To want to try for DC3 (at 47) or am IBU

[MarksandSpencerfoodjunkie]

Got an 8 and 4 YO - no problems getting pregnant with either. Even DC2 at 41 (had him at 42). DH is worried that my health will suffer. I'm a fitness junkie in very good health - the only problem I have is IBS which has just been diagnosed; had a lot of blood tests and scans which showed I was/am very healthy. I know my chance of m/c is 50% now but my cousin (who wishes she'd had another) and is now in her late 50s is telling me I will regret it. I have a full time job as a very senior manager - lots of mums are I senior management where I work but..

[yummymumoftwoandanangel]

I don't think you are being unreasonable. I had dd1 at 31 and dd2 at 41. I am currently trying for dc3. I will be 46 later this year. I know lots of ladies who are having their third and fourth kids in their mid 40s. Having dd2 in my 40's has been the most worthwhile and amazing decision I've ever made in my life. My perspective on life has altered dramatically. It's made me more health conscious, sanguine and adventurous. I take time to invest in myself nutritionally, physically, intellectually, emotionally and psychologically . As a result, I look great and much younger than a lot of the mums in dd2 class, even though I am at least 10 years older than most. I have learnt to appreciate and enjoy life immensely as myself, as a mum and as a wife. As my friends put it "my zest for life is infectious". Having dc3 will be a blessing. I don't want to look back when I'm 70 wistfully and ask myself "what if". Go for it with an open mind, obviously with all the necessary precautions. if it works out, then so be it. Either way, you've got nothing to lose and a lot to gain. That's the way I'm approaching dc3.

[AKAmyself]

3 women in my extended family got pregnant naturally at 45+ and had healthy babies, so it is totally possible.

No one can or should judge, of course, but my observation in all those cases is that these mums (and dads - because they are also of a certain age!) just don't have a lot of energy to deal with young children or toddlers and they have in all cases found it very hard - while still loving and cherishing their little ones, it's a very different style of parenting. You have to be comfortable with not being able to give to your dcs a number of things that come easier when younger (physical evergy; sleep deprivation; patience; interest in peppa pig when young and Pokemon go when older; willingness to socialise with other parents; etc etc)

If I can offer my personal experience fwiw, i turned 40 this year and had a pregnancy scare (my eldest are 8 and 10) and totally freaked out - despite oohing and aaahing for years about having a third. But once it became a distinct possibility, I realised that no way I'm ready to go trough the whole hullabaloo again.

I am a little sad I won't have a 3rd but have realised 2 things: 1) I was really longing for the days my existing dcs were little, rather than an actual new baby and 2) the broodiness I had previously experienced was more a result of wanting to stay young, whatever that means. I loved my 30s with little ones, and was sad they were over. But for everything there is a season and I'm now really looking forward to my 40s with teenage children and hopefully my 50s of independence!

So in regards to your question: of corse YANBU, it's your decision. However, think carefully about the motivations behind it. Good luck!

[lisacammyjacksmum]

I'm 41 my oldest is 20 my youngest is 8 , I wouldn't like to have another baby at my age but if you are healthy go for it

[mysteryfairy]

My MIL had my SIL at 46. FIL was 5 years older. SIL lost her dad when she was 16 and her mum earlier this year when she was 23.

I needed my mum and dad so much when I was that age and it breaks my heart to think of my sister in law with no option to ever go home, to chat to her mum on the phone, to get support or a bail out, to have parents at her wedding, when she has DC etc.

Of course that can happen to people with much younger parents but the likelihood of being orphaned at a young age increases with parental age. Once I would probably have said go for it but having seen the utter desolation it causes to be left without parents before you've made your way in the world I would hang back, especially as you are already lucky enough to have two DC.

[Winemamma]

I wouldn't for the following reasons:-

1. the health risks for you and the baby
   
2. the fact that when they are in their early 20's you will be 70
   
3. you have 2 children so be happy and grateful for what you have, don't upset the apple cart and all that!
   
   Having said that, you know your body and your family and should do what you believe is the right thing for the whole family.....not just you
   
   One thing I would like to know, is it a baby you crave or another child? They aren't babies for long!
   
   I love my children but am glad I don't have to go through the baby years again.
   
   Good luck in your decision.

[blueberryporridge]

Too old. Not fair on the child. Imagine in the playground the other children would confuse you as a granny.

What a vacuous comment. I had my DS at three months short of my 47th birthday. He is now 5. (DD is 9). In all that time, a total of two people have mistaken me for his granny and, you know what - I don't think it matters anyway. I don't care what random people in the playground think about me and, by the time they reach a certain age, children are going to find something embarrassing about their parents regardless of their age...

There are quite a few things to weigh up about having a baby in your 40s but I really don't think that that is one of them...

[EverythingWillBeFine]

Wannabe a disabled child is a child first and foremost and as such will bring joy and value to your life. Of course it will.
But you can't ignore the fact that it is also requiring A LOT of work and time that a child wo disability will not. And that has some consequences on their siblings.

[EverythingWillBeFine]

Honestly? I judge just as harshly men such as Mick Jagger and I do so on the same grounds. Having a child at 73yo means that you will impose on your child either to be fatherless very young or to have to learn to care for him very young. How fair is that?

In the same way, I would look at the risk of downs etc... And the fact that when that child is 18yo, you will be 65yo.
Do you really see yourself at 65yo as the mum of an 18yo ready to go to Uni or as someone ready to retire?
Again HW fair is that on the potential child?
How fair is it on your two other dcs? (I'm thinking tiredness etc etc and assuming you would not carry on a pg with chromosome abnormalities. If you are against abortion on those grounds, then think again of the consequences on those two dcs)

[marblestatue]

It's entirely up to you. Men in their late 40s (and 50s/60s/70s) have kids and receive far less criticism. Mick Jagger is 73 and his 8th child is on the way.

