When I'm 64

I am a 35 year old single woman who would really like to have a family. I know I have a few years... maybe. But I do not support women having children over 45 years old. Sometimes biology takes over and it just happens, that's one thing but the ones that really try after 45 years old are just selfish in my opinion. Having a teenager at 60? A college student at retirement age? Whose interests come first at that point? I just think it's an unfair and selfish option to have a child so late in life that you can't care for that child when they require the most energy and oversight from their parents: the teenage years.

Sent by Kandace | 3:11 PM | 5-15-2007

I had my only child at 40; my husband had teenagers from his previous marriage. I have so much more wisdom now than I had at 20, but I agree...I am tired. We are not having a 2nd child for that reason.
But we have more money to take better care of her, and more insight into the world than we would have as younger parents. My husband even acknowledges that he is a better parent because he moves a little slower than when he was younger and in a hurry. Thank you for bringing this issue up, from all of us "parents of advanced age", as my ob-gyn calls us.

Sent by Tracy Hodges | 3:15 PM | 5-15-2007

I'm in my 40's, and just now I'm developing a really good relationship with my parents. I shudder to think of what the past couple of years would have been like if I had been born when my parents were in their 40's or 50's.

Sent by Archer | 3:16 PM | 5-15-2007

I am a 60 year old stay-at-home dad with an 8 and a 2-1/2 year old. My two children have been lifesavers for me at a time in life when many are thinking of slowing down. Now, they have revitalized me and given me purpose on a much more deeply emotional level than I ever thought possible. My concerns about age disappeared when I held them in the delivery room. My wife is 20 years my junior and she always asks me where I find the energy to cope with two scramblers while she is exhausted. I tell her to just watch these growing wonders and she'll see the answer lies in what elation and joy they return for the effort.

Sent by Mac Magruder | 3:18 PM | 5-15-2007

My father was 35 when I was born and I'm the oldest so I ddnt think it was a big deal to wait. In fact almost encourage to enjoy my 20s. I'm 37 and have a 5 month old. We're planning on having more children. My husband and I think it was GREAT that we waited b/c have more time to truly enjoy our little fella.

Sent by JD | 3:18 PM | 5-15-2007

While I understand the joy that older parents who have posted feel, I see it as selfish to wait so long to have a child. No child or teenager should have to deal with the death of a parent because of old age. I think about my own parents. My father was diagnosed at age 54 with early-onset Alzheimer's disease. I can't imagine what my poor mother would have gone through if she had just had a child and was having to take care of both of them. While wisdom and money that age brings are great, it's better for the child to have parents who aren't about to die when they hit middle school or high school. Children have too much to worry about in this day and age; they don't need this as well.

Sent by Kate | 3:26 PM | 5-15-2007

My mother gave birth to my twin sister and I when she was 42 and she had 6 other children already, worked full time and did all the house work.

She also had two older daughters who were pregnant at the same time she was twice, and people who saw them together, always thought my mother was their younger sister. She looked so young and had so much energy.

She did however have the assistance of one of my unmarried older sisters to take care of us during the day while she worked, but once she got home we were all hers.

I don't think it was as terrible as the previous caller says.

David Abad
Cincinnati

Sent by David Abad | 3:31 PM | 5-15-2007

I worry about the health problems associated with women having children late in life. I had always understood that the risk of having a Downs syndrom afflicted child was greater in older parents. Do women who have children later in life have more difficult pregnancies?

Sent by Brenda Cronin | 3:32 PM | 5-15-2007

My father wsa 41 when I was born and my mother was 30. yes, it was a second marriage for them both, and the decision to remain childless in their first marriages was deliberate. But I was never bothered by having "older" parents, and in fact I appreciate the wisdom and maturity they brought to parenthood. I'm just out of college now, and can't imagine having a child before I'm at least 30! My parents were well established, whole people when they had me, and I appreciate that immensely. I do have issues with becoming a parent over the age of perhaps 60, but only for the reality that you most likely will not live to see your children reach maturity. But I absolutely prefer older people becoming parents, rather than having people become parents too young.

Sent by KP | 3:32 PM | 5-15-2007

My mother and father had me when they were 37. It was a little different to have older parents; some people would assume that they were my grandparents, and I know it was hard on them at times, but I think it is wonderful. They were smarter and better prepared and more mellow. I was a "gift", but am thrilled to have them and can't imagine them any other way.

Sent by Amy Frachiseur | 3:32 PM | 5-15-2007

I became a first time mother at the age of 39... and am contemplating another child in the next 18-24 months. I think that my child will benefit from my life experiences. I also hope that he doesn't experience all the negativity that some of the callers I have heard today.

If I didn't think that I could have provided my child at least as great a childhood as I had, or better, I would have never gotten pregnant with him. That's not the kind of decision I was prepared to make as a twenty-something.

