Having a Baby in Early Retirement

[obgyn65]

+1

No need to "be at odds with the baby set" Sarah. What's right for you is wrong for someone else, etc. Live your life as you wish. Let others do likewise.

 

[traineeinvestor]

Forget the money angle. Look at your age when your kid(s) are teenagers. Do you want to be dealing with a rebellious 16 year old when you are in your mid 60's?

+1

I made it pretty clear to DW before we got married that I was not keen on having children after I turned 40 largely for the reasons given by other posters. Both of us are very glad we did not delay.

If you are going to do it, I'd get on with it or you could find that you have a teenager chosing your nursing home and managing your finances for you.

Also, one of the reasons I am FIREing is so that I can spend more time with my daughters (currently age 9 and 7).

 

[NW-Bound]

The financial cost of having children is nothing compared to the emotional burden parents may go through when their children go through their teenage years. Your children may not cause any problem, or they may give you hell. They may turn out OK, or they may end up in jail and you will have to bail them out. There is no telling how one may turn out.

Just go to any kindergarten or elementary school and see how sweet all of those little children are. Then, go to a typical high school and observe some of the monsters there. How did some of those sweet little kids turn out to be like that?

I am glad now that my children (26 and 23) are on their way to a good life of their own, but there was a time when we had sleepless nights. We brought them into this world, and if they did not turn out well, we would feel responsible.

I truly admire some people who have 4 or 5 children of their own and still adopt 2 or 3 more. They have the temperament of a saint, something that I do not have. I would be afraid that one of them would do something to give me a heart attack or a broken heart. I am not that strong.

Other than that, I do not think financial costs or the advanced age of the parents would be a big deal. It's more about the knowledge that things may not work out as well as you plan, and how prepared you are to deal with it.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Just go to any kindergarten or elementary school and see how sweet all of those little children are. Then, go to a typical high school and observe some of the monsters there. How did some of those sweet little kids turn out to be like that?

Because their parents allowed it. From what I've read and experienced, kids will take as much rope as you give them, but you have to reel it all back in again before you get good behavior. Also, if you don't "fix" behavioral issues before the kid reaches the 10-11 range, statistically you never will.

So those 5-7 year olds are still feeling around to see what they can get away with. When they're teenagers, they already know.

 

[haha]

My first son was born when I was 35, last one when was 41. I would have preferred to get started earlier, and have more, but wife took a while to get on board.

Kids have been my number one experience in life. However, I was lucky to have very intelligent cooperative kids who became successful and very nice adults without a lot of messing around or getting involved in stupid movements/detours. Also, my wife and I were completely on board with how to go about caring for them- although I will say that she was dominant in this part of our life. This was OK with me, as I saw and see the mother as being primary in a young childs life.

Kids also are very entertaining. One thing to consider is that a child very quickly becomes a separate power center in your life. His/her attitudes may relect yours, but often do not. They also bring the state into your home- school becomes a huge part of your reality, and unless you can afford private schools, that may not be something you will enjoy.

Lastly, if you divorce, a not uncommon experience, you may be paying child support into old age.

Overall, imo the best plan is to do it early, or not all. But so much depends on one's desires. Although it occurs to me that someone who was truly sold on the project wouldn't be asking the internet whether he should do it or not.

Ha

 

[Chuckanut]

Because their parents allowed it. From what I've read and experienced, kids will take as much rope as you give them, but you have to reel it all back in again before you get good behavior.

This is sometimes true but not always. People who have never had a difficult child sometimes don't understand what is going on. I know people who have spent evenings crying themselves to sleep because their teenager just doesn't respond to anything they do to reduce poor behaviors. Maybe it's brain chemistry or some gene that pops up from time to time, but strong willed children who won't listen to advices and won't respond to consequences are real.

 

[MichaelB]

Because their parents allowed it. From what I've read and experienced, kids will take as much rope as you give them, but you have to reel it all back in again before you get good behavior. Also, if you don't "fix" behavioral issues before the kid reaches the 10-11 range, statistically you never will.

So those 5-7 year olds are still feeling around to see what they can get away with. When they're teenagers, they already know.

Humanity has been trying to figure out the "right" and "wrong" ways to raise kids since the first one was born. We've made a lot of progress and built quite a body of knowledge on the "wrong ways". Not so much on the other one. Kind of like men trying to figure out women. Can't be done 'cause there ain't no right answer.

 

[NYEXPAT]

Kind of like men trying to figure out women. Can't be done 'cause there ain't no right answer.

+1

 

[rodi]

Anyone who thinks there's only one proper way to raise a kid.... only has one kid.

