Indi
03/02/2010, 07:32 PM
In my circle of friends 22 is an age to spend at uni or travelling, certainly not having babies - plenty of time for that. We all wanted a chance to have a good job, travel and be far more financially stable before having kids. Personally I don't believe at 22 you have had the time to just have fun with your partner and your friends without the added responsibility of kids.
dad101
04/02/2010, 06:20 AM
22 is not too young. There are two ways to do it. Do it while you are young, so that when the kids leave home you'll be in your early 40's and still quite fresh.
Or you can do it like I have. In my mid 30's and I started a family. I'll be mid 50's before I can even start to looking at moving the rascals on. But then i got all the adventures out of the way.
Whatever you do, don't leave it till your mid 20's. You'll wont have done all your adventures or become financially secure, and you will be much older at the other end to really be fresh enough to do all the adventures.
JacquelineB
04/02/2010, 09:00 AM
Hi, 22 is not too young to be a mum but it is very young... besides saving to buy a house etc (boring) what about travel... fly to europe, stay in african safari parks, go shopping in New York... go to Oktoberfest in Germany...ski switzerland... hike in New Zealand... so many wonderful things to do!! But so much harder, and more exensive with children. My parents and my in-laws both had children young and planned to do all their travel once their kids were older... well, cancer, parkinsons, work etc has meant those dreams are not fulfilled. Of course you wouldn't change having kids for all the world but maybe take one fabulous holiday first, and experience the world. I have a beautiful 4 month old daughter and am in my thirties and it has been the right decision for me.
meg 10
04/02/2010, 10:05 AM
'It's only the end of your life if you let it be.'
I am afraid that you have just shown that you are 22 and think you know it all. If you believe this for a moment you are definately showing your ignorance. Perhaps you should listen to the older wiser woman you found so patronising. There are many major differences between being a nanny and a mother. The most important is that it is not a job and your whole life will now revolve around this brand new dependent individual. Gone are any opportunities to be 'selfish' and think of what you want. Whether you want to or not, every decision you make, is now done within a paradigm of 'what impact will this have on the family as a whole and each of my children individually'. Even when the children reach adulthood, you will still never truely make decisions without considering the impact on them.
I was an avid traveller and very career minded before children. I am glad I was. I do not have the luxury ever to do this again. If I now travel to so called dangerous places (as I did) then I could be denying my children a mother and future grandchildren a grandmother - how could I do that!. If I went back to my career, the long hours and travel would deny my children constancy of care, instead I scaled back so I could see my kids at night.
Post birth, nothing is the same again - the selfish freedom of your 20's passes so quickly - hang onto it and have no regrets when your life changes.
Finally - the question (that now I ask as a mother, but did not before!) is not whether the time is right for you to have a baby (the selfish view), but when is the time right for your babies to have you as a mother (the selfless view)!
paula89
04/02/2010, 11:37 AM
QUOTE (meg 10 @ 04/02/2010, 10:05 AM)

I am afraid that you have just shown that you are 22 and think you know it all. If you believe this for a moment you are definately showing your ignorance. Perhaps you should listen to the older wiser woman you found so patronising. There are many major differences between being a nanny and a mother.
Firstly, I am not 22... not even close, so get your facts straight. I don't think I know it all. And I know that there are differences between being a nanny and being a mother, you completely misunderstood what I meant. I was not saying that from how I dealt with being a nanny, but from how I have observed numerous women deal with being mothers. I have seen so many different women, from different age groups become mothers and have subsequent children, and my statement "it's only the end of your life if you let it be" was purely based on how I have seen those women cope and adapt. Some cope, some don't. Perhaps you are one of those who didn't, judging from your highly defensive comment.
I am more than aware that having a baby changes your life utterly and completely, and that for a very long time, your world will revolve vompletely around that one small thing and nothing else. However, if that is what you honestly, 100% feel ready for (regardless of age) and are aware of what being a mother entails, then you should trust your instinct.
Travel and all those other things are wonderful things to do, but when it comes to it, it is more than possible to lead a happy, fulfilled life without going overseas even once. I wonder how many people lie on their deathbeds and think... gee I wish I'd gone and seen the Eiffel tower. I just don't feel like my life is complete without it.
