To consider having a baby at 44

My DD14 went through a phase of wanting a sibling. It was just that, a phase.

Having 1 is so much easier, I have been able to afford great holidays and private school too.

I also wouldn't do that to my body again back then but I'm now 52 and have a lot more freedom etc I had her "late" and that was hard enough.

She's likely to be 9 or so when the sibling is born. I have a brother 9 years younger, whom I have always loved and with whom I was especially close (unlike our older brother - they don't speak).

And then I went away to university at 18. He was utterly bereft - it massively affected him, because he was then an "only child" and he suffered mental health issues as a result.

The "sibling" thing shouldn't be part of your equation - because it's a scenario you just cannot predict.

I was in your position at 41 nearly 42. I talked to the GP about it and she said if I was going to do it better get on with it. Baby was conceived later that month. I have been told many times in this pregnancy that having a subsequent baby after 40 is much lower risk than having a first baby after 40. If you want to do it, go for it.

I absolutely wouldn’t for all of the reasons on this thread. Is not even about the baby - which would be high risk, 44 IS old to be pregnant let’s not pretend it’s optimal - but teens / university / young adults into your 60-70s?!! Absolutely NOT.

my cousin is having his first at 42 and that’s mad enough imo, his wife is a little younger but not by much. Don’t underestimate the impact of teenagers, you only have a 7 yr old right now which is the easiest phase .

For some it is, but may not be if you have family of your own such as a partner or children and close friends supporting you through it. Siblings don’t always step up to care for parents, nor do they always stick around and support one enough. A close friend of mine would argue her sister washing her hands of caring for their mother (and similarly disappearing when their father died) and leaving it all to her but expecting a whack of inheritance and demanding she go through their belongings is much more distressing.

Just as some only children may be lonely, equally some siblings do not have a bond, nor do they take care of each other. Instead of hypotheticals of the future to decide wouldn’t it make more sense for the OP to consider and decide whether her body can take another pregnancy and baby over the whims of a child who doesn’t really understand what’s she’s asking her mum to put herself through.

I wouldn’t have one just because your other child wants a sister / brother, you and your partner should be the ones to really want one,
I know plenty of people in their 40s who have had babies, some with IVF some without, one friend had one naturally at 45, there are obvious risks though and how would you and your partner cope if a child were to be born with a disability which is a possibility…..not sure I would have the energy for a newborn at 45 and a toddler at 46/47 which is the age you will be.
Im 48 and my energy levels are nothing like what they were 10 years ago

Of course your daughter wants a sibling-imaginary siblings are always fantastic. My very real sibling was cruel to me throughout childhood has not changed even as an adult. Please don't have another just because your DC thinks it will all be amazing.

How old is your dd?

My ds is 10, my dd is 4 and they bicker like mad, they don't get on because they have nothing in common being so far apart in age.

I'm 43 and would never consider another child because, as it is, I will not get my freedom back til I'm 61 and my husband will be 71!!

Go for it if it's what you want, but I'd go for IVF with donor eggs assuming you don't have any frozen. The chances of successful IVF with natural eggs at 44 is only 1.6%

YANBU to consider it, but I think you've got to really want another child yourself and not be doing it because your DD wants a sibling. They might not even get on if you have another child. The fact that you would be approaching your mid sixties by the time the child reaches adulthood would put me off, personally.

While I appreciate you're speaking from your own experience and it doubtless is pretty crap, having a sibling is no guarantee of help. Everyone I know struggling with elderly relatives at the moment has a sibling/s who is entirely useless, live in far-flung countries, or just don't involve themselves in extended family life.

Even if you did want one I'm afraid the odds at your age are extremely slim so I would probably give up on the idea altogether. Sorry but it's true.

I had DD when I was almost 43 (we have a ds who was born when I was 40.) Neither have special needs as far as we are aware. My body is a bit wrecked and free time is non existent. But I wouldn’t change her for the world.

I'm doing it and I manage. Having a sibling is absolutely no guarantee at all that they will help you with your parents when they are elderly. Most people I know with siblings get no help at all from them.