Sent by Micki | 3:32 PM | 5-15-2007

I am almost 50. I am raising my two granddaughters (alone) and have had them since the youngest was 6 months old and the older was 3, they are now 7 and 9. I don't want any other kids, but I have more energy now then I did when I was raising my original two children (alone) and am involved in their school and activities. We don't play soccer or baseball, but I never did, we enjoy swimming and bike riding and have a great life.

Sent by Tammera Giese | 3:33 PM | 5-15-2007

My mom was 37 when I was born and my dad was 45. It was really hard for my mom because she was a full-time caretaker for my grandmother at the same time that she was parenting a teenager. How's the "sandwich generation" problem affecting older parents now?

Sent by Tina Durham | 3:33 PM | 5-15-2007

The main problemsthis conversation is failing to address are the risks for the potential child for parents who seek out these reproductive technologies. For example, children that are born from the technoligies are more likely to be preterm, low birth weight and have congenital and chromosomal abnormalities. Why do we not consider this when we allow people to pursue these technologies.

Sent by Jason Lesandrini | 3:34 PM | 5-15-2007

After a number of years of infertility struggles including in vitro attempts, I conceived naturally in 1987. I was 40 when my son was born and it was amazing. My mother was 44 when I was born -- I was the youngest of 9 -- and hardly a comparable experience for her. Yes, I did not like having my Mom mistaken for my grandmother, so when my son was 2, I had a face lift. Best thing I ever did. I can't speak entirely for him, but I really don't think that, overall, it's been a problem for him. We've had great energy & activity (lake cabin, lots of friends, I learned to ski at 50). So, it's different than it was in the 40's when I was born. But I DO think that at 45 or 46, it becomes a high probability to be a negative for the child. Sharon

Sent by Sharon Tornes | 3:34 PM | 5-15-2007

I am 45 and hav a 13 year old son and a surprise 16 month old daughter. We tried for 5 years after our son was born to have more children and were not successful. We were a bit shocked by our daughter, but she is a blessing beyond belief and she adores her brother. I think parents can be loving at any age and bad at any age, age does not define the kind of person you are. I am more tired, but I know this too shall pass. Wisdom is definitely helpful at this age and I am thankful I have a big supportive family and a great 13 year old son. I love my children and am thankful every day. I think love can make a world of difference for all involved. Thanks

Sent by Diane Wiegel | 3:34 PM | 5-15-2007

I'm a 54 grandmother of two boys, ages 2 1/2 and 4 1/2. They are with me every weekend after I work a 40 hour work week in addition to my school MBA program. These kids are pure joy, but they totally wear me out! I've had my second round of formula, diapers, sick kids which is fine for part-time. However, I cannot imagine raising children at my and their ages right now. I'm now completely certain I did the right thing by having my children while I was in my 20's. I'm also loving seeing this next generation while I'm young enough to participate in their upbringing.

Sent by CL | 3:34 PM | 5-15-2007

Human life expectancy is increasing along with childbearing age so I don't think older parents are necessarily selfish. When people were having children young, weren't they also dying younger too? So now we are having children when we are older and dying older.

Sent by Jackie | 3:34 PM | 5-15-2007

I am 40 and had my last of three children last year. I think it's very 'mommy bashing' to say that it's selfish to have kids late in life. I was in school for many years and once I started to try, it took a long time to make it happen. I am on the floor playing with my kids, and out running around with them. I understand that I'm not as fast or energetic as when I young, but I'm a much better parent than I would have been when I was 20.
I have an almost infinite amount of patience, and I have kids around me at all times, and I wouldn't give it up for anything. I agree with the great 'sacrafice' issue, but it's so worth it.

Sent by Casey Inman | 3:34 PM | 5-15-2007

I am a 27 year old graduate student. My husband and I have been married for 5 years and I've found people are starting to point out my biological clock is ticking. While I do realize that I will not be biologically able to have children forever, my husband are not at a point where we feel we can commit to caring for a child right now. I strongly believe that the decision to have or not have children is entirely up to each family; too often it seems that everyone else wants to have input when it is none of their business.

Sent by Sarah | 3:34 PM | 5-15-2007

As a person who is child-free by choice and 35-years old, I wonder at the morality behind the reasoning of "science enables us to do this and thus we should be able to."

Science also enables people to have abortions, to perform embryonic stem-cell research, to do genetic screening on embryos to select for sex, to sterilize children so their parents can better care for them. I do not want to sound terribly eugenic about this, but biologically our bodies stop dropping eggs at a certain age, is that not nature's way of saying it's time to hang it up?