QUOTE
Finally - the question (that now I ask as a mother, but did not before!) is not whether the time is right for you to have a baby (the selfish view), but when is the time right for your babies to have you as a mother (the selfless view)!
I agree with you - that is most definitely a question you need to ask yourself. And if I had decided to have a baby as soon as I WANTED to, I would have been a mother at 17. But I knew I wasn't ready and neither was my husband, so we waited until now. It was hard to wait for so many years, but I was determined to do the right thing by my future children. There is definitely a difference between wanting to be a mother and being ready to be a mother, but you can't just write someone off as being not ready just because they are young. You don't know the OP and you certainly don't know me, or my situation (or my age for that matter), so you don't have a right to judge us.
I am glad for your sake that you are happy you did things the way you did. If it worked for you, then that's great! But different things work for different people and you need to recognise that your way is not the perfect way for everyone. I did not tell you, or anyone else, that the way you did things was wrong (and I don't plan to either), so please return the courtesy and refrain from being rude to me about how I choose to live my life.
mandabee85
05/02/2010, 09:04 AM
Hi Fee
I haven't read through all of the comments, so forgive if I say some things already said. I just wanted to give you my experience.
I got married at 21, in April 2007, and wanted to have my family started within the first year of our marriage. My husband was really unsure, he wanted to be more financially stable, and wanted to focus on his career. In the end we waited nearly a year and I fell pregnant in Jan 2008. My husband flipped out and accused me of blackmailing him into having a baby, told me he wasn't ready to be a dad and a whole lot of horrible things. In the end he left me in May 2008. I'm not saying you will be in the same situation and I'm sure your husband is a much better person then mine. But my caution is to make sure you are both on the same page. That is the MOST important thing before starting a family. Money is not the biggest stress that can happen when a baby arrives.
Secondly, as to being too young to be a mum at 22. The answer is yes and no in my opinion. I was 23 when Isobel was born (and again my situation is a little different as I am doing it alone) I love my little girl, and find I have an immense amount of time, energy and love for my her. I love to read with her and share things, we go to the park, and play peek-a-boo.
But on the flip side, being a mum is incredibly lonely. There are not many of my friends who are mums, there are more popping up now, but the age difference between our babies is a lot and it's hard to connect at times as they're concerned about my big bruiser of a toddler storming over their delicate first born newborn baby.
I also miss not having the freedom to go to movies, eat out and be out past 6 or 7 pm. I miss being the smart intellectual woman I once was. Now my head is filled with 'how many nappies are left before pay day?" and 'Is day care effecting my baby's emotional wellbeing?'. But they are good and fulfilling things to think of as well. It's just sometimes you can miss the person you once were.
Ultimately it all comes down to listening to advice, assessing where you are in life, and thinking about how a new baby will impact your life in a serious way. I was like you, desperate to have my little family, but the reality of it is a lot less glamourous then I had imagined. Which, again, is not neccessarily a bad things, just hard to come to terms with at first.
I wish you well and good luck with any decision you make.
Amanda
Polly Cooper
06/02/2010, 07:19 AM
You obviously are ready to have a baby but your husband is obviously not. The decision has to be mutual. Why not work on a compromise, agree to a date eg 2 years from now in which you will both work, save money have fun, and then start trying. After all twenty four is a good age to have a baby too.
Willow Angel
06/02/2010, 07:43 AM
as i have said before, 22 is not too young, it is entirely a personal decision - your life will not be over if you have children young and don't travel.... i am with the others in saying both of you need to be ready and neither of you should blackmail the other. BUT, sometimes, and this sounds idealistic, all you need is love, and the rest will work itself out. I learnt this, i was young, we struggled, but now we are "comfortable", no, we havent done the apparent "must do" travel overseas, but i have seen parts of australia that many of these people will never see, and may not think are worth it. my ds is 10 this year, and we were to go os next year, except for the fact there is a slightly unscheduled new baby on the way, but so be it, dh is considering taking ds os by themselves, which is ok with me. i dont think that bringing up aged illnesses is a reason not to have children early, as some of these illnesses can hit when you are young too.
mumsy26
06/02/2010, 09:40 AM
Fee,
My answer is no, 22 is not too young to have a baby. Plenty of women have babies at your age and are wonderful mothers. Yes, you may miss out on travel, the fun on being independent in your 20s and all that other stuff, but when it comes to it, IMO those things aren't highly important in the grand scheme of things.
