Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think 48 is too old to father a child?

123 replies

ali23 · 14/04/2013 19:52

Is it? There are 10 years between DH and I. We are swaying over a last baby which we'd both love. I miscarried a year ago and since then it's just not happening and the seed was planted that perhaps it was a sign it split wasn't to be. Also, for the first time in the relationship I feel that it might be unfair on a kid to grow up with its dad not at his former sprightly best. We have been blessed already with 3 dc so we are perhaps being a bit greedy!

OP posts:
cinnamonsugar · 14/04/2013 20:15

Mothers and fathers have been having children well into their forties for a very very long time Smile Definitely not too old if you both want to.

MisForMumNotMaid · 14/04/2013 20:15

My dad is 70 next year and gets very broody over babies and toddlers. My DD is 2 and he rolls around on the floor with her and chases her round the park without a hint of an issue thats age related. He's fitter than me.

It very much depends on the individual but to be 70 with an 18yr old doesn't seam that bad to me. So if you want to go for it 48, 50, mid 50's even why not?

VelvetSpoon · 14/04/2013 20:16

Provided he is healthy, fit and active, not too old at all. My dad was 49 when I was born. He was a brilliant dad, and was still working full time in a manual job til he was nearly 70 (and part time thereafter for the rest of his life).

Blending · 14/04/2013 20:18

DH will be 46 in June just after out twins arrive and we have a 2 yo. In some ways its all about attitude.

I'm in exactly the same postion as ImTooHecsy, my Mum seems ancient, and is only 64, and seemed to give up when she hit 60. There are also health issues (she had a stroke 2 years ago from which and she is 90% recovered) whereas MIL is a very spritley 80 yo who cycles daily, and does lots of voluntary work, choir practise etc

Marcheline · 14/04/2013 20:18

If he's up for it and you both feel that you're not 'finished' then go for it!

Good luck, I hope conception happens soon for you.

Blending · 14/04/2013 20:19

Oh yes and I hit 40 this year!

CuntAlors · 14/04/2013 20:20

We're debating this atm. DH is 50 and I'm 33. We'd both love to have another child but I can't help but look forward to 20 years time and worry. It's nice to read of others doing it at this age.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 14/04/2013 20:22

I'd think more about finances and what plans you might have for the ppost child rearing years than I would about a specific age. As you already have three, that's a lot of years on child rearing..

Oldandcobwebby · 14/04/2013 20:24

I was 48 when our first (and sadly last) child was conceived, and 49 1/2 when she was born last October. I find myself with reserves of patience and good humour I never had before. It has encouraged me to lose best part of two stone, too, so I am no longer an overweight slob. Her birth signalled the start of the best times of my life. I am determined to be an absolutely awesome dad. Oldies rock!

marjproops · 14/04/2013 20:25

my friend is 67 and has a 12 year old, she keep him young, and even though people think he's her grampa, hes as fit as a fiddle.

you get young people that can poppit through illness/accidents, its never too old to be a parent.

people complain at teenage parents too. ANY age, as long as theyre responsible and loving is okay.

I became a mother at 35 and DC keeps ME young-ish!

If Id had my way Id have had kids MUCH younger as I always wanted a big family but life didnt turn out that way.

and if i met someone (Im late 40's) hed prob be older than me and (big picture) a father to a teenager.

go for it!!!

Remotecontrolduck · 14/04/2013 20:28

Nope not too old providing he's fit and healthy. If you both want it there's no reason why you shouldn't.

I wouldn't go much older though I have to admit, purely because people can age a lot in 10 years and the child will still be young. At nearly 60 he could still be as fit and active as a 40 year old, or he could be struggling tbh. Only you know his family history and what his physical condition is like now, he could still be very independent and not show his age for a very long time yet!

Jinty64 · 14/04/2013 20:28

Dh was 48 when we had ds1, 50 when we had ds2 and 58 when ds3 was born. He is still very fit any appears much younger than his age. He is also now semi retired so is at home more and can do the school run. i don't see it as a problem.

ShowOfHands · 14/04/2013 20:33

My friend's Dad was 62 when she was born. He died when she was 20 which of course was devastating but she wouldn't have swapped those 20 years with her Dad for a lifetime with any other Dad. He was the gentlest, kindest, most natural Dad.

