[randomdata]

The well-off in North America stopped having kids because it has become socially unacceptable do so; at least in youth. The young "rural hick" mother is the canonical image young women are told they must not become. We even air TV shows (e.g. Teen Mom) meant to portray the ostracization young mothers face in an effort to not let others realize the same fate. Having children is something well-off people have come to fear, believing it will leave them to become failures in the eye of society.

The narrative changes when people grow older, nearing the end of a woman's viable productive years. All of a sudden it is "Why don't you have kids yet? You're not getting any younger. The clock is ticking." Once one overcomes dealing with the conflicting messaging and the emotional toil in that, this leaves time for one, occasionally two in the best case, children and no more. For others it is simply too late.

[alphabettsy]

> We even air TV shows (e.g. Teen Mom) meant to portray the ostracization young mothers face in an effort to not let others realize the same fate.

You don’t see any issue with people who haven’t even completed high school having children?

[ALittleLight]

It certainly seems like it would have a ton of challenges, but also pros, and, in a good family, seems quite manageable.

For example, my mother in law had children as a young teen. She advised her daughters against doing that, but she also had a bad family that didn't support her. She had five kids, the youngest, now 30, cumulatively, have fewer kids than she did. One example, of a benefit to having kids young, is fecundity.

My mother in law is also younger and can help with the grandkids more and can spend more time with them. Your late teens and twenties you're better about to function on low or interrupted sleep and keep up with a rambunctious little one. A young parent will likely be closer, in an experiential sense, to their children and that may lead to a closer relationship.

The challenges - mainly not being ready emotionally or financially, seem like the kind of thing that having a supportive family would address. If my children were to get pregnant at, say, fifteen, I'd expect to be the one financially responsible (or share the responsibility with the other grandparents) and same for childcare. I would expect to hand that responsibility over to the parents over the course of a decade or so.

[randomdata]

I have heard some suggest that the high school age has biological complications related to child birth. I have no expertise to delve into that topic.

Outside of those influences, in hindsight, the high school years would have been the perfect time to have children. They are virtually wasted years anyway, being old enough to be ready to start to spread your wings, but not considered old enough to do so. The time could be used productively to focus on the critical early years of rearing a child. Once you reach your prime, deemed ready to go out into the world and make something of yourself, your children will be starting to become independent. If you are well-off the financial supports are already in place, so that is moot.

However, in practice, it would be a challenge because of how society demonizes it. Humans are social creatures that rely on a stable society to survive. Being ostracized from that society is a complication one logically tries to avoid.

[JamesSwift]

> Outside of those influences, in hindsight, the high school years would have been the perfect time to have children

Umm what? Am I offbase in assuming you dont have kids? Its absolutely not a great idea to have children in high school. And I have 2 sisters who did. Without getting into too many details, I think it would have been more stable and much, _much_ easier if they didn't have children that young. Not only are you losing out on so much as a parent, but you are not even equipped to deal with the harshness of life for yourself let alone a completely helpless other person. Whats your plan as a 16/17 year old for your kid having a 105 temperature and having to go to the ER unannounced? Whats your plan to pay for daycare? Are you moving in with your partner at this point or do you play a weird game of parents being "separated" and shuttling between the houses? Do you even own a car?

It makes no sense

[randomdata]

> Am I offbase in assuming you dont have kids?

Yes. I do have children and in hindsight there would have been a lot of benefits having them much earlier in life.

> Not only are you losing out on so much as a parent

I lose out on so much now as a parent because I have adulting to do. When I was in high school what did I have to do with my time? Not much. Time that could have been put into the child. I also had way more energy to keep up with children, something that is much harder now that I'm older.

> Its absolutely not a great idea to have children in high school.

Yes, we firmly established in the environment where society demonizes having children, going against the grain will not lead to desirable outcomes. Going against society never ends well, no matter the topic. While your concerns are valid, they are the product of the very society that does not welcome children and ostracizes those who have them.

Again, people avoid having children young because it is socially unacceptable to do so. It is entirely logical to want to avoid fighting that given the importance of society to an individual. But, as said before, aside from those factors high school would be a great time to have children for a number of reasons. Indeed, there is never a perfect time to have children.

