How much would you support married children?

[yjacket]

Personally, I'm very hard-nosed about this issue. I think it is a real shame to give financial support to fully-functioning adults that are not in a crisis (and having been through a few crises in my life, I know what one is and one isn't), graduating high school and not having a job is not a crisis, going to college is not a crisis.

 

Having cancer, having a death, having a medical problem, house burns down, etc.-those are crises.  Simply not having a job, or even losing it is not a crisis. Losing a job shouldn't be a crisis because you should be living with at least a 6 months cushion-if you don't ain't my fault.

 

Necessity is the mother of invention. My rules, the summer past your 18th birthday (what would normally be college-time) you are out the door; don't ask for hand-outs because there will be none. You want food-work for it-you want games, TV, etc. work for it. Don't come begging to me about it.

 

I expect that by the time my kids are 18, I better have done a good enough job teaching them money management, work ethic, etc. that they should know I'm not a money tree. I have made my own way in my life and I've done quite well at it-but the only reason I have is because I am motivated by survival.

 

Yes we are all beggers, but the problem has become that people and especially the next generation of kids expect it and because they expect it they don't respect it. They don't respect what it takes to get to the point of having money to be able to give charity. A kid in college getting their tuition paid for by mom and dad will never respect his degree as much as if he did it himself. Kids who have parents pay for things after they are fully functioning adults will have lower confidence, more likely to be depressed, less successful overall in life.

 

And in fact, parents paying for kids education has made college more expensive.  Prior to graduating HS, if my kids are so inclined to take college courses, I will pay for those but not afterwards. I figured out how to make it through college, earn a BS and MS  without mom/dad; it made me a better person. You never know what you are made of until your back is against the wall. I'd rather have my kids learn very early in adulthood-you can do it on your own vs. having to figure it out later in life.

 

Rather than giving money to my kid for college-I'd rather give it to someone truly in need, someone with serious medical problems, etc.

Edited January 11, 2016 by yjacket

[The Folk Prophet]

but the problem has become that people and especially the next generation of kids expect it and because they expect it they don't respect it. 

 

If one raises their kids right, as you suggested, then this should not be the case.

 

A kid in college getting their tuition paid for by mom and dad will never respect his degree as much as if he did it himself. 

 

This may be true. But I'm struggling a bit to understand what value there is in respecting a degree. Working hard and being responsible. Doing what you say you will. Learning quickly. Being professional. Etc., etc., etc. All important. Respecting your degree? ???? I dunno. Sounds like so much pride to me.

 

Kids who have parents pay for things after they are fully functioning adults will have lower confidence, more likely to be depressed, less successful overall in life.

 

Can you support this? Or is it just your opinion?

 

I don't disagree that some kids will react that way. But I'm not sure I buy it's universal. That's wherein my support (and others who have suggested similar things) is conditional.

[Josiah]

Alright, so this thread has been on my mind since yesterday. I've been thinking a lot more about what I want to do (or not do) for my kids in 20 years or so, and why. I've also thought about the role Heavenly Father has played in my life, both in spoiling me at times and in letting me struggle at other times, and His possible reasons for both.

 

So far it seems like we've mostly been weighing the supposed financial and/or educational benefits for the adult child against the supposed detriments to their personal responsibility, character, etc. My question at this point is, could limited financial help ever be truly beneficial? Not just in the sense of helping a kid pay for things he/she wants or needs, but actually beneficial as a whole for the child's character and personal growth (a spiritual benefit)? If so, in what ways and under what conditions? And coming back to the OP, would the said benefits be reduced or changed after marriage?

 

What think ye?

[Guest]

Can you support this? Or is it just your opinion?

Just his opinion.

My grandfather on my dad's side was a high school principal and managed to pay for all of his 9 kids' college - 1 lawyer, 1 doctor, 2 nurses, 1 teacher, 3 engineers, and an architect. All 9 kids are successful in school with 5 of them graduating top of their class. Our family name got a reputation in the school as 4 out of the 5 attended the same college. All 9 are successful in their respective careers with 2 of them having served in Congress.

