watching older mums

[ll31]

must admit I started watching this prepared to be quite judgey... but...... you could see why these women wanted children and also particularly looking at twins born to 54 yr old woman in usa that actually as one of twins stated, if she hadn't done it, we wouldnt be here, so she was right to have children.....

I'd son at 36 which I thought was quite old... I really had very different reaction to this prog than I expected..aibu

i had my children in my mid 30's and wish I had been younger. I can't get my head round those doing it in their 50's/60's 70's. They're not thinking about what's best for the children at all, IMO.

I don't think you need to 'listen to your body' if you are under 50-but you do afterwards.

Death is a huge taboo subject. It crops up on threads here-DCs are very interested, but adults don't know how to talk about it. I would never say to a DC 'I won't die' -you could be knocked down by a bus tomorrow.
Life doesn't work out how you plan. My father was in his 20's when I was born, my FIL was nearly 50. My father died before my DCs were born, FIL saw them grow up. However, statistically, once you get to 70yrs and above you are more likely to die than a person in their 40/50/60s.

They are good role models though Jajas-if I get to be a granny I am going to be a mad, active one!

oh bum to it all. I've had a child in my teens, my twenties and now i'm about to be 40 and i want my DS (5months old) to have a little brother or sister asap. I am much fitter than I was when I was younger, am less self-concious or bothered about doing things by the book and I don't need to look amazing in a bikini (just good is fine!) DS sleeps wonderfully and having another little rugrat around would be absolutely delicious!

I think we might be at cross purposes. 40 isn't old!! I was 40 and didn't feel old or out of place-in fact young mums in their teens are more likely to feel out of place. I am talking 50+ or definitely 56+.

It proves age is a state of mind doesn't it? - I know women who feel 'over the hill' in their 30's! especially those who started in their early 20's and had that attitude that they should quickly have the requisite 2 kids to "get it out of the way"

I agree exotic we live in a society in denial about death and dying. It seems like people expect to live to the national average which isn't acheived by about half of us. And is often preceeded by 10 years or so of serious ill health.

It's a shocking statistic that 10-15% of women have died by the age of 45 but looking at my family, friends and my sons parents I can't deny it.

My Dad was 52 when I was born and 54 for my sister but my Mum is 19 years younger than him. I worry a lot about having children in the next few years, although I am relatively young to be thinking about it and should be thinking more about my career, because my grandparents died when I was very young (two before my sister was born) and I know they regretted not having grandchildren for longer (one of my saddest memories is clearing out my granddad's house aged 11 and finding birthday cards in a drawer for 3, 4 and 5 yrs - my grandma had bought them for me and my [then bump] sister but died when I was two).

On the other hand older parents can bring a different aspect to parenting and I wouldn't have my Dad any other way. I am also very PFB as by 52 he didn't think he would ever have children and so I was constantly told how much I am loved and wanted by my parents, which is very comforting :)

My dad had me at 54 0r 56, cannot quite remember. My mother was still very young then, 30 or 31 (cannot be bothered to do the math).

I think, however infair this may sound, that if the father is older (as long as it is not excessively) but the mother younger, that it is usually ok.

The problem is that how healthy the woman is physically plays a huge part in how healthy the baby is and how many complications may arrise during pregnancy.

The only thing with this scenario IMO is that it isnt fair on the children or the wife if the father is excessively older and unable to have the same relationship with his children that a younger father could have.

Also, if he does die, the mother may be around but the children have lost a parent and it is harder all round for the mother to raise them IYSWIM.

My father was very fit and healthy for his age so that was never an issue, but it could be for others.

But then I do wonder about women who have babies in their late 30s and early 40s as it also carries risks, which I have seen first hand. Nowadays it is the norm, but without modern medicine and a change in socio-economic issues, would not be considered as a relatively OK thing to do. It is only recently that it has become more acceptable as womens social roles change (but do correct me if I am wrong).

I know a lot of women, including myself, in my extended social circles (friends and friends of friends for instance) who have chosen to have babies in their mid twenties. It seems some young women are now opting to have a baby and then career to avoid being an older mother.

unfar, not infair.

try unfair

I know this is not really statistically significant but my sister died aged 32 years old when her children were 5 and 7 years old, so she stated having children relatively early. My brother in law then died aged 47 when the children were 16 and 19 years old.

I had ds at 39 years old and all my female cousins had their first child in their mid to late 30s. My sister had her children at a much younger age than me or any of her cousins and yet the only orphans in the family are her children.

I know that is probably not common but I have stopped worrying too much about being an older parent. Being a younger one is no guarantee of long life.

I thionk having a child in your 60s or 70s is too old but I would say up until around 50-55 is OK myself. It is obviously not ideal, but quite frankly what life is "ideal"

I personally beleive anyone who has children in their 60's or 70's is probably a certfiable loon and shouldn;t have childrne on that basis alone regardless of their age.

But what I think is really a bit irrelevant - the technology is there and you cannot regulate the whole world so people who have the money and little sense will travel to et what they want.

I suspect the numbers worldwide of women in their 60's and 70's getting prgnant and having a live birth is infinitesimally small and impossible to regulate so I really wouldn't spend much time stressing about it.

But ehn I becae a mother at 41 and although some things are harder than they would have been in my 20's some things are way easier. Although I am tireder I am far more content to collapse in a heap in front of the TV of an evening and not go out except very occasionally. Happy to step back fom my career knowing I am probably wrecking it which I wouldn;t have been happy about in my 20's or 30's.

