Why do people under 30ish have kids? (daycare, legal, teenagers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
End all "assistance" for unwed mothers, teen parents, etc and you'll see the rate of illegitimacy and teen pregnancy fall drastically. But unfortunately we all know this will never happen, most likely because the govt wants people to be dependent on them.
Why? It's of no benefit to the Gov, society, those leeches and deadbeats, the country in general,......
Don't misunderstand. I didn't say those who waited, such as I did, are "better" individuals than anyone else. It makes them more mature and responsible people.
Does that mean a "better" person to others? Maybe so.
What's better about waiting until marriage is the situation for the child most of all... and it's better for the taxpayer as I never took a dime from the Gov (taxpayers) to raise children.
I had children in my 30s and I don't think that by default that made me any more mature and responsible than if I had my children earlier. I was a homeowner at 21 and made pretty decent money in my 20s. I was very mature and responsible; however, most of the relationships that I had during that time period were nowhere close to the stage of contemplating children. Like I stated above, if I had married my husband at 24 instead of 27, I probably would have started a family at 28. Yes, there are a lot of single young moms out there... likewise, there are young responsible people as well. There is no life template that says "you must do this in your 20s, have kids in your 30s and 40s, and blah blah". It's all individual and as such, you do what is best for you. [You being a general term here]
this is the flip side of the parenting/age argument (i.e. 20 year olds asking "why do people wait so late to have kids???). It's like each side wants to feel as if the age that they started to have kids is the right age for everyone when that's not the case. I feel that when it comes to having kids, that's a personal decision. And, the welfare thing is a separate argument. Yes, there are a lot of deadbeat young moms out there who are on governmental assistance, but there are also moms who aren't in their 20s who are in similar circumstances for one reason or another. Also having kids in your 30s doesn't guarantee that they will have a better life...anyone can easily become a single parent. Divorce? Widowhood?
People should have children if they are responsible and can capably provide for them, period. No age attached. "Capably provide" in my book means providing the neccessities at the very least. Children don't need to live like little princes/princesses to live a good life.
Use your common sense here. If a woman or teenager has to go on welfare, SHE cannot afford to have children. It's not different for different people. It's a simple across the board fact.
This doesn't apply. Even a young person can suffer an accident or stroke leaving them (brain damaged) just like this senile dad in his 70s. Most people in their 70s are not senile. Few people wait until their 50s to have children. Many women are already going into menopause by then. He has a younger wife you say? If he's in his 50s, to have teens in his 70s, he's thinking of retirement, not starting with infants......
The question was nto why do people on welfare have children, but why do people under 30 have children. There is not difference in you welfare example as to whether the woman is under 30 or over 30. However what you are missing is the way our welfare programs are set up, the woman on welfare gets more money if she has more children. Thus, for welfare moms, the more kids the better.
Yes, it does apply. That was an example, not the catch all of issues that come with being old when your kids are in high school. Even if you have kids in your 40s you will be 58-67 by high school graduation that is pretty old. Most (all?) people are slowing down at that time. Most are starting to have health issues (my knees were blown out form jogging by the time I was 46 - again this is an example, not the complete scope of all possible problems). the OP wants to know why some people have kids when they are younger and one reason is becuase you are in better health and can do more things with them and enjoy them more when you are younger. My younegest is 12. I have not been able to do the fun things with him that I could do with his older siblings. Some things, yes, but some things I just cannot do, or no longer enjoy. While I can go for a bike ride with him, a 5 day bike/camping trip is possibly beyond me, and even if do-able it woudl be quite uncomfortable. I cannto simply jump up and take off like a rabbit after spending a night sleeping on the ground anymore, it takes a hour to get loosened up engouh to do anything active.Honestly, I would not want to be any older than I am with a 12 year old son. If we had waited to have our first child(ren) untli we were over 30, he would only be 7 or 8. I would be pretty old by the time he got through college.
Another reason people have kids before 30 is they want to be able to retire before they get really really old. For many of us that means the kids need to be through college and usully a few additional years to get finances in order. If you still have kids in college when you are 68 (for example), you are not going to retire until you are well into your 70s. Personally, I will be about 59 when my son finishes 4 years of college. Then I can start dumping money into retirement. It will take probably ten years before I can retire, possibly more. I am looking at retirement at age 70 at best. If I had waited longer to have kids, it would be later.