All 9 children paid for their own children's colleges some paying for their child-in-laws' colleges. All grand kids would line up to greet my grandfather on family reunions and state their accomplishments in school (1st honor, won the inter scholastic debate tournament, etc.). Out of that crop, we have several high ranking politicians, doctors, engineers, etc. etc. one of these is my brother who is a neurologist - every single cent of his 10 years of med school paid for by my dad. He married a Pediatrician lived in my childhood home with my parents until he had 3 children and completed the construction of his 7 bedroom, 5 bathroom mansion - he was 40 years old. My brother's in laws live with him now and my parents live with him in the months that they're not living with my sister in Texas.

Of course we all respect our degrees. That degree came from the sweat of my father's brow! My grandfather has an entire wall in his house dedicated to all his 9 children's diplomas and certificates of accomplishments. All 9 kids' college degrees are printed on the outside wall of the house so people passing by can see it from the street. My dad has his own wall in our house of our diplomas and certificates of accomplishments. When he was alive, if you come to my house and make a comment about anything on that wall, be prepared to sit down for hours as he regales you with tales from his children's college days and where they are now.

Education is very important in my family. Hah... It's very important to Asians in general. We work hard to get good grades and earn our degrees and make something of our lives because we see how my dad is who he is because of his dad before him and we love our grandfather and my dad dearly.

Therefore, I conclude that how your children treats the things they are bequeathed with has a lot to do with how they are raised than what they are bequeathed with. And yes, that's also just my opinion.

Edited January 11, 2016 by anatess

[Guest]

Alright, so this thread has been on my mind since yesterday. I've been thinking a lot more about what I want to do (or not do) for my kids in 20 years or so, and why. I've also thought about the role Heavenly Father has played in my life, both in spoiling me at times and in letting me struggle at other times, and His possible reasons for both.

So far it seems like we've mostly been weighing the supposed financial and/or educational benefits for the adult child against the supposed detriments to their personal responsibility, character, etc. My question at this point is, could limited financial help ever be truly beneficial? Not just in the sense of helping a kid pay for things he/she wants or needs, but actually beneficial as a whole for the child's character and personal growth (a spiritual benefit)? If so, in what ways and under what conditions? And coming back to the OP, would the said benefits be reduced or changed after marriage?

What think ye?

Your child's character need to be forged before he becomes an adult and surely before he gets married. If your child has not learned the value of work and has not learned responsibility and being able to stand on his own two feet by the time he graduates out of high school, he will be at a distinct disadvantage and you have a lot of catching up to do.

So, should you continue to support your child as an adult? Of course. You are family. The welfare state SHOULD NOT be the first place a person goes to for help. THAT's WHAT FAMILY IS FOR.

If your child has learned work ethic and good citizenship before he became an adult, he will continue to apply such character as an adult. But, if as a parent, you want to make it easier for your child to succeed - for example, having him live with you instead of paying rent so that he can save up for a down payment on a house and buy his house earlier than he would if he had to pay rent too,.. Or you want to pay for his car so he won't incur the 7% interest on a car loan and then he can pay you the monthly amortization... Or you pay for his college instead of him having to start his career on a negative financial status with student loans... This is not going to CHANGE his character that you already forged before he became an adult,.

In the same token, when you're the one needing assistance, he will not just throw you into the first nursing home that will take you... Because, you've already established that in your family, the family take care of each other.

Now, if your child did not learn this lesson of character and responsibility, then the best way for him to learn it is to vote him off the family island.

Marriage doesn't change anything. Marriage, in fact, expands your family so that now you have another person who is a member of it, contributing to (and yes needing as well) the family resources. So that, it is also imperative that you teach your child - before he becomes an adult - to recognize character and responsibility in others so that he will choose a spouse with these characteristics.

Edited January 11, 2016 by anatess

[Backroads]

When I was student-teaching, another gal from my university was at my site. We had two different scenarios of paying for college and thus two different experiences. My parents had paid for roughly the first two years and then I took over. No particular family rule, just how things went down for me. This other girl's parents had paid for all of her college. I was a bit looser with classes since I was paying for it, taking classes to play for two degrees until I decided which one to pursue. I was in college a semester longer due to this... and was just fine with that. My friend, on the other hand, was sure to pick a major early on and commit to it so she wouldn't waste her parents' money. No extra classes, no changing her mind, just get that degree as quickly as possible.

I'm not saying one of us had the right scenario and the other the wrong, just that it led to two different college experiences.