Stacy Bertinelli
Scottsdale, AZ

Sent by Stacy Bertinelli | 3:35 PM | 5-15-2007

To the caller about international adoption:

I feel that it wrong for someone to think about adoption. There are so many complications about adoption and people are not always aware of the consequences. Age is just another issue to....race, cullture, language, etc.

Sent by HeeRa | 3:36 PM | 5-15-2007

One thing that is often overlooked is the fact that being a parent doesn't end at age 20. So often the question is asked of 50-year-old parents, "How are you going to feel when you're 75 and your child is 20." My adult children are my best friends and have just as much a need for a steady parent now as they did when they were toddlers--just a different need. (I'm 56 and have children from ages 21 to 35 years of age)

Sent by D Crumbaker | 3:36 PM | 5-15-2007

I agree with the caller who suggests that there is an element of narcissism in the decision of older couples to have children beyond a certain age. Talk to people who are in their 50s and 60s; they will be the first to tell you that they would never consider starting a family at their age. If you're 50 when you have a baby, you will most likely not be able to experience a large portion of your child's life: when they're 30, you'll be 80, if you're lucky! Having a child to satisfy a young second wife's need to experience pregnancy or because you don't want to raise "someone else's" child through adoption...that's selfish.

Sent by Laura | 3:36 PM | 5-15-2007

I am 45 years old and I have recently adopted 3 little girls age 7, 4 and 2. I do not sit by the sidelines watching the "younger" mothers play with their children. In fact, I feel like my life experiences have helped me to learn to live more in the moment with my children. More often than not you will find my daughters and I running through our sprinklers or playing hopskotch while my "younger" neighbors are sitting in their lawn chairs watching their children playing with me!

Sent by Maureen | 3:37 PM | 5-15-2007

My father was 53 when he and my mother (who admittedly was 19) had me and he was 55 when they had my younger sister. What I enjoyed most about the experience was the fact that he was always there for me, to take me to school, to go to my performances, just anytime I needed him. My mother wasn't very reliable and often my sister and I were left with him. In fact, we spent our teenage years living exclusively with him.
What was most difficult was his ailing health, in my life-span he has had two heart attacks a triple bypass and a pacemaker. It was left to me to take care of myself and my sister when these things were happening and a part of me was left resentful for it.
Now he is 76 years old and one of my best friends, he has instilled in my a great wisdom and sense of security that I don't think I could have gotten from having younger parents.

Sent by Ashley Kilgore | 3:38 PM | 5-15-2007

I disagree with those who hold that having children at an older age is selfish. There are just as many selfishly motivated young parents. My parents had me around the age of 20, and their last child by the age of 27. My father was a very career oriented individual-extremely successful-but that entailed my mother functioning as his personal assistant 24 hours a day. She spent her time mothering him and helping him, and my siblings and I were neglected. Now, my husband and I plan on reaching our career goals and ensuring we have enough independence before we start to have children. We may start our family later than other people, but we will have time for our children.

Sent by S.E. | 3:39 PM | 5-15-2007

I hope that our generation educates the younger generation about the statistics of fertility. When I was in my 30's you could have it all - career, family, etc. No doctor until I was close to 35 ever said - you should have really thought about having children sooner. Maybe our next generation will better understand this... hopefully not because their parents were much older as they were growing up.

Sent by A. M. | 3:40 PM | 5-15-2007

My mother was 42 when I was born. I was 40 when my first was born and 43 when my second was born (so my parents were in their 80's when they had grandchildren). I never thought that my parents were too old when they had me and I don't regret having children. My children are now 15 and 12. There are certainly times when we are tired, but younger parents get tired, too. The only thing that I slightly regret is that my children didn't get to know their grandparents when they were younger, (and I didn't either). It was also difficult the last 5 years of my parents life when my children were in grade school. These are not impossible problems, however.

Sent by Karen Wilson | 3:41 PM | 5-15-2007

My mother was 40 and my father nearly 50 when I was born. My eldest brother was already married and I have nieces who are older than I - it was srange to be called "aunt" on the playground by someone who was 2 grades ahead of me. My peers teased me a lot for that.

My parents were unable to play ball or ride bikes with me, and I felt I missed a lot by having parents who were constantly mistaken for grandparents. It embarrassed them and it also embarrassed me. Sure, they could read to me and play board games, but I wanted to play catch and rollerskate with them.

My brothers and I are really from 2 different generations and don't see the world in the same way - we have few shared experiences to bond us.

My father died when I was 12 and I never knew him without gray hair and false teeth. My mother was 2 generations removed from me, and that caused a lot of trouble with our very different views of the world from politics to technology. I would have liked to have known my parents when they were still young enough to enjoy being active with me.

I miscarried several times during my 30's and I stopped trying to have children before I turned 40 because I swore I would never put a child through the type of childhood I had with parents too old to really be parents.