However, your husband clearly is not ready. And nothing you can say to try and change his mind is going to make him ready. Feeling ready to be a parent is something that can only come from within, and there is absolutely no way you can force him to feel ready any sooner. The only thing you can do is support him and be patient and he will come around when he's ready.
I fell pregnant at 20, and had my first child when I was 21. I was ready to be a mother, and although some people said that I was too young, I did a damn good job. My DH was like yours - dragging his feet and making excuses about money etc. I nagged and nagged him for 6 months and he finally gave in. I really wish I hadn't. Don't get me wrong. He loves our children and is a wonderful father, but it put a real strain on our relationship. One that we're only getting over now - 5 years down the track.
If I could do it over again, I would wait until he was ready of his own accord. I was more than ready to be a mum, but he didn't feel ready to be a dad and no amount of nagging is going to change that, and your child deserves to be wanted 100% by both you and your husband.
So no, you are not too young. But your husband clearly is too young and needs more time. Be patient and when the time is right, you will be able to have a gorgeous little baby that you BOTH love and adore and feel 100% ready for.
BeckyEtal
06/02/2010, 01:08 PM
22 is not too young if both parties are ready. I don't think your husband is ready as yet which makes your age a moot point.
Padmé Amidala
06/02/2010, 01:19 PM
22 was too young
for me but I think that everyone is different. Motherhood for me has been far more challenging than I expected and I would never have coped without a supportive partner (and my Mum's support for that matter!)
QUOTE
So no, you are not too young. But your husband clearly is too young and needs more time. Be patient and when the time is right, you will be able to have a gorgeous little baby that you BOTH love and adore and feel 100% ready for.
This, really.
Proodles
07/02/2010, 04:39 PM
i agree with most PP especially if you and your DH feel ready.
I was very young when i had my first mc...i think i was 18 - 19
klizanne
07/02/2010, 05:15 PM
No I don't think 22 is too young. I had DS when I was 23 but would have been 22 if my first pregnancy continued (m/c)
DH and I were both ready and very excited about it. My advice would be to just make sure you get everything out of your system before taking such a big step because everything is more challenging when you have kids to think about.
amyk81
07/02/2010, 05:44 PM
I think it's not the age that's important, but your social situation. If you are the only couple with children in your circle of friends, it could be quite isolating. It really is true that it takes a village to raise a child, and having a strong support network is as important for you as it is for the raising of the baby. While having a baby does make everything harder (sometimes much harder) I wouldn't trade it for the world. You just have to be mentally ready for that, which could be at any age.
pookems85
07/02/2010, 07:59 PM
no it is not too young.
i know some wonderful mothers who had their children younger than 22.
every woman/family/couple decides what is right for them.
forget about other people's opinions. you are the expert in your own life.
age does not guarantee maturity.
of course age does not guarantee financial security or a wider network of friends and family to support child rearing too.
people can be quick to generalise and make ageist statements about who is too 'young', 'old', 'poor', 'career oriented' etc. to have kids. it's just nuts.
sekiya16
08/02/2010, 10:23 AM
It think having a baby at any stage of life has it's pros and cons. I was pregnant at 22 with my son and had my daughter at 25. You have less couple time without responsability but then you have more energy for children and you can start focusing (when your ready) on your career(if inclined). I had a lot of friends that were not at the stage of children either but the real friends stuck around and the others well, people come and go in your life to suit stages and changes. My husband and I got a house at 21 (got meaning a mortgage). I suppose it is a good feeling knowing that you have a house before your child is born but it is by no means less of a financial strain then renting. Some times you are better off renting. Having a secure job and secure income is important. At the end of the day I don't think you can ever fully be prepared for having children you just have to go with the flow when they arrive.
