Sure, let's short-change the kids by giving them the immature mom who'd rather be elsewhere than sitting home with babies, whose judgment leaves something to be desired. And what makes you think that she'll be free to pursue a career at 35 or 40? Her teenagers won't miss her? Better take this plan back to the drawing board!
>And what makes you think that she'll be free to pursue a >career at 35 or 40? Her teenagers won't miss her?
Actually that is when I intend to be home. I have worked since they were babies and have had them in daycare (a very good rural daycare with teachers who have been there since they started 7 years ago) and I plan on scaling back to be home when they get home. I need to be home when they are old enough to get into trouble and need the most guidance.
I think the ideal scenario is to have kids while you are relatively young and save your career for later. For years, while our kids were small, we arranged to be home for them and didn't make a whole lot of money. But they were great years and I'll never want to do it differently. Now that the kids are pretty much grown up, the both of us can focus on our careers (and pay for all that college!). Having your kids grown up when you are still in your mid-40s is a beautiful thing. I do not envy at all those in my peer group who are just now starting to have kids (in their 40s). Having little ones running around when you are in your 50s and 60s just doesn't appeal to me. But to each their own.
It is sad when women who wanted kids hit against their "biological clock." I know a few women like that and I feel badly for them. They are just not very happy people.