Sent by Carol | 3:41 PM | 5-15-2007

When I was 19 my mom gave birth to my youngest sister. My mom was 40 years old and my youngest brother was 14. One month after her birth I left on an LDS mission to Poland. I was gone for 2 years with little contact with my family. When I returned my parents seemed dramatically younger. In fact they acted younger, were more vibrant in every way and it was due to having a young one in their lives. As their friends have grown old, emptied the nest, and now act older, my parents have found a fountain of youth, my little sister.

Sent by Ryan Fisher | 3:41 PM | 5-15-2007

I had my children at 35 and 37 and now at 42 am having a wonderful time as a mother. I am surprised to hear so many people on the program today talking about women in their 40s and 50s as old. I of course get tired with two small children and a job, but am confident that I will have energy to enjoy my children and to share the greater wisdom that I have now as opposed to when I was in my twenties. There may be a 'too old', but that is highly personal. My husband and I are extremely happy we had our children just when we did. Thanks for a great show.

Sent by Alison Adams-Woodford | 3:43 PM | 5-15-2007

My mother was forty, my father thirty-four when I came along, the last of three children. They were both great storytellers, and we benefitted from first-hand accounts of life in the Great Depression and WWII.
My mother was always the oldest mom at PTA and Girl Scout meetings, and I have to admit to being embarrassed by her gray hair, but the enthusiasm and experience she brought to group projects more than made up for youthful energy.

Sent by Elaine Garris | 3:44 PM | 5-15-2007

I had my daughter 2 months after turning 40. I didn't meet my husband until I was 33 and I wasn't sure I even wanted children. I was able to enjoy myself in my 20s have a career in my 30s and now at 42 I have my own family and couldn't be happier. Having a toddler is exhausting but also very rewarding. My advise to anyone planning to have children at an older age is to make sure you are in good health. You've got to be able to keep up with them! Another downfall, your support system is also older. I am the youngest of three and my parents would love to help more but my mother could not even lift the baby when she was born. My sister babysits sometimes, but she is now 44 she gets very tired out. It's sad that a caller said she had a terrible childhood because her parents were older, but people do tend to live longer now and be in better health. (an earlier program mentioned GM had problems with paying retirement because of people living over 100!) Children keep you young, I keep getting mistaken for being 10 years younger. My mother's health has even improved by loooking forward to spending time with her grand daughter, she now can even pick her up. Yes is strange to have my first child at the same age my mother was when she first became a grandmother, but things have improved in the past 25 years. Also, I have alot more patience than I would've had 10 or 20 years ago.

Sent by millie | 3:45 PM | 5-15-2007

I had a third child at age 46. My daughter was in the last class of college and my son was in high school. The hardest thing was telling the group of women I worked with. At that time, five of the six women in my department were in their mid 20's and had been unsuccessfully on fertility drugs for months. When I told them [at 4 months] they were very excited for me. There was a significant pause though as they did the math of my age, etc. I have been thrilled with this child; her siblings who are adults are also thrilled with her. She does not keep me young, but she does keep me busy. I did lose several friends after making my announcement. It was too much of an adjustment for them and I was too tired to bridge the gap unilaterally. So that is hard. But I have no regrets.

Sent by Jan | 3:47 PM | 5-15-2007

I have been asked, since my mid 20's,"why don't you have any children?" my answer has always been,"I have not yet met a man with whom I feel I could take on such a long term project, although I would like to have children." Now, at 37, I have finally met a man who fits that description. Yes, it may be a bit selfish to think of having a child at my age or older. But, I also know that my great grandmother gave birth to my grandmother (only child) at age 35 in 1914. My mom and dad were 30 and 35 when I was born, and there is healthy longevity on both sides of my family. This is a discussion which requires one to look at individuals, family history, health, and lifestyle to make a valid judgement on the wisdom of having a child 'later' in life.

Sent by Katherine Lynn McIntosh | 3:48 PM | 5-15-2007

I had hoped to ask the guests to help me understand people who seem upset with conceiving beyond (my version) of reason. I feel guilty because at 45 I am blessed with a beautiful 9 year old, obviously in no position to judge. A dear friend of mine stopped writing for a while because she felt jealous of my pregnancy. I finally heard from her - after she became pregnant. I don't understand this at all, but I know it's true for many people. I am not proud of this, but sometimes my first thought is "get a life!" But I know it can't be that simple. Can anyone help me bridge the gap?

Sent by Kim Fogel | 3:49 PM | 5-15-2007

My wife and I became first-time parents when I was 34 and she was 33; we'd spent three years going through IVF cycles before it finally paid off. Now we've got a happy, healthy, hilarious 11-month old and we're contemplating trying for a second one.