[The Folk Prophet]

So far it seems like we've mostly been weighing the supposed financial and/or educational benefits for the adult child against the supposed detriments to their personal responsibility, character, etc. My question at this point is, could limited financial help ever be truly beneficial? Not just in the sense of helping a kid pay for things he/she wants or needs, but actually beneficial as a whole for the child's character and personal growth (a spiritual benefit)? If so, in what ways and under what conditions? And coming back to the OP, would the said benefits be reduced or changed after marriage?

 

What think ye?

 

It strikes me (and I also have experienced this, as I expect we all have) that being blessed has been one of the key factors in my spiritual growth. Yes, trials have also been part of the equation (followed by blessings). But ultimately, the key key factor is, and always has been, choice.

[Guest]

When I was student-teaching, another gal from my university was at my site. We had two different scenarios of paying for college and thus two different experiences. My parents had paid for roughly the first two years and then I took over. No particular family rule, just how things went down for me. This other girl's parents had paid for all of her college. I was a bit looser with classes since I was paying for it, taking classes to play for two degrees until I decided which one to pursue. I was in college a semester longer due to this... and was just fine with that. My friend, on the other hand, was sure to pick a major early on and commit to it so she wouldn't waste her parents' money. No extra classes, no changing her mind, just get that degree as quickly as possible.

I'm not saying one of us had the right scenario and the other the wrong, just that it led to two different college experiences.

 

Yep!  I have a different experience from my brother as well...

 

I wanted to be a programmer.  In the 80's in the Philippines... programmers was synonymous to video game addicts.  When my dad and I went through the colleges to find a good college program for me, the only thing he thought was reputable enough to amount to something is either Industrial Engineering or Computer Engineering.  Information Technology as he saw it was making games for Atari which he considered in the same level as Fine Arts - which is drawing comic books, or Liberal Arts - party organizer.

 

So, I got myself a Computer Engineering Degree and took Programming Classes for my electives and took other programming classes on my dime.  I held a job through college so I was able to pay for a lot of extra classes.

 

My other brother was a professional soccer player.  He wanted to take Soccer as a college degree - which, of course, didn't exist.  He decided to take Electronics Communications Engineering because it was the bomdiggity back in the day.  He didn't really have any ambition to become an Electronics Engineer.  Good thing he did that... he got a major injury not too long after he graduated from his degree which killed his soccer career... he was able to use his degree to get a high-paying job instead of doing what most injured players do - coach a school team for peanuts.

Edited January 11, 2016 by anatess

[The Folk Prophet]

If your child has learned work ethic and good citizenship before he became an adult, 

 

This is key.

 

Anyone who thinks they can raise their child right by punishing them as an adult after they have failed to raise them right as young children is deluded.

 

Now I'm not saying that irresponsible young adults are always the blame of the parents. But if the kid is going to be that way after being raised right anyhow, then punishment to them as an adult is as likely to harm as to hurt, just as coddling them might do the same -- harm or hurt. In that regard (having a messed up young adult child) then we should be carefully doing our best to customize our response based on the individual, and above and beyond that, follow the Spirit as we fast and pray to know what to do.

 

I can understand that some tend naturally towards a hard line with struggling young adults, and some tend naturally the other way. I'm sure this comes from our experiences. I did not have help from my parents in college. It is my strong belief that due to my late maturing in some matters and my A.D.D. that if I had been coddled somewhat for a time I would have done better in my life overall. I grew up eventually. By the time I did, it was too late. Now I will be punished for the rest of my life for something that was somewhat beyond my control. As an extreme example, it's sort of like denying a job/scholarship/opportunity to an adult because he/she wet the bed when they were 5.

 

So I can accept that I'm biased. But even if I let go of that bias, it strikes me that a hard line either direction is foolishness. Each person is different and should be treated according to their best interests, character, needs, etc. Each situation is different. Each person will respond differently to any given approach.

 

There are great lessons to be learned from trials and self-reliance, and there are great lessons to be learned from blessings and mercy. Extremes in either regard are harmful.

[NightSG]

The two-car discount on insurance is more expensive than the 5 car discount (i.e. having a shared policy with the extended family).

True, but that also depends on how the insurance is handled; I was on a separate policy shortly after I turned 18 even though family still paid for it while I was in school. The rule was they paid the base price and any ticket increases would be my problem. Mom and I got speeding tickets within a couple days of each other, and she couldn't figure out how much of the increase should be mine on the shared policy.