DD is 5yo and has a 31yo Dad. Her best friends (twins) have a 60yo Dad. We spend a lot of time together and in terms of involvement and energy, there's little to split my DH from the twins' Dad.

CandlestickOlder · 14/04/2013 20:33

Completely depends. I know a couple of men in their late 40s who wish they'd had children earlier. They had them in their earli 40s.This may be because they are now senior in their careers - they would have had more time for them earlier in their careers. However both are able to afford their partners being SAHM.

Just one perspective though OP Smile

CheerfulYank · 14/04/2013 20:34

Totally depends. My dad became a grandfather at 47, because he was a dad when he was in his late teens. (He's 52 now) His brother, who is 3-ish years younger, didn't have DC until he was in his late 40s. So my son and my little cousin are quite close in age and are good friends. :)

Both my dad and uncle are excellent fathers. The difference in their lives is that my uncle did a lot of things when he was younger (degrees, a lot of moving and travel) and my parents didn't as they were raising kids from 18. But my brother and I were both moved out by the year our parents turned 40, so they do travel now, have started their own businesses, etc.

Original poster
ali23 · 14/04/2013 20:37

Some really lovely replies Smile. Thank u. Have the ovulation sticks at the ready!

OP posts:
CheerfulYank · 14/04/2013 20:38

Oh, and my FIL is a few years older than my grandmother; DH was a "surprise baby" born when FIL was in his 40's.

My GM is practically an invalid. She doesn't take care of herself and is not doing well.

FIL is very social and in much better shape, always doing something, always taking his GC places. It really depends.

deleted203 · 14/04/2013 20:41

DH was 47 when we had our last child, and he is a terrific father (now 55). I don't think you can say, 'Oh that's too old,' really.

Certainly I think there would be a huge cry of outrage if anyone suggested women shouldn't have a baby at 45, say.

Whilst thinking that you perhaps shouldn't father/mother a child at 78 - purely on the grounds that you are likely to die whilst they are still a child - I don't think 40s is old.

juneau · 14/04/2013 20:49

The main thing that would worry me would be the costs associated with having a DC and still supporting that DC when your DH may well be retired. Of course, retirement ages are going up and up, but if you assume that your DC will be dependent on you until at least 18 and quite possibly long after that, your DH would be a minimum of 66 by then. I'm sure you've done the sums, but it was something I was very aware of when we were having our 2nd and DH was 41.

BakingBunty · 14/04/2013 20:50

My DH is fifteen years older than me, and our DS was born when he was 50. He is the most wonderful, patient and energetic father. Fatherhood is something that he thought had passed him by, and he is totally over the moon to be a Dad. So much so that we are discussing him being a SAHD for a while now I'm back at work. In short - go for it!

Viviennemary · 14/04/2013 20:54

It is definitely not too old. Some men are hopeless fathers at any age. So it really isn't an age thing. Unless somebody themselves feel they are too old then that's a different thing.

WafflyVersatile · 14/04/2013 21:18

my bro was 45 for the first and 48 for the 2nd

SlimFitWellies · 14/04/2013 21:34

DH is 21 years older than me. We had our (and his) first when he was 56.

It is not an age thing, as others have said. We both know that when our babies are at secondary school, DH will be 70+. We know we have to prepare for this, and for me perhaps being on my own when they are in later teens. It is not an easy decision, but also, he is a great dad, and adores our children. They will have that legacy. What other people think or say is irrelevant. It is what is right for you, your family and what you are prepared for.

(although we did laugh when our DC1 was due, and I said to the mw that we were 'older parents' and her response was 'well, as long as the combined age of the parents is not over 90 it probably does not matter' and we quickly did the sums and said 'oh fuck').

Honestly though- look at the people who have children. The ONLY thing that matters is that you love them, care for them, and provide for them. Age is not the defining factor there.

MummytoKatie · 14/04/2013 21:52

According to the decennial life tables a 20 year old man has a 98% chance of living for 20 years. (ie seeing his child to adulthood.)

A 30 year old 96%
A 40 year old 92%
A 50 year old 79%
A 60 year old 51%

I think it is up to the individual to decide when these stats become too scary for them.

ArtemisKeldaHasALonelyYoni · 14/04/2013 21:56

DH is 49, nearly 50 and we have a 14 week old DD as well as a 6 year old DS. He's also 10 years older than me - it works for us.