The funny thing is that she and I dated for over a decade before getting married and were never in a rush to have kids. But now that we have one, I can't help but think about how much time we'll all have together in the coming decades and whether we should have started sooner.

Sent by andy | 3:52 PM | 5-15-2007

I am 44 and my husband is 48, and we just had twins 8 weeks ago (first children for both of us). What I feel is very important but is being left out of this discussion is how HARD it is to GET pregnant at this age!!! I've seen stories in the media for decades now about how 40 is the new 30, and how hip and great it is that women of 40 and above are having children ... but these stories mislead women terribly by glossing over the physical facts of getting pregnant at an older age. The lowdown: If you are 30, start working on getting pregnant NOW. Fertility declines amazingly starting at age 35 (a fact I had managed to miss, despite being a member of Mensa and having a postgraduate degree), and using IVF does NOT guarantee a baby. It is also extremely expensive to use IVF, IVF is rarely covered by insurance, and even a woman with a very good ovarian reserve such as mine was has only about a 5 percent chance of getting pregnant at 40 and above when using IVF. IVF is not some cure-all that can guarantee you a family. Don't wait too long or you may be left out.

That said, even though I am exhausted at the moment, I am also happier than I have ever been in my life. Our twins are healthy and seem to be bright and alert, and with any luck they won't mind having "old fogey" parents too much. But they could easily have never arrived at all.

Sent by Ann Jordan | 3:58 PM | 5-15-2007

I am on my second marriage. With my first husband, I wanted to have children, but didn't feel that we would have made good parents. I had a baby boy last year with my second husband at the age of 40. Having gone through what I have so far, if I had had a child in my 20's or 30's, I would not have had the patience and understanding that I have now. I feel more secure emotionally and financially.

My husband's parents were the same age as we are (40 and 45)when they had him and his twin brother. At no time did my husband feel that they were old. He actually felt jealousy from his peers because his parents weren't divorced.

After reading some of the previous posts, I'm being labeled as selfish. I find it funny because in the past, I thought it was the common opinion those that DIDN'T have children were labeled as such. I guess what I'm interested in now is if those that consider me selfish would think differently if they themselves were in a situation that denied them this wonderful gift until a later age.

Sent by Kim | 3:59 PM | 5-15-2007

I find it very irresponsible. It's not a matter of fatigue. It's a matter of selfishness. When did this become the so called "next chapter" to be in your forties and treating this like another business venture. Children are a privledge. As a forty-five year old woman I made my choice not to have children. I found other ways to create than by procreating. My life is very full. Parents need to grow with their children; and to hear one of the callers state that he can correct mistakes made with his older children - I've seen this within my own family. It's a falicy. Second families and children late in life are not the answer.

Sent by RA Johnson | 4:05 PM | 5-15-2007

My husband and I raised three children in our 30's while living overseas. We both worked full time and relied on extended family and well-trained hired help to help look after our children. We recently moved to the U.S. and are surprised at the tenor of the discussions around child-rearing - your forum on older parents being one example. I think the issue of whether it is "right" to have a child in your 40's or 50's is of secondary importance, what is more important for parents of ANY age is whether they have a support network in place to help them raise their children. I don't know who first coined the phrase "It takes a village" but I think it is a rare set of parents who can provide everything that children need. Foreigners often ridicule the American "D.I.Y." culture, which seems to have grown out of the proud pioneer spirit that built this country. I find it less than noble however when I realize that I am expected to hold down a job, clean my house, fix my car, and so on all on my own... this D.I.Y. fixation is nowhere more evident than in child-rearing. No matter how wealthy or resourceful you are, it seems that American society demands that you raise your children alone, that anyone who has to rely on outside help is weak or has the wrong priorities. The idea of asking one's own parents or relatives to pitch in seems to be taboo in most families, or reserved only for emergency situations. When I've asked friends about this they explain that they do not want to give up control of their children, either to their parents or to daycare workers or nannies, they point to stories of abuse, or they simply don't think anyone else should be given this responsibility. In many other cultures however, it is considered perfectly normal for relatives to be involved in childcare; in others the role of the nanny is very much respected. I think our children benefited enormously from being looked after by a "village," even when the caregivers had slightly different sets of values, it was eye-opening, it taught them tolerance, it made them adaptable and more compassionate toward others. I don't think my husband and I are much different from other educated parents, but we feel our children's lives have been enriched by close contact with people of different generations and backgrounds, and we remain very close to our children even if we weren't present at every birthday or doctor's visit. So I say to women of 50+ who are thinking of having children: who will you turn to to help out when you are too busy, or too tired? Do you have a support network? That's a daily issue... Taking a longer view, have you decided whom you would appoint formally in your will as legal guardians for your children in the event that you die at a time when they still need parental guidance? These are the real issues that responsible parents-to-be need to consider.

