Sociologically is probably 35+.
So there is an unsolvable problem here, you have to compromise one way or the other.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/cusp/201211/whats-th...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4418963/
35-39 year olds have slightly higher rates of complications, but the rates are still lower than in teenage mothers. This rank ordering persists even after adjusting for demographics, type of birth, and comorbidities (table 5).
I stopped reading after that. There's no such thing as 'fresh' oocytes. The author is just making stuff for his purpose as he goes along.
The ideal age for having kids lies somewhere in the range of late 20's to early 30's. Here both biological and sociological advantages convene.
> Mitochondria in oocyte aging: current understanding
> The oocyte is the largest cell found in multicellular organisms. Mitochondria, as the energy factories for cells, are found in high numbers in oocytes, as they provide the energy for oocyte maturation, fertilization, and embryo formation via oxidative phosphorylation. Failure of assisted reproduction is mainly attributed to oocyte aging and increased aneuploidy.
Men are biased towards younger women because they don't bear the risks of pregnancy.
This seems addressable by biotechnology, artificial wombs and so on. At a certain level of technological sophistication, all problems become engineering problems.