My boys' temperaments are so different from each other. What is effective with one is completely ineffective with the other. Therefore - we parent them differently.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

This is sometimes true but not always. People who have never had a difficult child sometimes don't understand what is going on. I know people who have spent evenings crying themselves to sleep because their teenager just doesn't respond to anything they do to reduce poor behaviors. Maybe it's brain chemistry or some gene that pops up from time to time, but strong willed children who won't listen to advices and won't respond to consequences are real.

My point was that if you allow a child to have control over you until they become a teenager, you have very little chance of fixing it then. Lots of facts and data on this in Nurture Shock.

Humanity has been trying to figure out the "right" and "wrong" ways to raise kids since the first one was born. We've made a lot of progress and built quite a body of knowledge on the "wrong ways". Not so much on the other one. Kind of like men trying to figure out women. Can't be done 'cause there ain't no right answer.

I'll tell you whats different between when it works and when it doesn't. Children used to be the 3rd wheel in the family and the family did stuff and the kids went along with it. It went wrong when the child became the families centric, and we did stuff organized around the kid.

It also went wrong when parents started leaving the parenting to other people, most of which don't do it or don't do it well.

There certainly is no universal answer, nor do we need one. If you make the child feel like the center of the universe and don't govern them effectively and be persistent in parenting...you've got a good chance of raising a douchebag.

Are You Raising a Douchebag?: Details

 

[MichaelB]

My point was that if you allow a child to have control over you until they become a teenager, you have very little chance of fixing it then. Lots of facts and data on this in Nurture Shock.



I'll tell you whats different between when it works and when it doesn't. Children used to be the 3rd wheel in the family and the family did stuff and the kids went along with it. It went wrong when the child became the families centric, and we did stuff organized around the kid.

It also went wrong when parents started leaving the parenting to other people, most of which don't do it or don't do it well.

There certainly is no universal answer, nor do we need one. If you make the child feel like the center of the universe and don't govern them effectively and be persistent in parenting...you've got a good chance of raising a douchebag.

Are You Raising a Douchebag?: Details

I'm not disagreeing with ya'. We agree on how not to raise a child. Problem is (IMHO) the absence of the [-]douchbag[/-] poor parenting you refer to does not necessarily lead to a better outcome.

 

[NW-Bound]

Because their parents allowed it. From what I've read and experienced, kids will take as much rope as you give them, but you have to reel it all back in again before you get good behavior. Also, if you don't "fix" behavioral issues before the kid reaches the 10-11 range, statistically you never will.

So those 5-7 year olds are still feeling around to see what they can get away with. When they're teenagers, they already know.

A teenager spends more time outside the home with friends than in the home. The influence of friends is extremely important. Kids are not yet independently minded to avoid peer pressure. They need to feel accepted.

Look at gang members, as an extreme example. Each gang member by himself would not dare to do much. Together, they commit mayhem.

 

[marko]

And kids are incredibly cheap to raise.

I did not know that.

 

[NYEXPAT]

You can take inspiration from Clint Eastwood who fathered his last two children (that we know of) at 64 & 67 and then there is Bing Crosby who did not begin his "second family" till 65.

I think it is becoming alot more common these days as I know several Germans in there late 70's and early 80's who recently had babies and many of my friends in their 50's and 60's are starting new families.

 

[marko]

You can take inspiration from Clint Eastwood who fathered his last two children (that we know of) at 64 & 67 and then there is Bing Crosby who did not begin his "second family" till 65.

Inspiration is a fine thing but it doesn't pay the bills. Eastwood and Crosby are/were extremely wealthy. Eastwood's kids aren't going to be worried about paying for college when dad is 90 years old.

I'd think that RE with a child on the way for most folks would be a challenge to the FI side of things.

 

[Lsbcal]

This is sometimes true but not always. People who have never had a difficult child sometimes don't understand what is going on. I know people who have spent evenings crying themselves to sleep because their teenager just doesn't respond to anything they do to reduce poor behaviors. Maybe it's brain chemistry or some gene that pops up from time to time, but strong willed children who won't listen to advices and won't respond to consequences are real.

Very true indeed.

I would also add, there are many adopted children with emotional issues around the "having been rejected by the birth parents" angle. We have not adopted but I've seen some of these situations second hand. I'm sure there are times that adoption works beautifully too.

One just has to go into this with eyes wide open.

 

[Moemg]

You can take inspiration from Clint Eastwood who fathered his last two children (that we know of) at 64 & 67 and then there is Bing Crosby who did not begin his "second family" till 65.

I think it is becoming alot more common these days as I know several Germans in there late 70's and early 80's who recently had babies and many of my friends in their 50's and 60's are starting new families.

