so many things factor (or they SHOULD factor) into the decision, and I agree that age should be one of them. I do think it's ridiculous and self serving for 70 y/o celebrities to be fathering children. Granted, people are living longer, in general, but IMO, a 70 y/o is not going to be able to be as involved in parenting as say, a 30 y/o, or a 40 y/o. And consider this: these 70 y/o celebrities have all this wealth, they are more than likely actually paying someone else to rear these kids, rather than doing most of the actual parenting themselves. I mean, think about it, how many 60 or 70 y/o's do you know who would get up several times during the night every night to feed and diaper a baby, or have the stamina to chase a 2 y/o through the mall, or teach a 6 y/o to ride a bike.......??? The list goes on and on. I believe that if you have a child it's because you want to raise the child yourself, and be active in the child's life.
Personally, I can't imagine wanting to start raising a child at 60 or 70 years of age.

By Truestori on Friday, March 8, 2002 - 11:37 am:

I believe that everyone knows what age is right for them. I personally wouldn't have a baby after 35 only because I started very early. I knew that I wanted all of my kids in thier teens by the time me and hubby were in our 40's.It truly depends on where life takes you. Some people don't even meet someone special until their 40's. I do agree that 70 is way to old and money doesn't replace a mom or dad!