Sent by MC Taylor | 4:14 PM | 5-15-2007

Regarding the caller who complained about having parents that looked like her friends' grandparents:

If that's your biggest obstacle in life, count your blessings.

I too went through that - my parents didn't have me until they were 39 & 38. It was uncomfortable having parents that old when all of my peers had been born to 18-20 year olds. But so was having acne and not having the fashionable tennis shoes/jeans/shirts/whatever.

I remember swearing that if I ever had kids, I would do it when I was young!

So what did I do? I waited until I was 35 to have a child. I doubt he'll have any stigma though, as I know several people that are 30-35 with newborns/toddlers. It's sad that he'll never really know his grandparents, but the tradeoff (if I would've had my son in my early 20's) would've been a selfish dad.

Sent by lee | 4:25 PM | 5-15-2007

People shouldn't pressure 20-somethings to have children. Not having a child gave me time to work through issues in my life so I didn't have to pass them on to a child. Doing so would probably have been selfish or mindless.

I think older people can be better parents due to the depth of experience they have acquired by surviving the vicissitudes of life. This broader perspective makes them more understanding. They have learned through trial be fire that people are very different. They are more supportive of teenagers who develop along their own paths. This increased wisdom can mean older parents give teenagers the emotional space they need to value their own individuality.

I think some younger parents can make more mistakes by being be more controlling. This can violate the personal space that their teenagers' maturation processes require. Teenagers can react in anger to such violations, and situations of emotional abuse can result. Younger parents can be more defensive. In ideal situations, I think a child benefits from a range of perspectives from people both young and old.

Sent by Irene C | 4:32 PM | 5-15-2007

I am 46 years old with four biological children (I had them without fertility assistance) ages 9,8,6 and 2. Three boys and a girl (and no I wasn't trying for a girl). It took longer to get pregnant the 4th time, but when I finally gave up on the idea, I guess I relaxed and got pregnant. I wouldn't mind having another child, but I don't know how biblical I want to get about having children any older than I already have.
Since I didn't get married until I was almost 36 I didn't have much choice about how old I'd be when I had children. I had one sister out of four who had fertility problems, I figured I couldn't wait. Plus, if I thought about it too much I would have talked myself out of becoming pregnant.
I wondered about the caller on the show who was bothered about having older parents. I'm sure I'll embarrass my children, but my parents embarrassed me, too. That's just adolescence. I just hope I instill in my children not to worry too much what other people think. That was one of the greatest gifts my parents gave me. I would hope children's love for me and my husband would outweigh any long lasting embarrassment.
I would say the one thing I do think people might want to take into consideration is the risk of birth defects. I had an amniocentesis with my last pregnancy. I'm pro-choice, but really wouldn't want to have one myself. However, when I thought about my age and the fact that my older children might have to take on the responsibility (I'm talking about severe defects, not Down's Syndrome) of caring for a younger sibling (at a young age themselves) I would have considered it. I figured they could make that type of decision themselves when they were ready to start a family. I don't know if I would have had an abortion, but I did think I should consider the possibility of having to make that choice.
I've had to make quite a few adjustments in the last ten and half years. But these little people are so much fun and loving that I can't imagine really being happy without them in my life. Oh, and yes I could use more sleep.

Sent by Jacklyn | 5:42 PM | 5-15-2007

RA: When I was in my 20's, I was a beer-drinking, cigar-smoking, guitar-playing no-goodnik. Now I'm a healthy-eating triathlete. Don't tell me about not having energy!

Sent by lee | 6:05 PM | 5-15-2007

When I'm 64, my daughter (due at the end of July) will be 16. I also have a granddaughter due the same week as our daughter, and 2 other granddaughters. One at 3+ yrs and the other 2 1/2 months old. The only problem *I* have is being surrounded by all these girls!

Sent by tim, phoenix AZ | 8:05 PM | 5-15-2007

Because the majority of Americans are now overweight -- and a third obese -- the elephant in the room is that bearing children when you're "older" isn't the real issue ... it's bearing children when you're UNHEALTHY, no matter what the age. A very good friend of mine was born to parents some 10-20 years older than most his friends' parents (including mine), but they maintained healthy BMIs with very active, sporty lifestyles. Despite their obvious age differential, no one ever heard them complain of achy joints and fatigue (not even now in their 70s). Forget that today! Even young parents are "tired" because they're 10 - 20 - 30+ pounds outside of their BMI and, what's worse, creating a generation of chubby children--dependent upon chemical sweetners, artificial colors, syrups, flavorings, and preservatives--who also get "tired" after very little physical activity. If you ask me, have kids whenever life allows ... but be HEALTHY parents with HEALTHY kids always.

