Advanced search

Honest opinions is 42 too old....

(244 Posts)
Summerwood1 Sat 02-May-15 09:19:52

To be thinking about having one last baby? I have a 10 year old daughter and would love to start again!!!

mollyonthemove Sat 02-May-15 09:22:37

I was 41 when I had dd2! we already had dd1 who was 15 and D's who was 5. It was a bit of a shock but wouldn't change it at all. I feel almost sad now she's nearly 10 and we have no more littlies in the house sad

froggyjump Sat 02-May-15 09:22:57

Go for it if you have the energy. I had DS3 at 40 and while he is lovely, I'm much more knackered than I was the first (and second) time around.

pollypocket123 Sat 02-May-15 09:23:37

Go for it if it's what you want!

Gottagetmoving Sat 02-May-15 09:24:06

No its not too old if you feel ready to do it. Go for it.

FirstWeTakeManhattan Sat 02-May-15 09:25:28

Nope, not if you're fit and healthy. I just had our third at 42. I have two friends who gave birth at 42, one at 43 and another at 46. They are all fabulous, happy mothers.

SummerHouse Sat 02-May-15 09:26:27

Its just a number. At 39 I am too old but that's not to say a 45 year old is too old. Iyswim, smile

TwoOddSocks Sat 02-May-15 09:26:43

I wouldn't have a baby at 42 because I'd be far too paranoid about the genetic risks for the baby. Also my dad (who had a very healthy lifestyle and no history of cancer) died suddenly of cancer at 56. One of my good friends, 50 is currently going through cancer and has two almost teenaged sons she is desperately scared of leaving behind. Of course people can die at any age but the chances of you leaving behind not yet grown up children increase the older you are when you have them.

That said I'm risk averse, the level of risk you're happy to accept may be much higher.

Kampeki Sat 02-May-15 09:28:12

If you're fit and healthy, go for it. A friend of mine had her youngest at 45.

Philoslothy Sat 02-May-15 09:28:31

I am on my 40s and expecting number 6, was tired early on but was also ill, the rest of the pregnancy has been a breeze because I am quite healthy and fit. I would love one more but have accepted that this will probably be my last child.

Stopandlook Sat 02-May-15 09:29:10

If you're fit and healthy and can mange the sleep deprivation then no, not too old imo

Flugdrachen Sat 02-May-15 09:30:21

my youngest sibling was born when my mum was 42 (she had me at 21!).

I don't think it is too old - they had more money/better house, could pay for private school etc. Having children in your late 30s & 40s is not at all unusual where we live (e.g. I had my eldest at 25 & dh & I am by far the youngest parents when we go to parents' evening etc) ... so dsis certainly wasn't unusual.

My parents are now in their early 60s & are finding the fact that they have to work for another 5+ years to support dsis through university etc slightly hard - they probably would have taken semi-retirement 3/4 years ago if they hadn't had another child.

I have a big-ish age gap (6 years) between my first & second & that was fine too smile

MrsWooster Sat 02-May-15 09:31:39

had my first at 43, second at 46. absolutely knackered all the time but wouldn't change a ting. ( apart from having enough money for Help nothing fancy, just a fulltime housekeeper...cleaner.. account... Maybe one day!)

Only1scoop Sat 02-May-15 09:31:52

No I'm the same age and considering but probably for wrong reasons.

Thought scares me though.

notquitegrownup2 Sat 02-May-15 09:35:52

No there's a big group of 40+ mums on here. I had ds2 at 41 and have several good friends who have had babies well into their forties - two had their first child at 45 or 46!. Only you know how you feel.

Please don't be put off by scare stories about genetic risks. Find out the real info. 100 years ago it was very usual, and quite natural for women to still be giving birth well into their forties. It is a modern phenomenon with mothers having the choice to stop giving birth younger, and some of the increased genetic risks are actually balanced out by decreasing risks for other conditions and problems.

