ᐅ Planning a New Home with Consideration for Starting a Family

Created on: 11 Mar 2019 15:44
N
Niloa
Hello,
I’m not sure if this is the right section for this thread, but I couldn’t find a more suitable one.
I often read here about couples planning and building their house before having children. As a result, the children’s rooms are planned more or less optimistically.
That was also the case for us when we bought our house. At the time, we thought it would be quick and easy to fill the three children’s rooms. A few years later, we have to accept that we will probably never have biological children. Since adoption was an option for us from the start, we are still hopeful that we will have children eventually. The process has already cost us a lot, and there will be more costs to come; in the end, we will probably have spent a mid five-figure amount.
Because of these difficult experiences, I would like to advise every original poster who is building before having children that having children can take longer and be more expensive than planned. But of course, I don’t want to always be the downer. Unfulfilled desire to have children affects about one in ten couples, depending on how you look at it.
What do you think? Am I being too negative? Has anyone else had a similar experience?
B
Bauherrin92
14 Mar 2019 13:41
Had my first child at 20, started university when my daughter was 2 years old, single parent. Now at 27, the second child is on the way, married, and the house construction is starting now. I am curious, but regardless of how stressful the building phase with children will be, I would do it all over again. And without children, I wouldn’t build at all; a condominium would be enough.
W
wurmwichtel
14 Mar 2019 20:07
Jean-Marc schrieb:
...Well, if I have no problem living with five people in a three-room social housing apartment in Kassel-Waldau with a housing permit and letting my children grow up among dreary high-rise buildings, then of course I can finish planning my family in my mid-twenties.
However, if you want to have your own home, you tend to postpone having children at today's real estate market prices...

If you need a housing permit in your mid-twenties and you're not a student, you regularly cannot afford to buy property.
It seems some fail to realize that buying real estate requires an income above the median salary, and if you don’t come from a wealthy family, moving up financially is very difficult.
Starting a family at 40 is definitely too late for the first child.
First it’s all about me, me, and me, then others, and later you realize that was a mistake because you have to choose between a walker, an oxygen tank, and your grandchildren when you have your first encounter over 80 years old.
M
Maria16
14 Mar 2019 20:28
Some people here sound so absolutist and thoughtless! Have you ever considered that maybe the right person simply wasn’t found until the last minute, or that there was no partner at all for years? Many would choose differently if they could.

It’s understandable to personally think someone is too old, but definitely not "definitely"?!
H
haydee
14 Mar 2019 20:41
Some people here seem to be planning to move into a nursing home upon retirement.
Jean-Marc14 Mar 2019 21:25
wurmwichtel schrieb:

Starting with a first child at 40 is definitely too old. First me, then me again, and then me once more, followed by others, and later you realize it was a bad idea because you have to choose between a walker, an oxygen tank, and grandchildren when your first contact is over 80.

Well, the first child is rarely consciously planned to be born at 40 or older. Usually, there is a backstory, and it doesn’t always involve sheer egoism or an exaggerated desire for self-fulfillment. Some people had relationship difficulties, others simply didn’t feel the urge for years and then suddenly did, and so on... Yes, having a first child at 40, 41, or so may not be ideal—but it is still much better than empty nurseries and possibly years of therapy. A questioning teenager will probably understand that later. Instead of turning up our noses at this, we should appreciate that nature still allows late parental joy.
H
HilfeHilfe
15 Mar 2019 07:06
Jean-Marc schrieb:
Well, having a first child after 40 is rarely a conscious plan. Usually, there’s a backstory that doesn’t necessarily involve selfishness or an exaggerated focus on self-fulfillment. Some people had bad luck in relationships, others didn’t feel the urge for years and then suddenly much more, etc. ...
Yes, having the first child at 40, 41, and so on might not be ideal – but it’s still far better than empty nurseries and sometimes years of therapy. Even a questioning teenager might understand that later.
Instead of turning up our noses at it, we should be happy that nature even allows for late joy of having a baby.

Now don’t play the victim. Yes, there are such cases, but you wrote that you first earn money from work, then build at high cost, and only eventually have children after 40.

The “know-it-alls” here don’t say it’s bad per se to have children after 40. Yes, there are partners or health reasons. But I won’t accept having children late just because of career and property. If a child with Down syndrome then appears, you can’t complain.

I wouldn’t wish it on anyone!!!