Fathered just means their was viable sperm . The Op is talking about real fathering . Midnight feedings , dealing with an angry toddler , handling an adolescent , Etc.

 

[boatfishandnature]

I don't have kids yet - still young, maybe in the next few years - but why haven't I heard this from anyone else with kids? I'd think this was sarcasm, but you appeared to be serious in at least the first half of your post.

Tim

That is also news to me... DW and I have just finished paying for our kid's graduate school ( after college, a car, etc ) ... that was not cheap! I don't know what country you plan to live in, but in the U.S. or any other country where higher education is not free, you can think in terms of several hundred thousand dollars to raise a kid into a well-educated, productive adult.

 

[NYEXPAT]

Fathered just means their was viable sperm . The Op is talking about real fathering . Midnight feedings , dealing with an angry toddler , handling an adolescent , Etc.

Actually, the OP never mentioned that! He does mention the young girlfriend and that is the usual reason for stirring up feelings in one's loins.

In my experience, most of these young girls are working and the husband's are retired. The "baby stuff" is handled by the nanny and since kids start school here at 1 1/2 there is not all that much to do. I pick up my son everyday and either watch him play sports at school or spend the afternoons with him (doing homework) and then my Wife bond's when she gets home until bedtime.

Weekend's is strictly family time and we would never consider traveling without him.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Because their parents allowed it. From what I've read and experienced, kids will take as much rope as you give them, but you have to reel it all back in again before you get good behavior. Also, if you don't "fix" behavioral issues before the kid reaches the 10-11 range, statistically you never will.

So those 5-7 year olds are still feeling around to see what they can get away with. When they're teenagers, they already know.

This is something all parents with smart, interesting, well-behaved children under 10 believe .

 

[Nords]

Maybe it's brain chemistry or some gene that pops up from time to time, but strong willed children who won't listen to advices and won't respond to consequences are real.

Hey, I turned out OK.

You can take inspiration from Clint Eastwood who fathered his last two children (that we know of) at 64 & 67...

Fathered just means their was viable sperm . The Op is talking about real fathering . Midnight feedings , dealing with an angry toddler , handling an adolescent , Etc.

Yeah, Clint Eastwood always comes to mind when I think of "Father of the Year" figures. Right up there with Wilt Chamberlain.

I've read Eastwood's biography. He's a serial f... breeder, not a parent. And I bet that he wasn't even in the house for most of the kids' "formative" years.

 

[haha]

Hands on parenting can be overrated. Does anyone think that Sir Randolph Churchill and Jenny Jerome spent much time with young Winnie? Neither did, and neither did any of her subsequent husbands do the nappy thing. Nurses and boarding school for Winston, yet he managed to take appeasement besotted England into and victoriously out of a horrendous war that apparently was accomplished without the advantages of hands on parenting from Mummie or Daddie.

Ha

 

[MichaelB]

Fathered just means their was viable sperm . The Op is talking about real fathering . Midnight feedings , dealing with an angry toddler , handling an adolescent , Etc.

+1

Actually, the OP never mentioned that! He does mention the young girlfriend and that is the usual reason for stirring up feelings in one's loins.

In my experience, most of these young girls are working and the husband's are retired. The "baby stuff" is handled by the nanny and since kids start school here at 1 1/2 there is not all that much to do. I pick up my son everyday and either watch him play sports at school or spend the afternoons with him (doing homework) and then my Wife bond's when she gets home until bedtime.

Weekend's is strictly family time and we would never consider traveling without him.

I see no reference in the original post to a young working wife, anything remotely related to "usual reasons" , or nannies. That may be your experience but I got the same impression as Moemg - this is a question about becoming a fully involved parent after retirement.

This is something all parents with smart, interesting, well-behaved children under 10 believe .

+1

 

[HFWR]

Man plans, [-]God[/-] babies laugh...

 

[haha]

Man plans, [-]God[/-] babies laugh...

One thing I would say in complete seriouness to a 40-60 year old man, who is not already committed to some woman in America or UK or similar and who wants a family: make enough money, and get the hell out of Dodge and into a "developing" country before taking a wife or having children. Then never bring her back to the US. Visit on your own, tell her you are a political refugee, anything to avoid letting the American marriage/divorce racket get an open ended lien on your very being. You want someone whose has never been a princess, wasn't suckled on the milk of militant feminism and likely would consider a good apartment in a safe neighborhood with sewers and plenty of food to eat and medical care for her and her children to be a whole lot more than she ever expected to get from a man anyway. And as a big bonus, he is not going to beat her and very likely will even like her and be sexually faithful. Then he should take care of her in every way, but be careful about settling any money on her.

Ha