Whether you have the energy or not is up to you, but you sound excited by the idea. There are some advantages of being older - a little more financially or socially secure perhaps. Some people worry about what happens in teenage or beyond, but my 90 year old MIL is still working and very actively involved in her children's lives, so it doesn't have to be all doom and gloom.

Best of luck whatever you decide.

professornangnang Sat 02-May-15 09:36:04

I think you have to think forward a little - 50 when the child is 8 and 60 when the child is 18. If you're happy with that then go for it. I definitely wouldn't want an 8 year old at 50 but it suits lots of other people fine. Horses for courses.

Flugdrachen Sat 02-May-15 09:36:10

while my mum was pregnant with dsis she re-trained as a midwife (obviously full time) & worked 4 evenings a week as a fitness instructor - she took her last class when she was 36 weeks pregnant. She may be an outlier when it comes to being fit & healthy!

She didn't find the pregnancy any harder than her others (home birth etc) but was seriously sleep deprived for the first couple of years - that may have been more to do with the working full time though. They considered having another one after dsis but the lack of sleep put them off.

And of course dsis (now 20) is utterly adored by us & all her nieces & nephews (she, my eldest dd & niece are very close).

Rebecca2014 Sat 02-May-15 09:39:12

I would never do it but I had my first child at the age of 22 so I want be spending my 40s in peace.

Do what you feel is right for you.

FoxyLoxie Sat 02-May-15 09:49:25

It's really interesting on mumsnet how much encouragement there is to have babies well into your forties. Considering all the risks including stillbirth and Down's syndrome, women on here just tell eachother they had a child no problems, or someone they knew had a child with no issues, and subsequently that should be a good enough reason for the OP to consider it. It's always deemed on here that if you're fit and healthy, everything will be hunky dory. It's a hated opinion on mumsnet I'm well aware.

Does anyone who willingly goes ahead having children (not as an accident I stress) into their forties think about what life will be like for that child with older parents? Not to mention how crippling it is to have a miscarriage or stillbirth to deal with when you have other children to look after and are also affected by it. I would say weigh everything up and don't be naive about the reality. People think things will be different for them for some reason, but it's a decision that doesn't just affect you as a mother, rather the ones around you too, including that baby.

Haroldplaystheharmonica Sat 02-May-15 10:11:00

I completely agree Foxy. On here, it's as if having your family in your 40's is the most normal thing to do whereas I don't know anyone over the age of 38 who's had a baby. There's no way I could have another now. I'm 39 with two children (8 and 10) and every month they seem to grow up and we can do more with them. It's fab being able to look forward to weekends away where all the kids go off playing for hours and we can enjoy ourselves. No more babies for me!

Floisme Sat 02-May-15 10:19:08

If you don't know anyone over 38 who's had a baby then maybe you're not best placed to be giving advice?

IFinishedTheBiscuits Sat 02-May-15 10:19:19

I wouldn't ask anyone else because it's nothing to do with anyone else. You'll get opinions both ways here and they'll be based off of other peoples personal experiences and situations but that's not your situation.

And Foxy, I'd imagine that anyone who chooses to have a child in their forties thinks about what life will look like for that child. In some cases it might look a lot better than life for a child born in mum's thirties during a different relationship.
And life for a child who is planned, wanted and loved will always look better than for a child who is unwanted or resented, whatever the age of the parents.

SoleSource Sat 02-May-15 10:34:53

I was twenty four and had a baby severely disabled because of low birth weight. Women in their twenties do not have babies! hmm

Marynary Sat 02-May-15 10:39:00

It isn't too old if you can get pregnant and not miscarry. You may not be that fertile now though (I think 42 is the average age for the last child in developing countries) and there is a much higher risk that the baby will have down syndrome and other abnormalities.

Blueberrymuffint0p Sat 02-May-15 10:40:40

I hope you don't mind me asking but why now after a 10 year gap?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now