[yorkstonepatio]

It's a very personal decision and one only you and your DH can make. A friend of mine had her 3rd child at 50 last year. Easy pregnancy, healthy baby, although the consultant was not prepared to let her go overdue so her baby was induced at 40 weeks. There is a risk free maternal blood test available now to check for chromosome abnormalities.

[MumsTheWordYouKnow]

Just because your cousin regretted not having a third doesn't mean you will. You've had your children late in life. 3 children is not easy compared to 2, especially if you work full time. Sounds like too much pressure and what about the possibilities of a pregnancy that's not healthy, even more so. I'd say be grateful for the 2 you've got and lavish your attention on them.

[Badders123]

Hmm
Honestly?
No I wouldn't.
You would be 50 and possibly starting menopause when your child is 2/3 -such a Difficult age.
I'm in peri menopause now (at 43) and its bad enough with older kids and it can last years

[carolynrose]

I've just had my 3rd at 43.. It was an ok pregnancy but I definitely can say I wouldn't have done it again if something had happened (which I know is easy to say now I've had the baby) good luck whatever you decide! X

[WannaBe]

We are all just a car crash or a botched birth away from having a disabled child, so by that logic no-one should consider having more than one child because of the potential impact a disabled child would have on its sibling.

Reality is that every pregnancy carries risks of disability or serious health complications, and while the risk of Downs increases after the age of 35, there are a lot more disabilities out there which don't have chromosomal risk factors which can occur at any age.

It's incredibly sad that anyone feels that having a disabled sibling has negatively impacted on their lives, and although I could understand someone's choice to e.g. Not have children as a result of their own experiences, I do find the idea that siblings are somehow victims of disability rather offensive.

For me personally, the consideration wouldn't be whether to have a baby at 47 (although personally I couldn't envisage doing so,) but for me it would be the fact that I would almost be in my 70's by the time it was twenty. And although lifespan has increased in people, health hasn't, meaning that people who previously would have died in their 70's and 80's are now living longer but with dementia and the like, thus meaning that children born to older parents are having to become carers or at the very least making decisions on behalf of their parents at an age when they should really be setting up their own families and seeing the world.

[CecilyP]

I think up-thread, it said that the number of births to women over 45 was around 2,000. I don't have a breakdown of numbers for each age, but wouldn't be at all surprised if around 1,800 of those were to women who actually were 45. Before the advent of IVF using donor eggs, there were also about 49 births to women over 50 each year.

[PokemonGo]

Carabos. I was trying to find the stats for how many births there were for mothers who were over 45 but I couldn't find it. I think it's there somewhere....

[JinkxMonsoon]

At 47 I really think your chances are so low that it's not worth the heartache. And the most likely outcome is heartache. I think you should spare yourself and enjoy your two children.

[GinIsIn]

You may be fine to have a baby, but please think about the level of support you can give that DC as they grow up, as it really isn't fair on the child in some cases. My FIL was 50 when DH was born. DH can't really swim or ride a bike because his dad was too old to run around after him so they never bothered to teach him, and DH had to resit his uni finals as he had to take time off when his dad broke a hip and needed care. He wasn't able to come to our wedding, and now at 33 we are expecting our first DC, and FIL won't be any kind of involved grandparent. He's a lovely man, but his age made him at best an ineffectual parent.

[Cloudhopping]

I think you should go for it OP. Good luck.xx

[carabos]

I'm not in the least bit surprised it's that low. I'm surprised it's that many. I'll look it up myself, but I imagine most of those mothers are closer to 40 than 50...

[PokemonGo]

According to the Office of National Statistics in 2015 out of just under 700,000 births ONLY 29,000 were to mothers over 40.

I'm suprised it's so low. Thats only 1 in 24 births.

[herecomesthsun]

That article also gives figures of 2010 babies born to mums aged over 45 in England and Wales in that period, further evidence that it doesn't just happen to a couple of people on Mumsnet.

[herecomesthsun]

erm, what you read on mumsnet is generally genuine experience. Before contraception thankfully made choice available, it was not at all uncommon for women to have very large families, having the last baby in their 40s. It is increasingly common for women to want babies later and sorry Fail link again apparently births to mums over 40 are now more common in the UK than births to teenagers. 47 is well, a bit late, but then it happens for some (did for me).

We did see a fertility specialist before I had my first child. He was indeed discouraging about the chances of success- and advised us against IVF because of the toll it would take on me. He suggested in our case just continuing to try naturally, which is what we did.

[carabos]

I suppose to some degree it depends what you mean by "try for another". If you mean "let nature take its course and see what happens", that's different from "let's do all the tests, then include IVF with donor eggs or surrogacy in our plans".

However, the fact that your husband has mentioned vasectomy indicates that perhaps ye's not on the same page - is your broodiness maybe just a reaction to that? Wanting a last shake of the bag kind of thing?

On the technical side, your fsh levels may be good for someone of your age, but the facts don't lie. Despite what you read on MN, it is very very unlikely that you would conceive naturally at your age. It is very unlikely that even having conceived, you would carry a pregnancy to term. That's why if you are serious, you will need a plan B, and proper advice from a medical specialist before you start.

[herecomesthsun]

Well, there are an awful lot of mums in their 40s/50s at our primary/junior school.

(Mind you, I tried going from my touched up dark hair to grey and got a couple of granny comments. So I went blonde instead, and I think I might be sticking with it. )