To be absolutely furious with my father?

That sounds like the best approach, @PortaSix

@JustGotToKeepOnKeepingOn Unfortunately, there's a reason why your 50's and 60's are known as "sniper's alley" as they're the decades when people are at higher risk of developing serious illnesses and dying from them. Conditions such as heart disease, cancer, etc. Of course, many people don't, but your risk definitely increases. I'm very aware of this as I turned 50 this year!

Even though her Dad and SM may live into their 90's, they definitely need to have everything in place for their minor children just in case the worst happens. It happened to my Mum- she developed a chronic illness and died in her mid-60's after previously being very healthy. You just don't know.

If my parents had had a baby when my mother was, for talk's sake, 55, that child would have been orphaned at age 7/8.

You have misinterpreted what I said. I noted anecdotally that I hadn't had any friends get pregnant in their 50s. I don't think it's that common. That doesn't mean that it doesn't happen!

I'm not talking about you or your circumstances. Are you planning on having any more children? Do you have arrangements in place for the care of your child should you not be around?

I had my youngest when I was 40 so I am not exactly in a place to throw shade at older mums. I am one! I don't know how much longer I would have kept trying, though I was menopausal mid 40s so probably not long!

I'm assuming from your post that your child is your one and only, and that you don't have an adult child waiting in the wings to raise your baby should you be unable to?

The OP's father and stepmother already have 2 children. Having another in their 50s and expecting the OP to carry the can should the worst happen, is not fair.

I wouldn't have chosen to have a baby at 47, I'll be honest, but I wouldn't have chosen to have one at 40 either. Life just happens. I'm glad that you got to have you presumably much-wanted baby and I hope you live forever.

I think this is the right course op.

It's highly unlikely that you'd have to take them in... if the parents are in their 50s surely they'll only be late 60s when youngest is 18?

Honestly.. I wouldn't worry about it. There is no legal obligation for you to take the children into your home if you don't want to.

Well I don’t think they made it up ( nor did my mum) if that’s what you mean…

Wow they’re in their 50’s not 70’s. You talk as though it’s a given that they will die before the children are adults. In all likelihood they will live into their 70’s so the children will be adults by then. That said, don’t you feel any obligation to help look after your half siblings if they were orphaned. I know I’d have looked after my sisters without hesitation, but by the sound of most of the answers on here, that’s just me. What will happen to your children if you and your partner die?

I'm in my early 60s and have lots of friends in their 50s as well as the ones the same age as me. I've never known any of them to fall unexpectedly pregnant in their 50s. Maybe they just didn't tell me...

The OPs mum had a baby when she was 16.

I don't even think it's wrong for them to be procreating in itself at their ages. What is wrong is just expecting (without asking, or any kind of discussion) the OP to take the children in, should anything happen to them both.

If they had checked/asked first and received a positive response, then fine to go ahead and try for another child. It's the automatic expectation that rubs up the wrong way here.

Why is it selfish to have a child at 50, in your opinion? I'm 50 and mum to a 3 year old. I don't think I'm being selfish, but I could be wrong!

@PortaSix

I am a bit confused about this bit, how old was your Mum when she had you? Apologies if I a bit confused.

"Another thing that’s wild to me is that he knows how incredibly frustrated I found it when my mum had a baby at 16 and I basically became a mother to that baby."

Could be wrong here, but op do you think your thread has a wrongly worded title?

Do you think that rather than furious, you actually feel hurt?

Maybe that's because our "motherly instinct" extends only to our own birth children? And because that "motherly instinct" leads us to protect our own kids and take into consideration the likely impact on them of taking someone else's children?

I'm sorry but the idea of taking on another woman's children fills me with horror and I am glad that it's never going to happen.

Your Mum had a baby at 16? And you became a Mum to that baby? Eh?

The OP sounds like she's made really sensible and thoughtful decisions for her own family. Nobody has to take on the responsibility for other people's children if they don't want to. That's a decision that you make according to your own beliefs and conscience together with the practical considerations. And yes, they would have to discuss and agree to it, not just be expected to take on the role.

I don't think the age of the OP's parents is the crucial factor. People die at all ages and a 20 something could leave a child behind just as could a 50 odd year old.

My parents were older and are still living independently in our old family home at almost 90, full facalties and no significant illnesses. A school friend's mum had her at 21 and died of a terminal illness when thw friend was 15. So from personal experience I'm aware that there are no guarantees. We all just do the best we can.

I think you must be reading something different to all of the other posters!!!

Becoming a parent in your 50s is selfish!! And how many 20 year olds have you ever heard of being hit by a bus?

Your whole premise is utterly unreasonable and totally wrong. The OP's issue is that her father expects her to pick up the slack with his young family which he's had at an age when most people are becoming grandparents not parents.

Not only that, but he has just assumed it, and not even asked her.

Comprende now?!

I'm sorry but having your own children informs your decision in a way that you can't possibly know if you don't have any! It's not a criticism; it's just a fact!

I’ve read the full thread now and if I were the op I’d have an honest conversation with your dad where you said remember all the shit you gave mum about having another baby and me having to care for it? You’re older and it’s even sillier. Make solid plans for the children’s care, which don’t involve publicly announcing to the daughter you weren’t a great dad to and you’ve told her she won’t inherit anything that she’s also your replacement parent plan for your kids. You are an idiot to not have thought about this at your age.

but I can also see why she might just not be bothered to try and talk to him. Although if they did both die id stay in touch with the half siblings who didn’t ask for any of this. Children shouldn’t have to pay for the faults of their parents.

I have arranged and secured care for my children upon our passing. This includes enthusiastic and willing guardians.

OP is neither of those things.
Also, its common for care to flow certain ways in family trees

Being burdened with unwanted half siblings is different to the shared greif of losing a child and so providing security for much loved grandchildren.

You and others can pull whatever Whataboutery out of your arses the bottom line is. That I would hand on heart allow kids to go into care who I didn't care much about.
The only thing they share is some basic genetics.

OP has a life. And all the children she wants.
That's rightfully her priority.

Also any family would do it? Pull the other one. You're either naive or.....Well.

The care system is over full capacity. You don't think those kids have a single functional biological relative?
People make this exact valid argument every single day. And they're not wrong.for doing it.

If you and your partner died, wouldn’t you expect your parents to do everything possible for your children, health allowing? Despite having very much been there and done that with their own children with grandchildren ans undeniable evidence, and themselves being older now by definition. Even if that werent taking them in as they are too old, everyone I know would do what they were able to. Any normal family would, without having discussed it. I agree he should have discussed it and thought of multiple people and options and it’s bloody stupid not to have, but the idea that there is no way the op would get involved is really really cold.

It’s expressions like that that leave us all utterly unprepared for the reality!