Planning house construction and considering the desire for children

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, house construction is starting now. I am curious but regardless of how stressful the construction phase with children will be, I would do it all over again anytime. And without children, I wouldn't build at all; an apartment would be enough.

...Well, if I have no problem living with 5 people in a 3-room social apartment in Kassel-Waldau on a housing benefit certificate and letting my children grow up among gray high-rises, then of course I can finish my family planning in my mid-twenties. However, if you want to get your own place, you’d rather postpone having children at today’s price levels on the real estate market...

Anyone who needs a housing benefit certificate in their mid-twenties and is not a student regularly cannot afford to own property. People seem to miss the fact that buying real estate requires salaries above the median income, and those without wealthy parents cannot make the leap upwards. The initial 4 is definitely too old for the first child. First me, then me, then me again, then others, and later you realize it was crap because you have to choose between a walker, oxygen tank, and grandchild because you are over 80 at the first contact.

Some people here sound so absolutist and thoughtless! Have you ever thought that maybe until the very last moment the right person wasn’t there or maybe there wasn’t a partner at all for years? Some would also want it differently if it were possible.

That one might personally find it too old, okay. But definitely not "definitively"?!

Here, some are apparently planning to move into a nursing home upon retirement.

The leading 4 is definitely too old for the first child. First me, then me and then me, then others, and later you realize it was crap because you have to choose between a walker, an oxygen tank, and grandchildren because you are over 80 at first contact.

Well, the first child is rarely consciously planned from 40 onwards. Usually, there is a background story to it, and it does not always necessarily have to do with chronic selfishness and an exaggerated tendency towards self-fulfillment. Some had relationship bad luck, others felt no urge for years and suddenly all the more, etc. ... Yes, having the first child at 40, 41, etc. may not necessarily be ideal – but it is still significantly better than empty nurseries and sometimes years of therapy sessions. A questioning teenager is likely to understand that later. Instead of turning up our noses at it, we should rather be happy that nature still allows late baby joy.

Well, the first child is rarely consciously planned from the age of 40. Usually, there is a backstory to it, and it doesn’t always necessarily have to do with notorious selfishness and an exaggerated tendency towards self-fulfillment. Some had bad luck in relationships, others felt no urge for years and then suddenly much more, etc. ...
Yes, having the first child at 40, 41, etc. may not be ideal—but it is still clearly better than empty nurseries and sometimes years of therapy sessions. A questioning teenager will probably understand that later.
Instead of wrinkling our noses about it, we should rather be happy that nature still allows late baby joy.

Now don’t play the victim. Yes, there are such cases, but you wrote about earning money from a job first, then building at an overpriced rate, and then eventually having children at 40.

The "know-it-alls" here don’t say that being over 40 is bad per se. Yes, there are partners or health reasons. But just because of career and property doesn’t hold water. If a child with Down syndrome comes along, you can’t complain.

But I wish that on no one!!!