Hacker News Reader

Comment by seabombs | Hacker News Reader

Thanks for sharing! I remember thinking pre-kids mostly about how much work they would be but not really considering the joy they bring too. Like I knew they would, but vastly underestimated what effect that would have on my life.

I don't particularly regret any of my choices either, but knowing what I do now, would have chosen to have kids earlier in my life.

View on HN

I find it funny that I spent my 20s and 30s doing everything in my power to avoid having kids and at this stage in my life I’m doing everything to have kids.

I do feel that 30 year old me would definitely be in better shape to chase kids around.

This. I’m an old dad. I realized two years ago that to keep up with my pre-teens I had to change my lifestyle. For me that meant cutting out alcohol, not eating processed foods, avoiding sugar, reduced caffeine, way more protein and doing calisthenics. I sleep well and I have energy. I just have to keep this up for 10 more years when my youngest will be 21, then I can die. ;-)

Haha! Very interesting life goal - When your dependents have sucked all the life out of you, you can kick the bucket:) (And am sure it’s worth it)

Rather sounds like they’ve given them their life back.

Exactly, good for them

Am not sure what your statement means? :) who is "them" and who is "their" in this?

I read it as “them” and “their” is the OP and “they’ve” are OP’s children.

> When your dependents have sucked all the life out of you, you can kick the bucket:)

Don't laugh, there's a reason for it. Read the book "The Red Queen" which explains all this.

Is this the teen novel or something else? Curios how a teen novel could address these issues?

https://www.amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/0...

Ah, think the commenter was joking around a bit

> when my youngest will be 21, then I can die. ;-)

which I thought was a funny way to put.

But, am sure there is an evolutionary reason for dying after your children leave the nest. It's all good:)

Same here in almost all ways, except the caffeine. What was the benefit there? My hot pots keep me going. Once my wife hits menopause I might also consider TRT. I'm almost certainly not low by the standards of the average American, let alone for my age, but it's gonna keep falling as I age and wouldn't mind that extra oomph.

Previously, when my head touched the pillow I was asleep. Two years ago I noticed that wasn’t happening and I would wake frequently through the night. I cut back my caffeine intake and my restored my sleep. Without knowing the physiological reason I assume my metabolism is slowing down and I had to alter my lifestyle to fit to it, hence my strict diet now. The calisthenics has been awesome for me. I love the progression moves to unlock skills and levelling up. Pushing weights just to stack more plates wasn’t motivation for me - cali is. It replaces my caffeine.

As for menopause, or more accurately, perimenopause, my wife has been in that for years. (She’s an old mom) She started HRT about 6 months ago and it has been amazing. She no longer wants to murder me or anyone else that irritates her.

Yip peri is also where we're at right now. Still trying and hoping for another kiddo. Glad to hear it can last for years at least there's a bit more chance.

There’s never a right time to have kids. But having them older has its perks. You are much more calmed, patient, you are wiser and likely financially stable. Throwing money at problems definitely makes life 10X easier when you have kids, something most people can’t do in their 20s or even 30s.

I disagree. As a father of nine children, I submit that the best time to have children is when you’re young. The next best time is now.

Sure, you’ll be poor, and you’ll make lots of mistakes. But how do you know you’ll be able to have children later? And what’s so important now that makes it worth putting off children?

You’ll feel poor anyhow. More money just means you want more.

I’ll say there’s benefits to having a single child, but not nearly as many as there are to have multiple.

Explain this please.

I mean: siblings.

Not to discount that it’s great when you play with your kids, but it’s different when your kids play together, and in particular when you can’t play that they have someone to interact with.

Yeah, the group dynamics of, say, a family with two children:

   1. Kid A plays with Kid B
   2. Kid A plays alone and Kid B plays alone

As compared to a three-child household:

   1. Kids A, B and C play together
   2. Kid A plays with Kid B, Kid C plays alone
   3. Kid A plays with Kid C, Kid B plays alone
   4. Kid B plays with Kid C, Kid A plays alone
   5. Kid A, Kid B and Kid C all play alone

So, in a bigger family, many more communication patterns between children can arise, which, among other things, might develop the child's empathy etc.

Adding mom and dad as "players" would give us many more possible scenarios here (Kid A playing with mom, Kid B alone or with dad, etc).