50's is a much more difficult call - some fit and healthy women in their 50's are probably quite likely to live another 40 or 50 years which is no more than you can say about a smoking drinking overweight 25 year old. Also some women in their fifties will be naturally still able to conceive so the "listen to your body" is much less clear.

On the whole I think we should set guidleines that we are happy with in theis country (which we do) and not get too concerned about the tiny proportion of women sho choose to go overseas for treatment after that.

I think it's sad that a child born to much older parents will, probably, have to deal with losing their parents, or caring for them, at a relatively young age and may not have parents around when, for example, they become parents themselves.

When it comes to older Dads, while it seems unfair, it is pretty basic biology. Men can reproduce into old age. While it is not ideal, biologically and at the most basic level (ie we are after all just mammals) children don't need a father to survive.

I say that as someone who is happily married that gets pissed off if DH is late home for work as sometimes it feels like I won't survive tea/bath/bedtime.....

What channel was it on?

You're right Kewcumber. I just cannot imagine being 55 and thinking "I know, I'll have a child". By the time DS and his (theoretical) sibling are independent, I'll be pushing 60. The thought of starting up at that age is a major horror.

I know people live longer than they did, but they don't necessarily enjoy good health. A lot just stagger through a couple of extra decades fueled by handfuls of prescription medications, moaning about their ailments.

"and at the most basic level (ie we are after all just mammals) children don't need a father to survive. "

What a strange statement. Children without mothers have had perfectly able fathers bring them up.

thes women

no women have the right to a baby.

Almost all procreation is selfish unless you are doing it against your better judgement because you are concerned for the underpopulation of the planet or becasue a total stranger is likely to be a bone marrow match and you are having a new baby to donte bone marrow to them.

my dad was 43 when I was born and 54 when my youngest sister born, she is now 31 and my dad 87 he is still relatively healthy just a wonky knee. I was 41 and DH 49 when DD born , DH's mother was 37 when he was born and she is still around though health not good, his father died when he was 16 in a work accident.

The average lifespan for a woman at birth is about 82 but if you make it to 65 it is then about 85, for a man about 77 at birth but again if reach 65 it goes up 82. ( national statistics website)on average people have 10 years of chronic health problems before death this is an average generalisation there will always be exceptions but average figures are really the best guide to planning

personally I think the menopause is a natural cut off point but don't think IVF is wrong at around that age especially if had an early menopause, so upto about 50 you could expect to be in reasonable health until your child is about 25, none of this allows for the vagaries of life like not meeting the ideal partner until later in life unexpected pregnancy later etc,

"It proves age is a state of mind doesn't it?"

No it doesn't. People like to think if they act young and keep themselves fit that they can somehow bypass the effects of ageing. They may be able to get rid of wrinkles through surgery, but you can't get rid of the damage ageing causes to your body as a whole.

I know 2 woman who died in their early 40's who always looked after their health. But shit still happens.

From the 60's on most people start getting a range of age related illnesses such as angina, diabetes type 2, slow growing cancer, etc. This might mean they will die at a younger age and will mean that they don't have the energy to properly care for a child or teenager. IMO having children in your 60's and 70's is monstrously selfish.

Well when these parents are up a night in their 60's cleaning/feeding etc, I will be 45 when my YOUNGEST is 20, so bring it on...............

................I might be the skintest at the moment, but hell when I am older enjoying my grandkids, the happiest x

Its not just about losing a parent at a young age although that is a major concern. There are risk factors affecting the health of the child as the parents get older. This applies to men as well as women see here so even if they use a donor egg the father's sperm may be of lower quality than is ideal.

DH and I are both in our 40's we are fortunate enough to already have children so I would think hard before having any more. I think for most people within their 40's the risks remain within an acceptable range but into your 50's and 60's seems a bit much.

"But ehn I becae a mother at 41 and although some things are harder than they would have been in my 20's some things are way easier. Although I am tireder I am far more content to collapse in a heap in front of the TV of an evening and not go out except very occasionally. Happy to step back fom my career knowing I am probably wrecking it which I wouldn;t have been happy about in my 20's or 30's."

Actually I disagree with this idea. From speaking to the couples I know having children in their early to mid twenties, and going on the reasons behind my own choice, we actually feel that having a baby now is more positive in terms of the issues you have stated, than waiting till our mid 30s to 40s.

For example, we have all had our party days and are ready to leave them behind. I have done enough partying in my 24 years to know it doesn't appeal to me anymore. In fact, I now much prefer watching a film at home with my DH or going for walks than heading to a bar or club. People start partying younger these days, and tend to get it out of their systems earlier from my experience.

In terms of career, I and these young women I know all seem to agree that it is better to take a year or two out now while we are still young enough to go back to our careers way before we hit 30 even. A lot of these women I know are new graduates, or just finishing a post graduate study. So while we are taking a year or two out post study, we are also having our first children. It is not uncommon at all for people to take a year or so out post study and most employers are aware of this. I personally find this preferable to having to take a break somewhere halfway down the line of my career and then having to return after maternity leave. It also means I get to be at home for a whole year if I choose after my baby arrives.

Of course this means having a good solid relationship with a supportive partner, without which I doubt this would be possible.

A lot is being said on this thread in a very harshly judgemental way about women having babies in their 50's, but frankly I think it is somewhat hypocrytical (and I may get flamed for this) if these comments are coming from people having babies in their 40's which also carries major risks, maybe no where near as high, but still major risks. I know many will disagree with me.