Am i too old to have a baby?

I had my 1st at 40. 2nd at 42. I don't know any different because I don't know what it's like to have children younger. Although,I first was harder than the 2nd and I exhausted all the time.

I had my DS2 at 39. Would I want to do it again at 43, no I wouldn't - however that's me.
If you want another child and you both agree then do what's right for both of you and your family.
Lots of judgemental people on here tonight.

I was 41 when I had my son. I just never felt bothered about having children before then even though I’d been with my partner for 19 years by that point. My son is 14 and he’s the light of my life. I wouldn’t change a thing except I did want a sibling for him and had three miscarriages after him so stopped trying at 43.
It’s a totally personal thing and I wouldn’t care two hoots about someone else’s opinion about your age. Xx

Only you know your financial circumstances and whether you would cope with being a mother again in your forties. Personally, I don't think that there is anything wrong with it if the circumstances are right.

You'll get a lot of smug people on this thread who had the amount of children that they wanted by the age of 35 telling you that you are too old. For whatever reason, these same people wouldn't say a 43 year old man was too old.

For me the reasons I'd never deliberately try for a dc 40+ or even 36+ tbh is the risk of chromosomal disorders.

I'd not want the invasive tests/ amino etc.

What if the amnio ended a healthy pregnancy?

I've known 2 women to have late TFMR and it's horrific. You don't know the extent of the problems until often well over 20 weeks and abortion at that stage is brutal. I don't think I'd survive the trauma.

So it's a no from me but it's your body your choice.

I had exactly the same experience of menopause as @RampantIvy . Maybe I was lucky but it was nothing much at all. A few 60 second warm feelings.

My other children loved the baby (why wouldn't they?)

Because babies are noisy, smelly and very disruptive of your routines?

I guess the difference is that a 43 year old man's body wouldn't have to cope with being pregnant and giving birth at an older age. Also men don't go through the menopause so they wouldn't be dealing with all of the exhausting physical and hormonal changes whilst also trying to keep up with the physical demands of having young kids.

You won’t know until you try.

Thank you for adding that balance, at 42 I was having nightmares reading this thread! Hoping I lean towards your experience and not the utter doom and gloom listed on here

I'm in London media-type circles and having kids in your 40s is completely normal. Everyone is more settled, has more resources, most of us own properties, careers sorted.

LOL at being better able to cope in your thirties if your partner left. I would have been a mess.

I had a baby at 45 and it was a fabulous pregnancy, birth and recovery. My other children loved the baby (why wouldn't they?) and the baby has been a beautiful addition to our blended family. I look my now 6 year old and I'm amazed my body made that miracle and I'd do it all again. My children keep me young and I feel the same now as I did when I was 30.

Ahh ok, so your saying a woman who is left to be a single parent at 45, is going to have a harder time than a woman left to be a single parent at 30? I think that’s debatable, so much depends on personal circumstances.

Just to add, some people seem to be jumping to conclusions as to what my opinion is when I’m simply just curious about people’s opinions. I’m not judging.

I’ll leave this thread now because I don’t want to derail, but OP, for what it’s worth, I wouldn’t do it for all the money in the world!! I also wouldn’t have a baby with a man over 40. But, I believe it’s completely a personal choice and as long as you consider all the risks, you should be free to make your own choice.

@Naunet lol no. You still don't get it.

When you're 30 and your partner leaves you you are in a much better position to handle parenting alone in terms of energy and health than you would be at 45. At 30 you might have parents to help you out. At 45 you will be a carer to your elderly parents instead.

Being abandoned is a risk at any age, but handling the consequences when you're almost 50 running around a toddler is just an extra layer or hardship and shittines...

Hence why the risk of parenting along should be assessed in conjunction with your age

@Thepeopleversuswork, I should have said conceive, not parent. Shame I didn’t, I could have saved you a lot of pointless typing.

43 is not too old if you are healthy but I imagine your 16 yo would be pretty pissed off.
Focus on your existing kids

When we had our two DCs my DH was 43 and 46 years old respectively.

For us, for various reasons, having children later in life was unavoidable - we met fairly 'late' and we had very unstable housing and employment for the first few years. So I wouldn't have changed it - because the only alternative would have been not to have our children.

However, as time goes on we become more and more acutely aware of how much age does make a difference.

My DH has had far less energy to play actively with our children than he had with his nieces and nephews in their younger years a decade earlier. He is slowing up, as our children are moving towards their teenage years.

Financially it's not ideal, to be mid 50's and thinking more urgently about planning to have enough retirement provision in the future - and still with youngish children to fund through teenage years and potentially Uni.

And the chances of ill health at some point in the next decade do feel much higher than in the past. My DH's Dad died suddenly at 57 of a sudden-onset condition. My DH is now 56, he is acutely aware of the greater possibility that things might go wrong in the next few years - and what that would mean for our children.

Not to mention, having children late has a huge effect on from a family relationships perspective. Many of our elderly relatives have died in the last few years, it has meant children never meeting their grandparents or their grandparents being too elderly and struggling with dementia to have a relationship with them.

So whilst it's true that clearly a man doesn't have a biological clock running down in the same way as a woman (although sperm quality does decline with age) yes, actually, I do think a man of 43 is also approaching being too old - it can certainly be done, but I think it's far from ideal.

And to go back to the main question - whether a woman of 43 is too old.... Reluctantly (speaking as someone who got pregnant with her last DC at 39 and gave birth at 40) I would have to say I think it's right on the cusp. Honestly, based on my own experience (with miscarriage, pregnancy ill health, birth issues) as well as all the points I mention above re. tiredness, finances, family relationships etc I really wish I'd been able to do it a few years earlier. 43 might be possible and it might be right for you, but it will be harder at that age.

@Blossomtoes

And, yes, I think 43 is too old to parent a child.

I am 50 and I have an 11 year old. Are you saying you think I am too old to parent her? Should social services take children away from mothers over 40? Would you want people sterilised over the age of 30?

You haven’t really thought this through have you?

Moreover you are completely missing the point. The mum’s age isn’t really the main issue here. If she can conceive and carry a baby to term by definition she is not too old.

The point is that she is considering having a child with a man she’s been with for a fairly short time when she already has two older children.

Maybe that’s one to remove from the list then!

@Naunet I don't think men past 40 are more likely to walk away compared to 20-30 year olds. Probably quite the opposite.

Nope, I'd love to be in the same position!

Nothing wrong with having a child at 43 if you've got health and finances on your side, but I'm always baffled at the desire people have to reproduce with new boyfriends when they already both have kids. Why? Is the relationship not real unless you produce a joint offspring?

I don’t disagree at all, I just think that says more about society than a woman’s age.

Yeah, no... That almost never happens. Society treats women who abandon their child as absolute scum. Meanwhile men are weekend dads or worse and no one blinks an eye.

Also, surely that’s a good reason not to have a baby with a man over 40?