Frankly I would reccomend to most people they start their family before they are 30. There will always be some exceptions. But for most, I woudl suggest prior to 30 unless you only plan on having one child.
Im not sure if the topic is having kids under 30ish or having kids on welfare.
People have been having children forever before the age of 30ish. Until recently, IMO, couples were mature enough and finanically able to have children in their 20's and even late teens. They didnt have PhD's or master or 60,000 in the bank, but thats not what it takes to be a parent/family.
Apparently for young people today its financially more difficult or people are spoiled, entitled and immature. Kids are living with and depending on their parents into their mid 20's. They are more into doing for themselves, partying, travel, etc. So, yes, they should wait before having children. This is all a different issue from having children while depending on welfare.
There is a downside to waiting on that degree and money, neigher of which makes you a better parent. Older parents physically and medically have a more difficult time conceiving and delivering and taking care of children. A couple I know just had twins at 43, they also have a almost 3 yr old. By the time they start college they will be about 60. They may never live to see their grandchildren. (I know this can happen regardless of age). This couple has relied heavily on their parents and I dont think they could do it without them.
If everyone stops having kids until their mid 30's we will lose the grandparent/family dynamic. I think that will be sad. I have great memories of my grandparents and I have grandkids of my own and Im young enough to be able to do lots of things with them.
Then you're, statistically, extremely unusual. A solid majority of people who are raising kids qualify for a child tax credit of up to $1,000 per child (if a single parent is making under $75K or a married couple is making under $110K), above and beyond the standard dependent deduction. Many more people take tax deductions on their child care expenses. Not to mention that approximately 90% of Americans send their kids to public school, and in the vast majority of cases their own property taxes don't fully cover the costs of educating their kids.
Those are all entitlements. Just because they don't come with a government check doesn't mean that money isn't flowing from society as a whole to parents -- it absolutely is.
Funny how people forget to include this in their rants against "welfare."
Use your common sense here. If a woman or teenager has to go on welfare, SHE cannot afford to have children. It's not different for different people. It's a simple across the board fact.
What of the people who lose their jobs after they have children and then have no choice but to go on welfare?
Do they give the children back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by =^..^=
This doesn't apply. Even a young person can suffer an accident or stroke leaving them (brain damaged) just like this senile dad in his 70s. Most people in their 70s are not senile. Few people wait until their 50s to have children. Many women are already going into menopause by then. He has a younger wife you say? If he's in his 50s, to have teens in his 70s, he's thinking of retirement, not starting with infants......
Why doesn't it apply?
It is a scientifically proven fact that people in their 20s are healthier and have fewer issues related to child-bearing. Just because someone can have a child into their 40s, 50s, etc. doesn't mean that it is a good idea.
For virtually all of human history, people were young parents. This idea of waiting until things are "perfect" is a relatively new phenomenon. And your choice to wait doesn't mean that you have to degrade someone else's choice not to.
Seriously, when did it become fashionable to discriminate against people in their 20s?
As a 25 year old guy I wouldent even think about children before I am 30. It's been my experience that it's mainly the girls that want to have children at young ages (ie: before 30). It's the girls who want "one night stands" and "quickies" that lead to "unplanned pregnancies". Add in the fact that most girls think babies are cute but don't give one thought to the cost and responsibilities that come with a child.
Most people of my generation lack the maturity and well paying jobs needed to have a stable family life. I have virtually no friends in career type jobs - I suspect this is mainly due to the economy but I have more than a few friends who still think they are 18 rather than 24/25/26.
Im not sure if the topic is having kids under 30ish or having kids on welfare.
People have been having children forever before the age of 30ish. Until recently, IMO, couples were mature enough and finanically able to have children in their 20's and even late teens. They didnt have PhD's or master or 60,000 in the bank, but thats not what it takes to be a parent/family.
Apparently for young people today its financially more difficult or people are spoiled, entitled and immature. Kids are living with and depending on their parents into their mid 20's. They are more into doing for themselves, partying, travel, etc. So, yes, they should wait before having children. This is all a different issue from having children while depending on welfare.
There is a downside to waiting on that degree and money, neigher of which makes you a better parent. Older parents physically and medically have a more difficult time conceiving and delivering and taking care of children. A couple I know just had twins at 43, they also have a almost 3 yr old. By the time they start college they will be about 60. They may never live to see their grandchildren. (I know this can happen regardless of age). This couple has relied heavily on their parents and I dont think they could do it without them.