 

Washing 2 sets of clothes costs the same whether or not these people are married.

That depends on how you wash; if you dump it all together and wash every time there's a full load, (and only when there's a full load) sure. If you separate it, and one or more loads have room for more, then two people can more efficiently make use of those loads. It also becomes considerably more practical to look for a used W/D when two people will be sharing it. (And when they don't have the roommate issue of what happens to it when one moves out.) You're sharing sheets, blankets, maybe towels, and things like the fluffy little mat around the toilet, so that part of the laundry is effectively cut in half. (And yes, I had the fluffy toilet mat for a while because I had ceramic tile in the bathroom and that stuff is cold when you're barefoot. I could leap from the carpeted hall to the little mat in my sleep.)

 

Likewise food for 2 costs the same whether or not you're married.

 

Again, usage of standard sizes is the key; I've never mastered getting a single serving of rice from the cooker, nor do I generally eat an entire can of anything other than soup by myself in one sitting, so things that will spoil soon are often wasted, when they wouldn't be if shared with someone else.

The simple matter of cutting rent in half (or nearly so; my aunt and uncle upgraded to a one-bedroom apartment when they got married in college, because in the efficiencies they'd had, there was no way for one to stay up studying late while the other slept - they went from $450 each to $550 for both of them) will give back a significant chunk of the income of most people poor enough to care. If both are students, then a little care in scheduling may allow them to mothball or even sell a car until graduation.

Too many people seem to think they have to buy and furnish a house as part of getting married, or at least upgrade to renting a house instead of apartments. My ex wife and I spent the first year on a twin bed in the same rented one bedroom house she'd had, then another two years on a full. The only furniture we acquired in the first couple years was a mix of gifts and garage sale finds. Overall expenses went way down compared to our separate living costs.

Edited January 11, 2016 by NightSG

[Backroads]

Anatess, your story about your brother avoiding coaching makes me laugh. The two major I was picking between were both in education, so I was forever doomed to be not rich, but picking elementary ed (my degree) over a vague secondary ed subject probably made my career easier. More jobs. Yes, I'd say your brother lucked out with that choice.

My husband started his major with a good career outlook... then the economy tanked and now the geologists won't retire. Realistically he will need a master's to wiggle into that field at this time, but he's making decent money in the security field, so, hey. One of his geology buddies snagged an entry level job in a genetics lab and is back in school in hopes to go further in that field.

Majors be crazy these days.

[Guest]

Anatess, your story about your brother avoiding coaching makes me laugh. The two major I was picking between were both in education, so I was forever doomed to be not rich, but picking elementary ed (my degree) over a vague secondary ed subject probably made my career easier. More jobs. Yes, I'd say your brother lucked out with that choice.

My husband started his major with a good career outlook... then the economy tanked and now the geologists won't retire. Realistically he will need a master's to wiggle into that field at this time, but he's making decent money in the security field, so, hey. One of his geology buddies snagged an entry level job in a genetics lab and is back in school in hopes to go further in that field.

Majors be crazy these days.

 

We have several educators in my extended family.  Grandpa was a high school principal, my grandma an elementary school teacher.  One of their kids - my aunt - was also an elementary school teacher teaching at the same school as my grandmother.  She has a daughter - my cousin - who is an elementary school teacher, not only teaching at the same school but teaching at the same classroom my grandmother taught in!  Several kids in that branch of my family are teachers - most of them in Elementary or High School, the rest are college professors.  Out of the 9 kids, this branch are the least paid group.  But they are the most respected.  There was one time, some young politician was running against my uncle and my aunt told him - I knew you when you were in 3rd grade with snot running down your nose and can barely read and write - I made you literate .... that killed his campaign.  Hah hah.

[Guest]

Some of these posts make me so thankful to be a part of 2 families who agree that we're all in this together. We've been on the giving and receiving end, and each was a blessing in its own way.

[The Folk Prophet]

If you can't afford to get that roommate pregnant right away, then don't; 

 

This goes pretty much directly counter to our church counsel.

[Guest]

Church counsel doesn't say you have to start having babies right away. It says it's a choice to be made between the couple and the Lord. 

[omegaseamaster75]

This goes pretty much directly counter to our church counsel.

I'd like to see proof of this

[Windseeker]

I really like this article. I'm past being able to do any of this with my kids, but thought I'd post it anyway. I think it has some great ideas. 

