https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/27/super-founders-median-age-of...

I thought it DID increase with age. A quick search suggests that to be the case, but I stand by to be corrected.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/693467/rate-of-new-entre...

If you can meet all their needs, then whatever you have in excess certainly can be gambled if it can improve both of your odds, but only beyond that baseline threshold. That resource threshold for a parent is going to be higher than for a single person in the same situation, so you inherently have less resources to gamble than someone without a kid.

I would consider less resources as being less free to take unneeded risk, although it really just means you have less you can risk not that you have less ability to risk (unless of course you're already at or below that child's baseline needs where you're making sacrifices of your own needs for them). You could make further sacrifices on your own needs to gamble if that doesn't effect the child but chances are, it's going to effect both of you.

Theres an absolute magnitude of wealth/resources one needs to exceed before they start playing the capital gamble gamble, at least when your risk has significant effects on someone else, especially your own child.