If you were 44 and found out you were pregnant?

[HillsHaveEyez]

Would you have it?

I’m not asking for advice for myself. Just interested in whether you personally would go ahead with a surprise pregnancy at such an advanced age.

No way. I have recently turned 43.
My dd is 10 next week and my ds will be 18 2 weeks after that.

We’ve got a 4 month old puppy and that’s hard work enough!

No, in a similar position to @PotteringAlong in terms of age and children.

I couldn't face another bout of toddlerhood. The actual pregnancy and newborn, yes. All three of mine have been brutal toddlers.

If it was my first child, absolutely yes. I'd embrace it fully.

Had my one and only after multiple IVF failure at 42. It wasn’t what I would have chosen, but it’s been easy since, because most things are when you’re established in your home, career, financially etc.

If you can get get pregnant at 44 your body is already confirming you’re in much better physical nick than most 44 year olds, and statistics show you’ll probably live longer.

No. I said no more after 40. I'm 44 now and I'd have an abortion.

My children would be 20, 17 and 13 and I wouldn't want to start again, would be next year for me.

If it was a first or I already had children all under around 7 I would.

Absolutely not.

I know two people well who had children at 45 and a colleague who had surprise twins at 46 having been told she couldn’t have children.

Surely it’s not about age or fertility really - but about timing. Having a baby at 25 would have been horrendous timing for me and I would not have gone ahead but I will happily have a baby at 41.

I was and did. No problems then or now.

I would because I wouldn't really have a choice. But I would be devastated. But I'm sure I would come round. Plenty of people do. My friend has just had a baby aged 45 and is thrilled.

I’m 42 and due dc3 next month. The pregnancy has been no harder than previous pregnancies. I know lots of women who have had babies in their 40’s. And I’ve heard of the odd woman in her 50’s.

Same as above. I wouldn’t want to be pregnant at 44 but I would accept it and try to see it as a blessing.

Then I’d hire a live-in nanny!

I would, I have 3 kids, had them in my mid- late 20ies. I sometimes toy with the idea of having an other but I know realistically it would be very hard work. But if it happened I would see it as meant to be and probably be very happy with the decision eventually. If I didn’t have kids yet I would be very happy to have a child at 44 and don’t see the age as an issue at all really.

Well it’s only a couple of months away for me and my youngest is 3 so probably yes. Any doubts would only be because I think I’m done at 2, not because of my advanced years.

I did. She's lovely 😊

If would depend on so many things, but not age I don’t think.
AFAIK getting pregnant at 44 would be half the battle anyway, and then the risk of MC is high.. but assuming this did not happen, I might. I guess it would depend on finances, whether we felt like our family was complete or not, what the impact on my older children would be. I wouldn’t be against the idea automatically.

This happened to me except I am 4 years older at 48. It was a huge shock but I’m so glad I had my beautiful baby. She is the most amazing gift. I love her so, so much.
I do worry about being so old but I’m fit and healthy (people are always surprised when they find out my age) and it’s a lot easier this time as I have two boys already and know what I’m doing. The pregnancy was a bit stressful initially as I worried about her being healthy but I had a private harmony test which was really reassuring. The birth was also a doodle - I really enjoyed it. She came out in three pushes! Financially we’ll have to make things go further than we would with two and my DH will definitely be working into his 70’s but we are not an early retirement sort of couple anyway. We don’t have a mortgage thankfully. One thing we do have is lots of life and critical illness insurance should the worst happen. I do also feel sad that I might not be around to meet my daughter’s children if she chooses to have them later.

My worst nightmare to have to make this choice but no.

No
But I have two teenagers

I was that woman (at 43 though) DC 5, a bit of a surprise. It was okay, pregnancy was easier than earlier ones when I had toddlers to run after, birth was very quick.
Most of my older kids were at an age where there was always a pair of arms to put her in safely and they were happy enough to play with her and generally help out (entertain her so I could have a shower, make dinner).
She is nearly eleven and while it would not necessarily been my expectation to still run up and down to primary school in my mid fifties, it was much easier than the bigger ones as I was more relaxed.
She is probably one of the most independant eleven year olds I know and has an eclectic taste and knowledge in music, clothes, books etc.

No, then they would be 25 years between my oldest child to my youngest, that wouldn't be fair on my children. My days of child rearing are over and probably be a gran by then. I had my children young, so I'm happy they've grown up and not have to worry about nighttime routines ect

Hell no! My eldest is going off to university in September so no way would I want to go back to nappies and sleepless nights.

Yes and I would have been thrilled. I’m an older mum than that. I adopted so I’m 50 years older than my youngest.

Would depend on lots of factors

*Whether I already had kids
*The ages of existing kids
*My relationship status
*My financial status
*My health status
*Support I had around me

But I know women who've had a first baby in their mid forties, and they love their late motherhood.

First child yes, small gap with siblings yes, large gap...No!!

I would. I’m as pro choice as they come, but as we are financially secure and there are no obvious health issues to consider, I think I’d find it too hard to abort. Not something I’d choose, however....