Sent by B. C. Roth, Pennsylvania | 9:17 PM | 5-15-2007

To the caller about saying her adopted kids were "not hers" and she wanted them to be more like her, does she realize a donor egg is not "her" either? And to to Neal--please don't use the phrase "kids of her own." For those of us who have adopted children, these kids are absoultely "our own." And often very much "like us." The preferred term is "biological child." Thanks

Sent by Micol Rothman | 11:33 PM | 5-15-2007

As you can see from all the varying comments, there is no absolute right or wrong about having "older" or "younger" parents--there will always be people at one end of the spectrum or another. I do agree that the fertility industry has fed into some of the problems and narcissm of our culture, and I appreciated the thoughtful comments of the guests on the program. I could not help but be appalled by the one caller who said she was 55, had not been able to have biological children with her husband but had raised several adopted children--she still wanted a genetic child because "none of them are anything like us." Leaving aside the question of age (and the near-impossibility that the caller could have her own genetic child at this point), how horrifying to hear her express disappointment in all the children she had raised! She needs to stop complaining about the clinics and doctors who are reluctant to help her get pregnant and deal with her issues as a parent and a person, and accept the reality of her life. Perhaps without the false promises implied by advanced reproductive technology, such a person could be happier and farther along in her maturity by now.

Sent by J.C., Berkeley, California | 12:39 AM | 5-16-2007

Maybe it's a mark of how much has changed that this show seemed very strange to me. I had my daughter at 35; my good friend is pregnant at 40 with her 4th (in 7 years) and her husband is 60. They run around all over with what seems to me an exhausting program of sports and activities. My college boyfriend also had older parents, 60 or 70ish, who were so draggy and vitiated that somehow his dad ran a giant audio electronics company and his mother did yoga and volunteered inbetween jetting all over the place and entertaining. It was the third marriage for them both. The boyfriend and I broke up long ago, but I still hear from his delightful mother, who just turned 70something.

I think this really has more to do with the health and personalities of the parents than it does with their ages.

I'm not sure how I feel about the expensive and gruelling procedures -- I wouldn't have gone through them myself -- but frankly, it's their money and comfort. I do think it's likely that we'll end up with a large cohort of middle/upper-middle-class kids with older parents, though I'm not sure I see how that's either a good or a bad thing.

Sent by amy | 12:50 AM | 5-16-2007

I think anybody who feels the need to replicate themselves, especially people who jump through all sorts of hoops to do it, is being selfish and narcissistic at any age. There are so many children who need good homes, and we as a species are straining our planet and its resources with our numbers already. What sort of compromised planet are we handing these kids to live on anyway? If these aspiring child-bearers really wanted to nurture life, they would nurture the life that's here needing nurturing, not attempting to create something that has their nose and eyes so they can have an "experience." I'm a 47 year old woman, happily kid-free, and I've just never been able to comprehend the impulse.

Sent by Kimberley | 12:53 AM | 5-16-2007

I don't think it is fair to be judgemental about the decisions others make about when to start a family. Modern lives are far too complex to base the decision on the isolated issue of age.

My mother's age when she had children, and the health of my grandparents - both of whom are in their late eighties and still healthy and involved in life - impacted my choices.

I *know* I started my family at the time that was right for my husband and I. I was 32 and my husband 35, which is so completely average in San Francisco. In fact, I was always shocked on the rare occassion when I met a first time mom under 30.

In contrast, my parents had 2 kids by the time my mother was 20 and my father 23. She will tell you that she did not get to enjoy motherhood nor did she raise us the way she would have with a little more life experience. She also finally divorced my immature father when she was 31, after three separations that greatly disrupted our lives. She is now, at 58, fully enjoying being a grandparent and shares her playful exuberence about life with my two kids.

My older sister chose to wait even longer than I, and will be having her first child at 41, in September. She did not meet her future husband until she was 38, and wisdom told her not to rush the relationship just because of her age.

Others may disagree, but I trust the decision-making skills of people over 35 for such an important decision, than I do the judgement (or lack thereof) of parents who start their families before they are 25.

At 38, after 2 kids, I am not sure whether or not I will try to have another child.

Sent by Greta | 2:37 AM | 5-16-2007

I was 28 years old when I had my first child and I had four more children within 8 years. I loved raising those kids and always felt like I had enough energy and enthusiasm. I did all kinds of things with those kids and felt as if it was okay that being a mom was pretty much all I did or thought of. Ten years after I had my fifth child when I was 46 years old I had another child. This child had a different dad and he lives in a different state and has only ever seen his daughter a couple times a year. She is now 11 years old and I am 57. I love her very much of course but I find it very difficult to participate in all of the school functions, the plays, the carnivals, the haunted houses, etc, etc. When I come home from work I really do not feel like working on a social studies project or watching a PG movie or going to a 4 H meeting. It is very hard because I feel guilty that she has not had the so very full childhood that her siblings had. Fortunately, some of them are close by and do things with her that I just do not want to do. One of the guests on the show really helped me by saying that it is just not developmentally appropriate to be in your 50's and chasing a toddler. I know my daughter is no longer a toddler but I do feel that I would love to take more time to do things that I like to do and not feel so guilty and neglectful when I do. I do know some older parents who did not have children when they were younger and they seem to have more enthusiam than I do.

