37 is a tight window if you meet someone at 35. And it’s still risky to both mother and child:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4418963/

And “risky” here means potential of death or serious defect in child, or death for the mother. It’s irresponsible, unethical, and I don’t understand any parent that would risk the health of their child.

Some can but most won't. https://images.theconversation.com/files/53777/original/2yc4...

>If you only want one or two kids

This is nuts. Remember, the minimum birth rate is 2.1. Every single woman you've ever met must have 2.1 children just to keep population constant. I'm sure you've met some women who wouldn't be great mothers... which just increases the burden on everyone else!

Just think about the timeline here. Start having children at 35, have your third kid at 38? By the time your youngest is 18 you'll be 56! This is supposed to be the standard life plan, the thing everybody does?

"What about immigration?"

Mexico, Brazil and India already have below-replacement fertility. Where are all these immigrants supposed to come from?

No one is obligated to have any children, let alone three. The population growth rate should have absolutely zero influence on your decision to reproduce.