If everyone stops having kids until their mid 30's we will lose the grandparent/family dynamic. I think that will be sad. I have great memories of my grandparents and I have grandkids of my own and Im young enough to be able to do lots of things with them.
I just came into this thread at post #121, so if I'm being repetitious, forgive me. I have long said I thought the best time to have kids is when you have them. Just in these last 40 or so posts, I've seen all kinds of situations, people having kids old, young, etc, and having it work out.
In re: the bold, the only point I can agree with is that older parents have more difficulty conceiving. Other than that, people in their 40s are certainly young enough to take care of an infant. So what if these folks are 60ish when their kids graduate from high school? 60 these days is pretty young, and someone in their 40s today will probably not be able to retire until they are at least 68 anyway.
Funny that you talk about losing the grandparent dynamic yet state that these 40 something parents are getting a lot of help from their parents. Age really is just a number.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens
Because condoms are 99.9% effective. There are 365.25 days in a year. A young couple having sex three times a day are pretty likely to have a child within a year if they are using condoms.
Because they are ready to start a family. My wife and I took (take) our marriage commitment very seriously. We were engaged for two years. We wanted to have a family when we were young so we could still have fun with them when they became teens. We also wanted to have kids while my wife was still able to revocer from pregnancy quickly, less likely to develop complications and we were both still sufficiently energetic to deal with little ones. I was making well over $100K a year so we were able to pay our bills and still eat well even though we could not afford a house (renters are not supposed to have kids?). I cannot remember which of our kids were intentional and which were not, but it does not matter. We were not interested in killing them for convenience and we were happy to have them. Life is not all about finacial matters. What one person thinks is being able to "afford" kids may be different for another.
I had a girlfriend in high school whose dad was in his later 70s. He was senile and a huge embarrassment to her. Sometimes when I ws around heir house, he woudl mistake me for her or for her brother. Generally if he told me to take out the trash, I just did it, but it mortified her. He died before she finsied college. I would not want my kids to have to deal with that.
B#1: No matter how young you were when you had your kids, they will still think of you as "old fogies". That is the nature of kids, especially teens. I addressed the energy issue before. Most people in their 40s have plenty of energy to take care of kids. They're not in the rocking chair yet.
B#2: Has been addressed, but I'd like to reiterate and reinforce. Alzheimer's can happen at any age. I've seen people with early onset Alzheimer's in their 50s, a more typical age to have a kid in high school. I think your girlfriend should have respected her father more, instead of acting as she did. As far as dying before she finished college, that is not unheard of, even when ther parents are much younger.
From reading many of the posts I want to make some comments.
1. Most babies are not born to teen age girls that can not support the child. Most babies are born to families that can support them.
2. Just because a young married couple may not have the money they need to buy all the items that many think are needed does not mean that they can not afford to have kids. I know of lots of young families that started off with little and built a life together over time.
3. Divorce is not caused by being young and poor. Divorce is caused by being selfish.
4. Young and poor people can become wealthy over time.
5. I am the product of a formerly young and poor set of parents that raised 8 kids on their own with out the benefit of socialist government programs. My parents were able to buy a home, build a life, and give us kids a great upbringing.
From reading many of the posts I want to make some comments.
1. Most babies are not born to teen age girls that can not support the child. Most babies are born to families that can support them.
2. Just because a young married couple may not have the money they need to buy all the items that many think are needed does not mean that they can not afford to have kids. I know of lots of young families that started off with little and built a life together over time.
3. Divorce is not caused by being young and poor. Divorce is caused by being selfish.
4. Young and poor people can become wealthy over time.
5. I am the product of a formerly young and poor set of parents that raised 8 kids on their own with out the benefit of socialist government programs. My parents were able to buy a home, build a life, and give us kids a great upbringing.
In other words, it'll work if the parents heads are on completely straight.
If they're ready to do it and know it will work out despite some of the obvious challenges, then go right on ahead.
If there are too many surefire indicators around that will knowingly make it all crash and burn(ie,. mental illness, criminal history, failure to hold any type of employment for extended periods of time) it should be stopped immediately.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If a woman or teenager has to go on welfare, SHE cannot afford to have children. It's not different for different people. It's a simple across the board fact. 
He has a younger wife you say? If he's in his 50s, to have teens in his 70s, he's thinking of retirement, not starting with infants......
