Is 45 too old to have a baby

It doesn't just depend on how fit she is now. OP may well end up working beyond 65 to support the child at university. Unfortunately health can be rather unpredictable in your 60s.

Crikey. I had my last period at 45!

It so depends on your own personal circumstances. I had my first at 35 due to needing ivf due to ny husbands sperm count, and I'm absolutely knackered. I was fit before with am active job and I'm healthy now but I'm just so tired with a bubs who still doesn't sleep all night at 18 months.

I would also say that heart aches change as circumstances do, for example we wanted a child so much and we had one with ivf, and thought we'd be 100% happy forever. But having a child brings new worries and anxieties, and now we worry about him being an only child as we dont live near family and when we're gone worrying what family peers he will have etc. Only children are often super happy and he'll make his own family one day but just using this to illustrate that heart ache follows you with each new era of life, and worries for and about a loved child can cut deep.

It's entirely based on your own circumstances though, I just wanted to male a point that having a child would heal one part of your heart but can also bring its own wounds with the joy.

As an older teen your existing child is unlikely to have a meaningful relationship with a baby sibling, especially if they are 15-16 before the potential sibling arrives. It's a huge age difference.

Your 14 year old will get way less of your time and resources. Is that really fair?
Sounds like a mid life crisis.

I don't think it's just your age now and a baby that needs to be considered!

55 with a 10 year old
60 with a 15 year old
Etc

And that's all with the best wishes in the world that you'll be healthy or the child will be healthy.

Of course a young mother doesn't know what the future holds either but the chances are in her favour!

@user6432879631 so no actual stats. I wouldn't call 45 yrs ago recent though! 😆

This is a question only you can answer..no one is promised a long life and having a child in your 20s does not mean you will live to see them grow up. We all take calculated risks. The decision is yours.

I think the bigger problem will be getting pregnant at 45 even if you're healthy the odds are against you.

Then she was a very unhealthy and unfit 20 year old.

Depends how fit you are I would say. I had my last at 39 and I felt the difference that when I had my others earlier in life. I am over weight though

If you've already got a 14 year old then I'll revise my response. I think you won't enjoy either of your children. You won't have as much energy for the baby and you'll miss out on some lovely years with your teen ( eg shopping together/eating out/staying up late to chat) because you'll be exhausted with the toddler.

I had a baby at 38 and I love being an older mum. Financially, mentally and just everything we're in a really good place. However, I'm now 44 and I can't imagine doing it all again with a baby at this age. But that's me and you're you.

I started peri menopause at 44 and had insomnia with it for at least 10 years. I could not begin to imagine coping with a baby and the sleepless nights on top of that.

Depends on your energy levels. If you are a high energy person you will probably be fine. If you are not you will struggle.

If you have family support it will be easier. If you have none it will be hard, and quite isolating.

As a single parent you do need to think about if the child has additional needs, and what will happen if you die. I am early 50s and am alarmed by the sheer number of people I know who have died in their 40s to 50s, nearly all of them parents. And I don't even have that wide a social network!

You can be fit and healthy but you're soon to hit menopause, after which a lot of risks go up sharply.

Just to point out:
Routine mammograms for breast cancer start at 50
Routine bowel cancer screening 54
For people aged 25-49 they make up 9% of cancer diagnoses. 50-74 makes up 54% of new cancer diagnoses.

Princess of Wales is very fit and healthy and was diagnosed with cancer at 43 (probably a couple years later if she had had to go through NHS channels though). My boss who ran a marathon last year was diagnosed with bowel cancer on his first NHS screen at 54 just after Christmas.

You could have a baby at 45, totally healthy, and live a long and happy life until you're 100. You could try get pregnant at 45 (at which point miscarriage risk is over 50%), have a profoundly disabled child you're sole caregiver for, and be diagnosed with cancer at your first mammogram at 50 when they're 5 years old. You need to strongly consider impact on your existing child, who would care for them should worst happen.

Consider whether the loss in your life you feel is because you actually want a second child now, or the lingering grief of the DV relationship you were in and the parts of your life you imagined you feel that robbed you of (family unit, stable upbringing for DD1 and wanting a do-over, being able to have a second back then).

Are you fit and healthy? Is there a good father around (or, if you're planning to do it alone, are you sure of your support network)? Will they be your first or will they have siblings? Do you feel financially secure enough?

There's so much more to this than just age.

I’m was much more tired with the baby I had at 30 than the one at 24. In hindsight I’d have had them closer together and got all the sleepless nights, tantrums and expensive childare days out of the way at once! In laws at also much older now and not as willing to have the younger one as they were with the first so time to myself is much rarer too!

I’d say 1980’s the majority of grandparents were late 40’s early 50’s…I know this as I was born late 1970’s to a 38 and 48yr old who were often mistaken for my grandparents!

Too old IMHO, you'll be 46 best case scenario if you're able to conceive naturally at 45, which there is a low chance of. It would be a high risk pregnancy with the chance of extra complications for you, and for baby. You would be 60/61 with a 14 year old. It is selfish op, it is just my opinion though.

I can’t imagine doing the school run in my 50s. It’s not a road I’d go down.

A huge hole in your life??

What's your 14 year old then; irrelevant? Nothing? How would they feel, to know this is how you feel, that they're not good enough?

And putting this giant burden on a baby as hole-filler... Huge expectations.

What if their arrival digs you into a hole many times worse?

Up to the individual. My friend got married at 29 and she never got pregnant... until she was 46! They had resigned to the fact they weren't going to have any so happy surprise. The Dad was 50. Boy is now 23, going fine, and the parents are well too.
My sister had hers, after being told her she and PCOS meant she couldn't get pregnant, at 45. Her DD s now 14.
I had mine in my 40 (last at 43).
All of the above conceived naturally.
As for those who say you will barely be living long enough to see them into adulthood, well first couple are still fit and well and together; my sister's partner left her soon after the birth and had no contact; I was happily married but my DH died suddenly when my kids were 4 and 6.
There are no guarantees.
I would not go to extraordinary measures though. If it happens naturally, great. But don't become obsessed with the idea.