Have kids, freeze them; thaw them later

It sounds outrageous when stated so succinctly, but this idea was first brought to my attention through the writings of Robert Heinlein, the dean of science fiction, and based upon an easily observed fact: there is a huge gap between the best biological age for bearing children (late teens) and the best age for being a parent (late thirties to late forties).
Face it: by the time you reach 40 years of age, you are more mature, more financially secure, more sure of your values, more experienced, you are better able to distinguish between what is eternal and what is merely a fad, etc. You are easily a better parent than you were as a teen.

However, our society conspires against you: children are grouped in school according to age, which is the cheapest, easiest, and fastest method of classification. It is also the worst.
Instead of lumping them by birthyear, they could be better separated according to developmental stage, intelligence, interests, etc.

All through their lives, children are segregated into the ghetto of their age groups, cut off from all contact with adults other than those in a supervisory capacity (teachers, mothers, etc.) and soon cut off from those younger than themselves.
Our culture is divided into three distinct groups: children, working-age adults, and senior citizens. Contact between and among these groups is rigidly controlled: especially the older members of society who may have seen that the emperor is naked are not allowed to contaminate the minds of the working class or the next generation of drones.

Due to this segregation, children begin dating in their age group.
Despite all of the evidence that females mature faster- biology forces it upon them- girls continue to date boys their own age who are seldom as mature as they are.

The kids, of course, are discouraged from engaging in premarital sex play.
How many get married to relieve sexual tension?
For the boys, especially, it is a disaster: a few weeks of honeymoon followed by a lifetime of responsibility and curtailed freedom.
Of course the divorce rate is high; it would be astonishing if it were not.

Heinlein suggested in one of his novels that girls have children in their late teens or early twenties, whether naturally or by test-tube babies, nurture them for six months or so, then suspend them cryogenically (freeze them).
Then the new parent could go off to wander the world for a while, see other lands and other people, take those business risks which are not available to a parent with children to feed, have those adventures which parenthood would otherwise deny them, and come back when they are settled down and the wild oats are sown.
Then the children could be re-animated (thawed out, to be crude) and taken to a loving home whose parents DO NOT RESENT THE KIDS IN ANY WAY FOR DEPRIVING THEM OF THEIR FUN.

This is the real cause of much of the resentment. Every kid dreams of the things that can be done "when I grow up". Yet these things are denied them by the responsibility of raising a family. Conscious or unconscious, this resentment manifests itself in the parent's attitude towards the kid.

How does this relate to us?
1) "Have sex? Hell, no! You wait until you are grown up and married the way I had to."
2) "Have sex? No, baby, the church says it's bad, and this idea is constantly reinforced by the media, who also have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo."