Daniela Katzenberger: Has the family planning been completed?

Daniela Katzenberger
"For us it is no longer an issue at all"

Daniela Katzenberger is fed up with baby questions.


Again and again Daniela Katzenberger has to be asked about a second baby. In the meantime, it is not only getting on her nerves, but also on the substance. Because an answer has long been found, so the cat.

Daniela Katzenberger, 34, and Lucas Cordalis, 53, lead a happy family life with their daughter Sophia, 5. They would have liked to add another member, but it had never worked out with a second baby. By now they have finished family planning, says Dani now.

Daniela Katzenberger: "That was my biggest mistake"

Daniela Katzenberger has been a mother for almost six years and for at least as long she has to keep asking herself whether and when Sophia would have a sibling. The 34-year-old now deeply regrets that she once replied that she wanted a second baby. "That was the biggest mistake I've ever said that I want a second child," she explains in an interview with RTL. Your answer at the time started a wave that could no longer be stopped. Again and again she had to read the headlines about herself, she was repeatedly confronted with the topic. Both in the press and privately.

Lucas would have wanted a second baby

While Daniela Katzenberger was able to conclude with the topic of having children quite quickly, her husband Lucas held on to it for longer. "I really would have liked my father to be able to hold a little Constantin in his arms," ​​said the 53-year-old. And that's why the two tried for years to have another child – so much that at some point their relationship suffered as a result. "Sex after ovulation app, that was the romance killer and at some point I didn't feel like it anymore," said the 34-year-old recently openly on Instagram.

Desire to have children put aside

In the meantime, the couple has drawn a line under family planning. "For us it is no longer an issue at all," says Daniela in an interview with Frauke Ludowig.

Source used:,

This article originally appeared on