Lil Mummy
08/02/2010, 02:57 PM
Hi Fee,
I'm 19 and pregnant (20 when i give birth). Both my partner and myself are
really excited, i would say it depends on how bad you both
want to be a mum and dad and i must say it is the
most beautiful thing you can experience as a couple.
Don't let him base your decisions around other people because
it's all about when your ready, we personally wanted to
be able to grow with our kids so we can have the friendship
as well as parenthood!
GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR DECISION!
ellas mum
08/02/2010, 03:15 PM
Hi Fee,
I really don't believe that anyone can answer this one for you; it is only something that you can know for yourself.
I was 22 (and already married) when I fell pregnant but I can honestly say for not one period in my life I felt my actual age... In high school I think I was more mature than most mid-twenty year olds, by the time I was 19 I was managing five 30 year old reps and by the time I was 21 I was a marketing manager for a pharmaceutical company so becoming a mother and being a mum is walk in the park compared to what I was used to!
Being a mum is such a joy and I have never looked back- Not to say that I don't miss certain aspects of my life, I think before you enter into the decision it would be wise to consider what you will need to give up for a few years when the baby is young, but in my experience, I can honestly say I wouldn't trade it for the world.
... And at risk of sounding like a hippy caravan park fortune reader, look within to make your decision; some of life's most important decisions come from the heart, not from over thinking them.
Good luck on your journey,
x
~cackleberry~
09/02/2010, 03:20 PM
Hi Fee. I agree with most of the other PP's in that, no 22 isn't too young to be a mum. But sounds as though your DH isn't ready yet, so i'd give him some time. I have known DH since I was 16 and we were married at 19. I had my first when I had just turned 21. We now have four children and have a very happy marriage. I still feel like i'm young too, at aged 33. I feel like it gave us time to have our four children and still be young parents. With regards to saving to buy a house first, I would have to agree with your DH on that one. That was one of our deals before I fell pregnant, we had to buy a house first. We were in the process of building a house when I fell pregnant.

I'm so glad DH made that decision and we followed it through. A bit more security etc in my opinion.
Good luck!
**Xena**
09/02/2010, 09:35 PM
QUOTE
So no, you are not too young. But your husband clearly is too young and needs more time. Be patient and when the time is right, you will be able to have a gorgeous little baby that you BOTH love and adore and feel 100% ready for.
I agree with this.
I was 20 when DF and I had our first but we were both on the same page and came to the agreement together.
I am still very happy with our decision. I haven't lost a single friend (only gained more), we bought a house when our first child was 1 and went on to have two more beautiful children. I was also lucky enough to travel oerseas before I fell pregnant with our first.
For us it was the best decision but I cannot stress the word
us enough. It really should to be a journey that
both of you agree to go on.
tazjam21
10/02/2010, 06:06 PM
I had my first at 23 years but we were tring for a long time.
but when we look back now we wished we did things a little different eg living on our own for a while etc
hickorydickorydock
11/02/2010, 01:23 PM
age to have a child is a very personal desicion it all depends on the maturity of a person...i turned 19 a week later my son was born and then at 20 i had a second child a girl...i am now 24 and trying for a third child at the moment my son is in school and daughter to start kindy this year...me and my husband have been together for 8 years and married for 1 and when my son was born we lived in a caravan and now 5 years on and 2 children later we now own a house and 2 nice cars and i've been overseas to thailand for a month last year all this and without any help from any1...and we still go out and have dinner go to the movies and just go for family drives...my son has autism which is an added challange but nothing stops us from experiencing new things currently we are saving to go on holiday this year as a family...I work casual which is a great job that could lead to a great career my husband works fulltime and we support eachother through everything...so what i'm trying to get across is that just because you have kids young does not mean you cant have a life and have everything you do evolve around your children you can still have holidays buy a house go out and have fun...it costs a bit more but you can do these things...
Riley'smum
11/02/2010, 04:08 PM
I think it is very individual and depends alot on your circumstances. In general I would say yes it is young and that there is no rush to bring beautiful children into the world.