 

http://qz.com/165716/how-i-made-sure-all-12-of-my-kids-could-pay-for-college-themselves/

Edited January 11, 2016 by Windseeker

[Backroads]

If you can't afford to get that roommate pregnant right away, then don't;

 

 

This goes pretty much directly counter to our church counsel.

 

 

Church counsel doesn't say you have to start having babies right away. It says it's a choice to be made between the couple and the Lord. 

 

 

I'd like to see proof of this

 

What I've heard is GAs advise we shouldn't wait to have kids based on money and whatnot, and I can't help but think part of that advice was to those who wait until they're making the big bucks of later-career salaries, along with a host of other so-called-reasons-to-wait. Don't justify putting off a family because of every little thing. But, like Eowyn said, it's ultimately up to each couple and the Lord.

 

So I agree, I've never seen the Church advise against not having a honeymoon baby.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Speaking of honeymoon babies...The advice I give my kids on this topic is wait a year.  

 

I had a honeymoon baby--because I was 28 when I got married and GardnerParakeet was 33.  We didn't want to waste any more time.  I would not go so far as to say I regret it, BUT...I think the first marriage is tricky enough (getting used to living together, working out who will do household chores and yard work, how you will handle $$$ and what to spend it on, and on and on) without adding pregnancy hormones into the mix.

 

Josiah, if you're reading this...for some women pregnancy hormones are like PMS times 10.  In other words lots of crying for no particular reason, and when she's not crying she's mad...don't say I didn't warn you.  LOL!  

 

Once during that first year, I made chicken soup from scratch.  It was literally only chicken, noodles and water, but hey I deboned the chicken and made the noodles from scratch so I was proud of myself.  (I have a very limited sense of smell and taste, that's why I didn't realize how sorely it was lacking.)  My sweetheart tactfully said, "It needs salt."  

 

It needed a lot more than that, but I just started crying.  I sobbed.  I was hurt and mad.  I slaved over that soup all day, and all he could say was "needs salt"???   

 

And that was just one day...imagine 9 months of that.  

[The Folk Prophet]

Of course it's up to the couple and the Lord. It's still advised to not put off having children.

[NightSG]

Josiah, if you're reading this...for some women pregnancy hormones are like PMS times 10.

And don't even think about how bad the gas can get. I wear, there were flies lined up at the door begging to be let out, and buzzards wouldn't even circle over the house.

 

Of course it's up to the couple and the Lord. It's still advised to not put off having children.

It's advised not to put it off when it's already practical. My aunt and uncle did that, and while they're no doubt financially better off for it, they weren't hurting just a couple years after college, and now they often regret not having their kids when they were in their early to mid twenties and already quite stable. They might not have the gorgeous custom house on the hill with the basketball court and saltwater pool with natural rock surrounds that they have now, but they almost certainly would still be very well off, and not waiting for their 17 year old to get through college so they can retire. (Yeah, they could easily retire and pay tuition from extra savings, but that's just not the way my family does it; you work until your kids graduate and then retirement becomes an option.)

I'm pretty sure no GA would advise a couple to start trying for a baby if they're dependent on food assistance and without an expectation of being financially stable enough to support themselves and the baby in the next nine months. That advice was geared more toward some of the mid singles we have who are fast approaching 40, never married, working on a PhD or trying to get their career right where they want it before "letting a relationship get in the way."

Edited January 11, 2016 by NightSG

[The Folk Prophet]

I'd like to see proof of this

 

Eternal Marriage Student Manual, (2003), 14–18

The ultimate treasures on earth and in heaven are our children and our posterity.

—Elder Dallin H. Oaks

Selected Teachings

The Family: A Proclamation to the World

“We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children. …

“The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.

“We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan” (Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102).

First Presidency—Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark Jr., David O. McKay

“By virtue of the authority in us vested as the First Presidency of the Church, we warn our people. …

“Amongst His earliest commands to Adam and Eve, the Lord said: ‘Multiply and replenish the earth.’ He has repeated that command in our day. He has again revealed in this, the last dispensation, the principle of the eternity of the marriage covenant. …

“The Lord has told us that it is the duty of every husband and wife to obey the command given to Adam to multiply and replenish the earth, so that the legions of choice spirits waiting for their tabernacles of flesh may come here and move forward under God’s great design to become perfect souls, for without these fleshly tabernacles they cannot progress to their God-planned destiny. Thus, every husband and wife should become a father and a mother in Israel to children born under the holy, eternal covenant” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1942, 11–12).