I'm 55, I can't imagine having a 9 year old. DH's kids are in their mid 20s and becoming independent - we are planning our retirement and travelling....

Speak to a midwife would be my advice. I had 2 babies in my 40s (at nearly 41 and nearly 45) I also had babies in my 20s and 30s. The current medical view would be that you would be more likely to miscarry (I had 4 miscarriages between ages 39 & 42). But if you stay pregnant you are highly likely to a normal healthy pregnancy and baby. Caveats being you should aim to be fit and healthy yourself before hand. I got asked if I was planning another after my baby at 44. The answer was "no" due to the high risk of miscarriage.

Hi OP, this is one of those things really no one can help you decide - it’s down to you and your Dp. Please take your dp’s views fully into this picture - it’s so important not to emotionally guilt-trip a partner into letting you conceive again.

I had a second baby late in life (43), my mum had her last baby aged 40, and my gran had one child at the age of 23 and her second aged 37 (big gap due to intervention of WW2 in killing her first husband; her second husband was 49 when his child was born). Being an older mum is easier than it ever has been in the past - great medical and social advances to thank for that - and MANY women had kids in their 40s throughout history. But you now have the advantage of choosing, not just falling pregnant because of a family planning failure.

You have to be prepared for failure to conceive.
DH and I decided we wouldn’t go the ivf route at this age personally - We let nature take its course and agreed we would stop trying after 8 months and give up. I was pregnant in three months, similar to my first child. So also don’t be surprised if that happens quickly too!

And you should know what you and dh would do if your foetus has a serious abnormality - late abortion is a difficult thing. Or you have to consider the impact of raising a child that has a disability of some kind - it could help if you’re financially more secure, but hard if you are both hoping for an independent child aged 18.

It will be tiring, that’s for sure. You’ll have to “stay young” in mind and body, as long as you can, and this has to be a conscious approach you can’t take it for granted.

On the other hand, in my family so far we have been pretty blessed. Natural conception, easy pregnancies, kids healthy, all parents have survived long enough to see their kids reach adulthood. I would like to live healthily until 65, which doesn’t seem an unreasonable hope, to see my son into adulthood.

Families come in all shapes and sizes and the pros and cons of older parents will be endlessly debated, at the end of the day only you and your dh can decide.

it's not absurd at all.
While it's not going to be on their list of reasons at the moment; being an only child and dealing with elderly infirm parents alone is really crap.

I tried ttc 2nd child in early 40’s, several miscarriages then a non viable pregnancy due to trisomy issue - not genetic so put down to age, I gave up at 43. Friend however had her 2nd at 45 with no issues.

in your shoes I would chat with a clinic and consider IUI or IVF.

Your existing child wanting a sibling is an absurd reason to have a baby. They will be just fine as an only child, you on the other hand will be the one having to raise this child into your 50s and 60s.

Hard pass.

44 is not old in the grand scheme of things, but is very old when talking about having a baby.

Also OP you don't say "we want a baby" you say "my child wants a sibling". Sounds harsh, but we can't always have what we want. Being an only isn't the worst thing in the world, and it might be better - gently - to explain to your child that they probably won't have a brother and sister and helping them get their head round that.

I wouldn’t want to plan to be dealing with a 16-20 year old in my early 60s….potential university fees as I’d be looking towards retirement….to me it’s not about the baby at 44, it’s about all the above!

I'm not sure why you're asking tbh. You must know the risks are significantly higher for things like Down's Syndrome and autism and that it might take a long time to conceive a viable pregnancy. You know you'll be 62 at the youngest when the potential baby hits 18.

Of course you're not being unreasonable to consider it, it's the path life has led you to. Just make the decision and own it. I had 4 children for absolutely no logical reason whatsoever.

The baby at 44 may not be an issue, but what about a teenager in your late 50s? Or a still-dependent 21 year old university student when you are 65?
Don't underestimate how tired you will feel in your 50s and 60s, let alone the increased risk of major health issues at those ages.