It is easier to 'grow up' yourself when you don't have to parent a child, and lets face it, at 22 there hasn't been too much room/time for life experience regardless of your circumstances.
hickorydickorydock
11/02/2010, 05:40 PM
yes having children young does make it more challanging to have life experiences as you call them but even if you wait until you are 35 or thereof to have a child doesnt mean you have done extensive travel overseas or are even more grown up...i know plenty of women who have had kids young and some of those women shouldnt have had children and those that have waited until they are older yet some of the older mothers have less maturity then the 18 year old mothers...so just because you wait and travel and have a career or job for a extensive period of time and go out and party or whatever and then have a child later in life doesnt make you any better of a parent than the woman that has had children young in most cases....in some cases some people shouldnt have been allowed to have kids regardless of age..
Chubub
16/02/2010, 11:03 AM
QUOTE (pookems85 @ 07/02/2010, 08:59 PM)

no it is not too young.
i know some wonderful mothers who had their children younger than 22.
every woman/family/couple decides what is right for them.
forget about other people's opinions. you are the expert in your own life.
age does not guarantee maturity.
of course age does not guarantee financial security or a wider network of friends and family to support child rearing too.
people can be quick to generalise and make ageist statements about who is too 'young', 'old', 'poor', 'career oriented' etc. to have kids. it's just nuts.
I agree with pookems85
If you are BOTH ready, then you are never too young or old!
I was 22 with DS and I think my age was really benefit.
He was a surprise, but changed my life! I would NEVER change that for the world!
justine89
16/02/2010, 11:33 AM
I'm 20 and 25 weeks pregnant, I say it all depends on where you are at with maturity and where you are in life. My personal opinion, it doesn't matter about money or age, as long as you are committed to being a good parent and do as much as you can for you children then there is no reason why you shouldn't be a mother. but do respect if your partner feels he is not ready, it has to be a mutual decision.
snoopytj
18/02/2010, 08:37 PM
22 is definitely not too young if you both feel ready. I fell pregnant with DS1 when I was 22 and had him when I was 23. DP was 25. He was a very big surprise and at the time babies was the furtherest thing away in both our minds. However, as soon as I found out I was pregnant I instantly could not wait to be a mother and I loved being one so much that we planned number 2 not long after and my boys are now 16mths apart. They are the most precious things and I could not imagine my life without them in it.
Good luck with your decision.
SunnyMummy:)
26/02/2010, 09:57 PM
As others have posted, you both need to be ready - sounds like maybe you are and DH is not at this moment.
But I would suggest thinking about a fertility check. My DH & I tried having a baby at 21 - we had no prior medical issues re fertility. But had many yrs of trying & lots of emotional & physical pain due to my undiagnosed PCOS & endometrosis. Luckily we were blessed at the age of 31 when we were able to adopt our beautiful daughter. Just suggesting maybe u should rule out any medical conditions before delaying, beause IVF / adoption are long routes that u would want to start sooner rather than later in life. hope this helps
PreciousOlive
26/02/2010, 10:29 PM
My mum was married at 19, and had her first at 24.
I was delivering at 19 and turning 20 with a 3month old.
I can't remember celebrating ONE NYE over the age of 18, or any of my birthdays since I had my first daughter, I was a single mum, no money, no life, struggled to go to school i had no licence no car, daycare cost too much, i couldn't stay for all the classes as they didn't fit around having a family, doing the study was hard, sometimes i had a runny tummy baby, sometimes a spewy baby, then a chest infecion toddler, followed by toilet training then nits.
Life is hard with kids!
I love both of my babies whole heartedly, but had a chosen to get educated, get a career, a mortgage and a head start in life my girls would already be MUCH better off.
However, in doing so, I put myself through yr 12 as a "mature age" student, got into uni, and have also gained my drivers licence in the time that i've been a mum...
it is just that materialistically i / we would be better off had I done those other things first!
1sttimedad2b
21/03/2010, 04:48 PM
not too young.
my wife was 22 when we first found out she was pregnant. I am 24.