I'm a father of two with a low income, and I would like to have a third child for precisely the above described reason. As a sociologist in my country put it -- somewhat harsh words maybe, but probably largely true: a single child might get spoiled, two children may start competing too heavily, but three children and above is company.

I disagree, when looking at 3-kids setup out there in the world. Ie my wife comes from such, she is the oldest and all 3 follow the typical 3 kids pattern - oldest was pushed into most responsibility to the point of trauma, middle one feels unappreciated and has inferiority complex as middle ones often do, and youngest is by huge margin the most spoiled one. This is the default for 3 kids that many parents end up with, unless fighting hard against this natural direction.

And yes a lot of interaction, but it doesn't guarantee anything further down the line - when long time adults youngest is still spoiled and selfish and not really a pleasant person to be around with for anybody, including siblings and their own mom. Middle one is scared to have kids, a decision that she may end up regretting later easily. And my wife is also carrying her part of the burden, won't bother you with details.

The grass is always greener behind the fence and all that.

Insightful comment, got me thinking, thanks for sharing. I suppose, in the end, there isn't all that much logic in human relations, or there are always far too many "unknown unknowns".

There are so many stereotypes involved in this that it may be hard to believe but at least I know I have caught myself repeating the stereotype almost to a T (especially with regard to the oldest being worked so hard or, as I would put it, constantly on the hardest jobs).

That said it does help that it’s a stereotype/generalization/trope that I’m aware of because I get to take that as part of my feedback loop to make the attempt to iterate around the negative aspects you’ve pointed out.

I think I’m doing better - I’ll know if my kids still talk to me after they move out.

There's very few humans that have enough time, energy, skills, wherewithal, and money to devote to 3+ kids to make these sorts of positive "three's company" interactions happen in the modern world. I am not saying that it's impossible, just that it's difficult and doesn't happen naturally like you're implying.

On a personal note, I never had much positive interactions with either of my siblings, certainly not as children as not now that we're in our 40s either. Lots of fighting, absolutely zero closeness or positive feelings.

I think you have a really different experience from me. In my experience it doesn’t cost any time, effort or money to make those interactions happen. You can just stick three kids in the same room for about 10 minutes and it will.

Not only do they play but they also learn to care for each other. Parental effort doesn't increase uniformly with each child – if you're lucky and have done a good job parenting them, children create a society and help with raising each other.

This is the take I pursue in my home, everyone is doing a see one, do one, teach one. There are still struggles around it but consistency makes the conversations shorter and more effective.

In my experience having room in the house, not having to cook dinner, not having to go grocery shopping, never have to clean the house, travel comfortably and have a full time nanny, makes a lot of a difference. You save a lot of time that you can then invest in yourself, your partner and your kids.

As a father of nine you have to acknowledge your perspective is an extreme outlier. Not criticizing, just, not a generalizable take.

Yes. Had one kid mid thirties. And now I realize I want nine of them too. Or four maybe. We started too late and I doubt we will make it. Biggest mistake of my life. In my environment I see people delaying kids because they think 33, 34 is still alright to start. And it is. If you want to have 1 or 2...

We will go for the third one next year and that would be it for us. I come from a family of 8 children and my wife is a single child. I don’t think I had a better childhood, just different. She has a lot of good memories of traveling with her parents and does not regret not having siblings. I saw my dad a few days a week for a good portion of my early childhood and regret that a bit. My wife and I are equally social, I’m actually more of an introvert in some circumstances. We are both considered of others, and like to share. I would say the one skill I developed that she lacks is the ability to focus and concentrate in public spaces with noise. Because that’s how I did homework and studied all the way from elementary school to college, always around a bunch of loud people, no place in the house where I could close a door and be alone.

I don't know if you are joking, but being poor is something big for most people. Specially people who don't make as much as SWEs did in USA in the last decade

I'd offer a contrasting view, as a father of many fewer. If I'd had children young it would have been an utter disaster. It's difficult enough when you're financially and romantically stable and have more emotional maturity. To ask a contrasting question, what's so important about having children that you need to rush into it on the off chance you'll be unable to later?

im in the "wish i had em earlier" camp assuming the same partner. i was not prepared for how much a kid would change me - so i spent more of my time and effort on priorities i would one day drop.

another thing i think about is grandparents. having kids earlier would mean longer time with grandparents! (heck, maybe one day my time with potential grandkids)

off topic - i understand my parents so much more now that im a parent. i think being a parent has helped heal my relationship with them. grandparents are awesome and i wish i had more time with mine.

