Baby first or house first?

posted 2 months ago in TTC
Post # 16
Member
984 posts
Busy bee

Where I live, it’s harder to become a home owner with children – they slash the amount tou can borrow becasue they deem your outgoings to be higher (of course!). So in general I would say it’s better to be on the property ladder first. But, if I was facing IVF, I would be putting baby first for sure. 

Good luck to you, sounds like you’re in for an exciting year!

Post # 17
Member
8016 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: October 2013

baby, while you have IF coverage.  i needed multiple rounds of IVF and we were mostly OOP.  i was thankful i already owned a house because i don’t know if we could ever afford it after DS. 

Post # 18
Member
331 posts
Helper bee

Def. Baby first. I was in a similar boat as you and we chose to buy a house, furnish said house, travel…and I wish we had started TTC much earlier. 

I am getting ready for my first IVF in August.

Plenty of people have families in apartments. Most of Europe does – we were just in Italy and I am 100% Polish so I can def. attest to this… unless they are super rich or have a house passed down from family (like in farm areas where my family is from) then most live in apartments and have babies.

 

Post # 19
Member
1009 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: December 2017

My FI and I are getting married in Dec, will hopefully buy land and start building within the first year, and wil start TTC after a year. So I don’t know whether the baby will come before the house is finished or vice versa. In your case though I’d definitely start IVF while you have it covered by insurance!

Post # 20
Member
2500 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: July 2014

In your case, I would definitely do IVF first.  That insurance plan is HUGE, and babies don’t need a lot of space.  Even teenagers can manage in smaller homes than most middle class Americans are accustomed too… it just means that they are going to have to spend more time out of the house- joining clubs, sports teams, music, etc instead of bonking down on internet/tv/video games etc.  Worst comes to worst, and you use up all your money on TTC, you could always rent a house in the suburbs later.  You can’t rent a baby and it is hard to find good financial help for fertility treatment.  I would look at this as a positive sign that you guys are meant to do a baby first!

There are loads and loads of baby products out there, which makes parents freak out that they need a huge space for all of them.  Most of these products are not necessary.  All you really need is a crib, and maybe a nice quilt or activity mat for tummy time, and a bouncer or portable swing would be a bonus. You don’t need a million baby holding devices (it isn’t great for babies to spend more than a couple hours in them anyways), you can change a diaper on a pad anywhere, and a baby doesn’t even need a huge furniture set to store their ity bitty clothes (even plastic bins would suffice).  

Post # 21
Member
1027 posts
Bumble bee

dizzybee130 :  we’re in a very similar situation to you. We rent, but the money we spend on rent is identical to a standard mortgage on a regular 3-4 bedroom house in the suburbs of this particular city. We also have enough saved right now for a down payment on a 2 bedroom but can save much more if we rent another year. We just can’t afford to buy in the city we live in, as a studio goes for 715K and a 1 bedroom over a million. So we are enjoying the amenities and short commute time all we can, secure in our ability to buy a home when we so choose. We will most likely be getting pregnant while still renting a 1 BR apartment. I had to let go of my fantasies of having a nursery all set up before a baby comes (we’re not pregnant right now btw.) But everyone I know has their infant in their room with them for at least the first 6 months so realistically, there’s no need for him or her to have their own room for about a year. I hear baby things take up a lot of room and it may be tight, but def doable. Don’t forget you’ll be pregnant for a whole 9 months too. If I were you, with your current insurance, I’d def get pregnant first (as long as you do have enough saved for a down payment for a house.) 

Post # 22
Member
537 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: December 2018

Baby first seems like the way to go. You don’t need a house to raise a child.