Finances will always be a consideration, but reality is whilst you want to give your child the world, nobody will ever be willing to sell it to you at a price you can afford.
We sat down early on in our relationship and nutted out a five year plan with all the major milestones: buy house, get married, have kids. We are now married home owners with our first child on the way.
You have to plan, we did. We built up our piggy bank (6 months of wife's wages) and once we had this we started trying.
If your husband is not on board, that is something you really have to think about. You need to be a team.
cjesse
22/03/2010, 07:41 AM
In previous generations, 22 would have been a bit of a late starter. Different times.
I think it depends on the would-be father. Guys are slower to mature than women are. Listen to what he says! The pull to nest is tremendously strong for women that it is hard to sit down and listen to what your partner is saying without discounting and trivializing.
The huge positives of having your family early are that you have a lot more energy, and stamina to chase after them and that the little chicks will fly the coup when you are in your late forties, cashed up and ready to party! That is the situation my husband and I are in right now.
brisbane40
12/06/2010, 08:53 AM
QUOTE (daviesjv @ 25/01/2010, 02:53 PM)

Hi Fee.
First off, as you said, it does need to be a mutual decision that you and your husband reach together. Other than that, I think the age at which you become a parent is an intensely personal thing. Is there “too young” or “too old” an age? I’m not sure, so I have asked registered nurse, midwife and parentcraft nurse, as well as author of the wonderful 'Baby Love' and 'The Mighty Toddler' books, Robin Barker, for her advice.
“ In terms of a mother’s age ��" well, my mother was twenty-two when she had me, and most of my friends had their children at around that age as well. I was the exception, not starting my family until I was twenty-seven,” says Robin. “This dilemma is all a social perception; nowadays we have become used to reading about and seeing women in their forties have their first child. It really has skewed the way that we perceive an ideal age to become a parent.”
Fee, Robin advises that if you were considering the ideal age of parenthood from a purely physical perspective, then somewhere between sixteen and twenty-two would be just about right. “In relation to modern society though a lot of women are busy studying and having careers at that age. That in turn can also impact on their financial arrangement, which is a terrible shame. A terrible shame that women should have to wonder whether they can afford to start a family.”
“In the context of modern living, the only downside that I see is the financial security,” says Robin. “Not that people should necessarily aspire to a large house with four bedrooms and three bathrooms, but it is nice for a parent to be able to enjoy spending time with their baby without being worried sick about whether the bills are going to get paid.”
In relation to looking after a child though there are a lots of benefits to being a young Mum. “You are likely to have more physical energy as your children get older,” says Robin. “And your children are also more likely to have younger, fitter grandparents who are able to play with and help with the children ��" if they are interested. It can be a wonderful thing for the children.”
And Fee, it also means that you would be getting those child rearing years done nice and early, leaving you with plenty of time ��" and youth and energy - to enjoy yourselves together down the track. But ��" Robin also echoes my opening statement that it does need to be a mutual decision between you and your husband. Otherwise it can be a recipe for disaster.
So good luck, and enjoy your family ��"whenever you decide to start it!
EB Members: Do you think 22 is too young to be a Mum? What advice do you have for Fee?
I was 23 when I fell pregnant with my son, who is now 16. Aside from having more energy to deal with the demands of a baby, I feel that I was much more adaptable than friends who became parents for the first time later in life. For example, I had no problems with giving up alcohol while pregnant, and since my career had not really taken off yet, did not worry about missing out at work while I took time to be with my son. My son's father was 41 when he was born, and had a much more difficult time adapting to parenthood. While it is not true of everyone, I think the longer you wait to have a child, the more difficulty you will have in making the necessary sacrifices to be a good parent. Ultimately I divorced from my son's father, but enjoy a close relationship with my son. And at 40 I am finally happily married again, and trying for a second one...
Chaton
14/06/2010, 01:12 AM
I just had my first at 26 and DH is 30 - our little man was very much planned and is very loved. But on some of the hard days I question whether we were ready. But that is me and I suspect would be the same whether we waited until later also. Some people are ready earlier, some later, some never. You can't pin an age on it.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.