Sent by liz bowman | 11:55 AM | 5-16-2007

My older brother was born when my parents were age 27; I was born when they were 34, and my younger brother (a gift baby--love that reference you made yesterday!) was born when they were 39. I have always thought (my younger brother agrees with this) that though we had the same biological parents, they were a different "set" of parents for each of us. In some ways, I feel my younger brother was robbed because he might not have received the "best" of my folks because their health was declining a great deal by the time my younger brother was in his teens. But I do know that they loved and cherished all three of us and did the best they could by us. I think my younger brother is the father he is because of the example that was set by our folks. I am married but have no children; I'm 47 and have decided not to have children at this point. If I change my mind, I will adopt, and probably not a baby.

Sent by Tamara | 1:06 PM | 5-16-2007

I just have to respond to the woman who had a tubal ligation at 30 because she says that older mothers are selfish. Madam, please check your family tree carefully. You'll almost certainly see that before birth control, many women could not prevent having babies later in life. After all, it was their duty to be available to their husbands, and without birth control, what was to stop them from conceiving at 48, like my great-grandmother? Although many 40-something women who conceive today may indeed go to extraordinary efforts and expense to conceive, it is no more selfish than my 48-year-old great-grandmother doing her wifely duty, and I think it's a lot less selfish than many of my neighbors, who spend far more on lavish vacations, gas-guzzling luxury cars and vacation homes. And guess what: maybe as a 20-something, your mother would not have gotten down on the floor to play. Some parents don't do that at any age. My mom didn't, and neither did her grandmother. My husband, as a 20-something, worked 12-hour days, but as a 40-something, he is home by 5:45 to take our son to the park.

Sent by Konni Shier | 1:21 PM | 5-16-2007

One thread that seems to be missing in this debate is why so many adults are having children in their 40s or older. If they couldn't get pregnant younger or married later, no big deal. I think it's the ones who have children to hang on to their own youth that are selfish. Societies count on people in their 50s and 60s to contribute in other ways to the community and the earth after they've raised children and before they are too old or in ill health. Also, it is traditionally a time to recapture your relationship with your spouse and yourself. Are some of these people having children older to avoid facing their own aging? I think that would be selfish.

Sent by Rosie | 2:37 PM | 5-16-2007

I really wanted to call in to this show. I am 27 years old and my mother turned 65 yesterday. I remember growing up how a trip to the mall or amusement park was out of the question for moms knees...and the only way to go was with other friends or her rediculusly young boyfriend at the time. She now lives in a price adjusted apartment complex in CT for those over 62. I see news reports about people starting to have heart attack and such around this age and I worry for her. How longer will mom and dad be around? I haven't even seriously dated anyone and I feel like I really want to be married and have kids ASAP so they can see some of their grandkids before they die. I think parents that want kids over forty need to be in excellent shape and have a support system in place for when they get older. MAybe it would be easier to adopt a ten year old at forty and have a head start. I get so sad thinking about how my parents memory is going and they might not be around for too much longer.

Sent by Summer | 3:25 PM | 5-16-2007

Some of the comments left me cold. If a parent of any age cannot "get down on the floor and play" as one participant stated, it is probably because they don't want to, not that they can't.

When I was in Jr. High, my 52 year old Dad showed me how to do a somersault. I never felt my parents were too old or looked odd. They always took plenty of time to spend with us and we knew how important we were to them!

As for the comment about older parents passing away when their children are barely beyond their teens, parents can die or get divorced at any time.

I was amazed at how everyone thought being tired while raising toddlers was an age related thing. It's not. Just ask any "younger" mom! As for keeping up with the younger moms, my adult daughters and I are coaching my granddaughters softball team.

Kids keep you young and no parent is irresponsible if they give them as much love and attention as needed.

I've seen many younger parents who seem put upon that their lives and personal time have been affected by their children.

Sent by Sandy | 5:08 PM | 5-16-2007

As an adoptive parent whose daughter arrived when we were 37, I was saddened to hear one of your callers say she had adopted 5 children "from different countries and with learning issues" but she now wanted "one of her own," meaning a biologic child. Thankfully, our children know that they are "ours," and how they came to our family has nothing to do with "whose they are."

Sent by Daniel Slate | 12:52 AM | 5-17-2007