Post # 23
Member
2212 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2013

as PP has mentioned talk to a dr first because that $20K of IVF might not really cover much for what you need to do – generally they cover retrieval, IVF and then implantation. If you need a donor egg, freezing eggs, thawing eggs, testing eggs, freezing sperm, thawing sperm, etc that isn’t covered (or at least it isn’t on my insurance)

I don’t want to sound like a downer but before you get all excited and think its a blank check for $20K make sure you know what the exact details are

for my DH and I, even though we need IVF due to genetic issues and my insurance coveres it with no limits/maxes I will still be looking at $15-25K out of pocket (due to freezing/thawing and testing embryo)

Post # 24
Member
4987 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: June 2015

dizzybee130 :  I was ready to pop in and say house first, but given your situation, it’s baby time.  Absolutely get that underway while you have the insurance coverage – don’t take the chance that you’ll lose that opportunity if your boss can’t pull the right strings.

My reasoning otherwise would be that we’re putting together baby furniture and realizing it can’t fit where we have space.  You may struggle a bit to squeeze baby into a 1-bedroom but if you go two and reserve that second bedroom specifically for baby, you’ll be fine.  Our spare doesn’t have a heater so it’s a no-go and has been a real pain (we’re buying space saving furniture as a result instead of using the stuff we were given free).

Post # 25
Member
7 posts
Newbee

dizzybee130 :    idk why you’re even questioning this. I would immediately do baby while I had the ivf coverage. And don’t get hung up on how your parents were married so long before having kids. They were probably also younger. We aren’t our parents and it’s ok to do things differently. My sister and her husband had their baby before buying a house and even lived in a couple different rental places before being able to buy a house and it was no problem. She waited to have her first until she was 36 and now is struggling to have second. There is no time to waste especially if you want more than one child. And considering you said the whole ivf thing…who knows at what time that will be successful right? So if it was me I would hurry my ass on baby. A house can be bought any time. Even in your 40s if need be! It’s just a house! Babies can only be had for so long however. And they’re your future children. Do it for them. If you’re anything like me then you already love them even though they’re not even here yet. They are much much more important than some inatimate bricks and walls. You’ll never regret not buying a house sooner because you’ll find a way to get one at some point and it’s just materials at the end of the day. Waiting too long to have children and then not getting to have as many as you wanted would end in forever lifetime regret however. You won’t even give a shit about the house when you’re 90 anyways right? But all your kids & grandkids are what you’ll care about.

 

Live like it’s your last day. Material physical things or your beloved precious babies? If an asteroid was hurling towards earth and we were all going to die what would you be clinging to and caring about? Your children or your house? Pick the one you’d care the most about if the world and life was ending. This is how I approach life and decide what matters more to me about everything. My mom died at 50 and she constantly said how thankful she was to have had us 3 kids. And she would always say how happy she was that she got to have me (I’m the third child) because the other 2 were hell and crazy lol. I’ll always remember seeing relief in her eyes for having had her 3 children. She would say often “idk what I would have done if I didn’t have you kids!”

Post # 26
Member
21 posts
Newbee

Baby baby! I think the people that are always so pushy on the “must buy house before children” train are the ones who live in the suburbs. In major cities buying is not affordable and if you arent planning on being a city dweller forever it doesnt really make sense. A city baby sounds great – im sure itll be a blast to do tons of fun city type things with your baby! That along with the stellar insurance offering the IVF coverage! Good luck! 

Post # 27
Member
454 posts
Helper bee

Baby, especially with your current IVF coverage! I’m a pregnant renter myself. We aren’t in a rush to buy a house because we are both picky lol! We have a down payment ready, but no house has made us feel like we need to make an offer so we are taking our time. I don’t think it is necessary to buy a house first; you have a place to live and it sounds like you are managing fine. Lots of people have children without purchasing a home. 

Post # 28
Member
471 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: August 2021

I say absolutely start the process of IVF like yesterday with your coverage and opportunities. The rest can be worked out but IVF/biology is one thing you canʻt make up for later.

Leave a comment


Get our weekly roundup of the best of Weddingbee.
I agree to receive emails from the site. I can withdraw my consent at any time by unsubscribing.

Find Amazing Vendors