President Joseph F. Smith

“Motherhood lies at the foundation of happiness in the home, and of prosperity in the nation. God has laid upon men and women very sacred obligations with respect to motherhood, and they are obligations that cannot be disregarded without invoking divine displeasure. In 1 Timothy 2:13–15, we are told that ‘Adam was first formed, then Eve. …’ Can she be saved without child-bearing? She indeed takes an awful risk if she wilfully disregards what is a pronounced requirement of God” (Gospel Doctrine, 288–89).

President David O. McKay

“Love realizes his sweetest happiness and his most divine consummation in the home where the coming of children is not restricted, where they are made most welcome, and where the duties of parenthood are accepted as a co-partnership with the eternal Creator.

“In all this, however, the mother’s health should be guarded. In the realm of wifehood, the woman should reign supreme” (Gospel Ideals, 469).

President Joseph Fielding Smith

“The family is the most important organization in time or in eternity. Our purpose in life is to create for ourselves eternal family units. There is nothing that will ever come into your family life that is as important as the sealing blessings of the temple and then keeping the covenants made in connection with this order of celestial marriage” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1972, 13; or Ensign, July 1972, 27).

President Spencer W. Kimball

“Tomorrow when I repeat the phrases that will bind you for eternity, I shall say the same impressive words that the Lord said to that handsome youth and his lovely bride in the Garden of Eden: ‘Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth.’ …

“… You came to get for yourself a mortal body that could become perfected, immortalized, and you understood that you were to act in partnership with God in providing bodies for other spirits. … And so you will not postpone parenthood. There will be rationalists who will name to you numerous reasons for postponement. Of course, it will be harder to get your college degrees or your financial start with a family, but strength like yours will be undaunted in the face of difficult obstacles. Have your family as the Lord intended. Of course it is expensive, but you will find a way, and besides, it is often those children who grow up with responsibility and hardships who carry on the world’s work” (“John and Mary, Beginning Life Together,”New Era, June 1975, 8).

“Supreme happiness in marriage is governed considerably by a primary factor—that of the bearing and rearing of children. Too many young people set their minds, determining they will not marry or have children until they are more secure, until the military service period is over; until the college degree is secured; until the occupation is more well-defined; until the debts are paid; or until it is more convenient. They have forgotten that the first commandment is to ‘be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.’ (Genesis 1:28.) And so brides continue their employment and husbands encourage it, and contraceptives are used to prevent conception. Relatives and friends and even mothers sometimes encourage birth control for their young newlyweds. But the excuses are many, mostly weak. The wife is not robust; the family budget will not feed extra mouths; or the expense of the doctor, hospital, and other incidentals is too great; it will disturb social life; it would prevent two salaries; and so abnormal living prevents the birth of children. The Church cannot approve nor condone the measures which so greatly limit the family” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 328–29).

Edited January 11, 2016 by The Folk Prophet

[The Folk Prophet]

It's advised not to put it off when it's already practical. 

 

No. It is advised to not put it off. The health of the mother is to be considered. Yes. And, of course, one should always follow the Spirit. But it has been distinctly advised against waiting until it is practical.

[NightSG]

In order to follow that counsel to its fullest, women need to be getting married and pregnant at the onset of menses. Otherwise they're putting off having children for lesser reasons. I doubt you'd find any support for that among Church leadership for the simple reason that we are expected to prepare ourselves to support and guide children before having them, and modern society makes it rather difficult to complete certain steps of that preparation before age 18/19/20. Marriage is one of those steps, but by no means does it always have to be the last one; putting off marriage because you're not ready to have children is not somehow more righteous than marrying while not ready, and then waiting to have the children.

If you're not going to be ready to have children until you're 25 either way, then refusing to marry at 20 is just delaying one of the most critical steps in the process until you're ready to finish the whole thing. Might as well wait until just before mission age to get baptized at that rate. (Well, ok, a year before mission age, but still, the process doesn't have to be held until all the waterfowl are completely linearized just so you can blast through multiple steps as quickly as possible.)

Edited January 11, 2016 by NightSG

[omegaseamaster75]

Congrats on your google search abilities, but I haven't see a "thus saith the Lord"