I was 41 when my daughter was born. I think it’s a great reason to stay for, strong and healthy.

My goal is to keep up with her mountain biking, snowboarding and hiking for as long as I can. Hopefully I’ll be on the game well in my 60s and her 20s

My dad was 42 when I was born, and he was keeping up with me on hikes in my early 20s (his mid 60s). I haven't done much hiking with him lately, but he's going on 50 mile bike rides at 70.

I think having kids late can help people stay young longer, if you let it.

> I do feel that 30 year old me would definitely be in better shape to chase kids around.

Can confirm that starting at 30 makes it relatively easy to keep up. Still not early enough though. Wish I’d started at 25.

It’s mostly a matter of effort though. You’ll become very good at it out of sheer need if you genuinely want to keep up. In far better shape now than I was at 30, mentally and physically.

I was nearly 40 when my younger daughter was born. No problem. Kids helped keep me fit.

100% on this. In my life I have 0 regrets except not having kids younger. I was never especially fond of kids, but it turns I out love my own more than I imagined possible, and have more fun with them I ever thought I would! I only wish we could have many more but given when we started, the odds of having more than 2 are very low. The amount of joy and life they bring to you and to your house is something you can't really appreciate until you've had them. To say nothing of the sort of fulfillment and life satisfaction they bring.

My parent's goal was to get me to go to college. My goal for my kids is to teach them the importance of having kids early. The fact it might help in having a grandkid or two before I kick the bucket is just a wee bit of icing on that cake. I think the ideal time to start is probably in your 20s. This also maximizes the amount of time you'll get to spend with your kids. I'm quite 'jealous' (sans the negative connotations) of those who will get to see their kids live til retirement, but hey - they made wiser decisions, so hopefully I can help encourage my children to do the same.

> I was never especially fond of kids, but it turns I out love my own more than I imagined possible, and have more fun with them I ever thought I would!

That's because we're designed to have kids.

I for a change am happy I had my kids in late 30s / 40. I am certainly wiser, way more experienced with world, humans, got to be successful and in much better financial position which also helped my parents to have better retirement.

I wasn't a full adult in my 20s, too naive, too trusting, undefined for the lack of better words, not experienced with various types of women (laugh all you want, this was probably the most important experience from all for me, it afterwards formed my choice of wife which is often the most important choice in one's life).

Plus I've managed in a decade before having kids to travel the world backpacking, various experiences that changed me for the better and basically reinvented myself, on my own. I don't come from competitive or nurturing environment, nobody expected anything from me. I've found my passions in various mountain/extreme sports. None of that would happen if I had kids earlier, thats very clear when looking at peers who took the other trajectory.

If my kids will have their kids young or older is completely up to them, I find it selfish to push any expectations on them, they (will) live vastly different life compared to me, I can just respect their choices and love them regardless.

I think your example of e.g. being able to provide a better retirement harken back to what times were like in the past. My parents and theirs on back had children quite young. It gave me a life where I was able to know my great grandparents. I didn't really appreciate it, or anything, at the time - but I hold those memories dearly now, in hindsight. And it also created an environment where social security, so to speak, was never any concern - you have about 20 relatives who are mostly all working together to make a better life for themselves, and always there for each other. Everybody was dirt poor, but you would never know it from what we were able to have.

If people start having children in their 40s then statistically grandparents will simply no longer be a thing, let alone great grandparents. And people's family sizes will substantially decline. I think that's quite sad from all perspectives, and also significantly detrimental. For instance there is so much I want to pass onto my children about having children (and I'm sure much I've yet to learn myself) but none of it will really 'stick' until they themselves have children. If they wait until their 40s then I'll most likely be dead by then.

And what we do we get in exchange in this sort of world? Slightly greater liberty to pursue self indulgence? And I think "slightly" is correct because you're right that self indulgences do become more difficult with children, but far from impossible, and even less difficult with large families. Want to head off to the mountains on the weekend? Sure, that's what grandparents are for!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com