[JamesSwift]

I dont know why you think the whole thing is just because of some social stigma. Nothing in my rebuttal cares about what society thinks. There are 10000 other things that are legit issues with having kids young before I get to "but what would my neighbor think".

> When I was in high school what did I have to do with my time? Not much. Time that could have been put into the child

Where are you getting all this magical time and money to be a responsible parent as a completely naive/inexperienced teenager? It presumes and absolutely requires someone else being able to take up the slack and provide for you as the parent because you are completely incapable of doing it without the help. I'm all for supporting parents who need the help, but I'm nowhere near suggesting "actually its best to have kids when you arent capable of raising them yourself". Not to mention the weird generational gap that then creates where your child now has their own child but is looking to you for guidance on how to raise them but you relied on grandma/grandpa for a lot of that maturity when you had them.

Also this is without considering the strain kids add to a relationship that somehow we think is magically going to be fine for a 16/17 year old.

[randomdata]

> Nothing in my rebuttal cares about what society thinks.

Your entire "rebuttal" is about the lack of support structures that are missing exactly because society does not condone people having children. Something which was already established throughout the thread, being the core premise raised.

[ryandrake]

> I lose out on so much now as a parent because I have adulting to do. When I was in high school what did I have to do with my time? Not much.

Interesting--I feel the exact opposite: You have much more free time as an adult than you do in high school (or college age). When I was < 22 years old, a huge part of my life was in school, studying, cramming for tests, doing extra-curriculars, applying to colleges. Then once in college, it was 18 credits a year worth of classes, labs, the whole nine yards. Absolutely everything I did was scheduled and accounted for. Class at this time, sports practice at that time, music lessons here, club meetings there, and so on. Ain't no way I had time to raise a kid! Once I became an adult, I had what? Work and maybe set aside some time for bills/chores, but otherwise I needed to get a damn hobby in order to not go insane!

As my (tiger-ish) parents would have put it: If you're bored in High School, you're not spending enough time studying.

[randomdata]

> If you're bored in High School, you're not spending enough time studying.

Wouldn't you rather spend the time studying when you're older? I have found studying to be much more enjoyable, and useful, the older I get. Having a breadth of experience to relate it to improves things substantially.

It is not so much being unable to find things to spend time at, but often it being a waste. Like cramming for tests. Looking back, who cares? If they are feel-good activities for you, great. Don't discount what you love. But if you are someone who wanted children, I'm sure spending time with children would have been worthwhile too.

[bergenty]

Financially yes. But the way this has traditionally worked is there is a whole familial support structure that helps raise the kid so the teen mother is financially and structurally supported. I don’t condone teens having children but babies born at that age have the least number of complications and healthier dispositions.

[anon291]

> For others it is simply too late.

Yup... you need to start very young to have a high chance of having more than two kids.

[giantg2]

I'm not sure. Is this sarcasm?

[anon291]

No. A few years ago, I looked at a study that said if you want three kids with >90% probability, you should marry at 23. For two kids, the age is 26-28 I think. This is the woman's age. Fertility decline rapidly after 30. Plus there's infertility between kids if you choose to breastfeed, etc. There's also a lot of other factors to consider that could delay having kids (miscarriages, difficulty conceiving, etc). Of course the father's age also matters but I don't have data on that.

[nxm]

A woman’s biological reproductive system starts declining after around 30 if I recall correctly

[giantg2]

Yeah, but in general it's not enough to impact having 2 kids. If getting pregnant for the first time at 30, you could wait the recommended 18 months between kids and still have two without it being a geriatric pregnancy. You don't need to start at 18 to have 2 kids.

[anon291]

That's not how pregnancy works. It can take quite a while to get pregnant. it's a bell curve. Certainly, a lot of couples will have another, but if you want to have another with a good chance of success (>90%), you have to start younger.

[giantg2]

Where did you get that number? Under 35 still has a reasonably high chance of success. It's really after 35 that risks go up and likelihood goes down.