For years, the age for new mothers has been going up, but now technology allows a new phenomenon: post-menopausal pregnancy. According to an article in New York magazine, over the last decade the number of women having babies over the age of 50 has doubled. Plus, 25 percent of parents who adopt are over 45. Is this unnatural and unfair to children, or an extension of the women's liberation movement? This Just In: Women Want To Start A Family In Their Late 20s
Studies have proven that older parents are more involved in their children's lives, live longer and are wealthier. Having children after the biological clock has stopped ticking is also very expensive (up to $110,000 for a surrogate). This only means that the parents are more invested in the children (literally) and have the resources to provide them with the best of everything, like education. Nearing retirement age, these older adults also have more career freedom to participate in their kids' lives. Parents who give birth over 40 are also four times more likely to live to be 100. Like the article says, "Nothing—not a sports car, not a genius dye job-says 'I'm young' like a baby on your hip." 'What's Your Number' Movie Contest: Dish Your Number, Win A Prize
Okay, what?! Are kids now the Botox du jour for those women dying to relive their younger days? One more box to check off after you've done everything you can in your career? The older parents interviewed in the article said they were fully aware that they may die before their kids even hit 30. And yet they still went ahead and had kids. Seems unethical somehow.
Do you think these older parents are depriving their children of a full life? Or should a woman be able to have kids whenever she chooses to?
More Juicy Content From YourTango: