Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To ask what your age cut off point to have a baby is?

404 replies

Mummyyummy2012 · 13/09/2016 21:32

I'm 43 and figure I am probably too old for any more children but deep down in my heart I'd love another...aibu to ask how old you think is too old?

OP posts:
HuskyLover1 · 19/09/2016 13:19

personally, I think 43 is too old. If you are ttc now, you'll probably be 44 when you give birth. If your child goes to Uni at age 18, you'll be 62 by the time they leave home. If they don't go to Uni, they could still be at home when you're 70!

But I realise my opinion is biased. As I say this as someone who is 46, with a DH of 43, and our two have both now flown the nest for Uni. Whilst we miss them, we are planning to embrace this new phase of life, by having some brilliant holidays, doing stuff you wouldn't do with kids etc.

I can't imagine still doing the school run in my 60's!

FrozenAteMyDaughter · 19/09/2016 14:10

It's a generalisation, of course, but I suspect that many people who have had children in their 20s or early 30s are hardly likely to relish the thought of still looking after little ones in their 40s and then teenagers into their 60s. Effectively, you will have spent your entire adult life looking after children. However, for those who don't have children at all until their late 30s/early40s, so spent the first twenty or so of their adult years free and responsible for no one other than themselves, looking after young children later in life doesn't seem like such an appalling prospect.

I imagine those that can still see themselves having babies at 47/48 probably didn't start having children until later anyway.

There are always exceptions of course but I think if I had had a couple of children in my 20s, I would now (late 40s) be settling back to wait for grandchildren rather than considering babies.

GreenShadow · 19/09/2016 16:39

First at 30, 2nd 33, 3rd when I was 37.
Physically I found pregnancy and birth all relatively easy, so from that point of view I'd have been quite happy to have them when older if we had wanted more.
I also don't think a lack of energy as you get older need be too much of an issue. I'm now 54 and need less sleep than I ever have before.
More worrying to me would be the effects on a teenager of having older parents. I certainly think that it can be a little unfair on a child to have retired parents -not very good for their image!

RunningLulu · 19/09/2016 16:49

Women have had babies safely in my family into their 50s (we menopause at 60 generally), so my target has always been around 50. I guess it just depends on how I feel though.

FrozenAteMyDaughter · 19/09/2016 16:52

Well it wouldn't have been good for their image when it was an unusual thing to have older parents. Looking around at the people I know now, and the mums at the school gates, there are quite a large number of teenagers who are going to have to deal with retired or nearly-retired parents in a few years time, so I expect it will become less of an issue soon.

Youarenotprepared · 19/09/2016 16:53

I think it depends on your circumstances. I had all 3 in my 20's and at 35 don't intend to do it again unless I have to. I have 3 kids with a 2-3 year age gap between them. It is the age gap we wanted, the time we wanted to have them and we feel complete as a family.

Youarenotprepared · 19/09/2016 16:54

To me it was more the gaps. I know families with massive age gaps and I think I would struggle with that. Youngest is almost 7 now and I can't imagine going back to nappies and broken nights.

Scichic · 19/09/2016 19:21

Had DS at 28 and DD the day before my 38th birthday. 2nd pregnancy considerably harder but worth it!!

DailyMailPenisPieces · 20/09/2016 11:46

When my eggs packed up! Had last baby at 41 but didn't manage to keep a pregnancy after that.

DailyMailPenisPieces · 20/09/2016 11:47

Wow RunningLou!

SirVixofVixHall · 20/09/2016 14:52

RunningLou! How brilliant. What ages were your family members having babies? (Am not considereing another, just curious). I remember reading that there is a tribe where the women routinely have babies in their 50s. Menopause at 60 sounds good.

LianneRSA · 20/09/2016 18:15

I saw this in an article and thought I should share my story. When I was 31 my fiance I had been with died in an accident so life started over for me. 3 years later I met my husband we were friends for a while started dating and married when I just turned 38. I fell pregnant 6 months later and at 39 had our son in 2013 it took me 2 months and I fell pregnant. I was pregnant again exactly 3 years later my children's due dates both fell in the June I had my baby girl in June 2016 aged 42. I fell pregnant with her immediately. Given my age and I battle a chronic condition Crohn's disease to be precise I feel very blessed to have not struggled to fall pregnant and also gave birth to 2 healthy babies by c section. So it wasn't by choice that I had children later in life so I don't think people should be prejudiced and say you won't be able to be on par with younger mom's I beg to differ despite my health challenges I do everything the younger mom's do. It's all in God's hands at the end of the day. Your risks to increase for abnormalities the older you get and my gynae said the risks are already there in your later 20's. Healthy young women have given birth to children with abnormalities so it can happen to anyone. My husband and I did make the conscious decision before the birth of our son even that if it was a struggle and we couldn't get pregnant we would consider adoption. We also agreed that if I didn't fall pregnant with our 2nd baby by the end of 2016 we would call it a day and be grateful just with one. Good luck to all the mums out there the younger and older. Of my circle of friends I have 1 friend only that started having children in her 20s it doesn't seem like an uncommon trend that women are having children later in life. Have a blessed day x

herecomesthsun · 20/09/2016 18:25

Women in my family also menopause late (around 60) but I've read that you are likely to get a sharp decline in fertility around 10 years before you menopause.

Hulababy · 20/09/2016 18:34

JenLindleyShitMom Tue 13-Sep-16 23:11:51
When nature decides you can't get pregnant anymore.

But for some people that might be when they are very young. Does that mean people with fertility issues shouldn't be a parent?

Im 43y. DD is 14y and was born when I was 29y, after a couple of years or so of TTC. Wanted a second but it hasn't happened. We don't do anything to prevent it, even now. So, although it is highly unlikely I guess we are subconsciously making the decision that at 43y we don't feel too old yet.

JenLindleyShitMom · 20/09/2016 18:40

Excellent point hula. I was thinking of menopause but hadn't considered early menopause or infertility.

Hulababy · 20/09/2016 18:50

Menopause makes sense, unless early onset - which I would class as being an infertility issue anyway.

RunningLulu · 20/09/2016 19:02

Gran on dads side had her last natural baby at 52 (baby later died of Asthma ). Gran on mums side had Her last at 55.

AHedgehogCanNeverBeBuggered · 20/09/2016 19:25

If you have DC early you'll be 'free' at a relatively young age. If you have them later you'll have enjoyed those free years earlier while you were still 'young'. Both have their advantages, but statistically older parents are more likely to read to their DC, more likely to give them educational opportunities, and less likely to divorce. That doesn't mean young parents aren't as good, but it is generally true that older parents are more likely to be financially stable and able to spend more time with their DC.

N.B. I'm NOT an older parent in case anyone's wondering whether I'm biased...

GoldLady · 20/09/2016 19:32

Had my one and only at 36, 10 years later I could do it all again and know other mothers who are 46 and have newborns, all perfectly happy and healthy. Most however have older kids helping out.

Irishgal80 · 20/09/2016 20:20

I had always said that if I didn't have a baby by 30, I would never have kids. I had my son at 21, and he is 15 now. I am a Registered Nurse Midwife, so I know those risks firsthand that come with pregnancy after the age of 35. It's not my place to tell anyone what to do, but medically, it's not advisable.

SukeyTakeItOffAgain · 20/09/2016 23:15

By 30???! That's overdoing it surely.

Cathaka15 · 20/09/2016 23:23

I had number 4 at 38. I loved it more this time round. Had my first three at 21 23 25.

minatiae · 21/09/2016 01:14

Saw an article about this thread on the Daily Mail today.

MrsDeVere · 21/09/2016 07:40

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bearfrills · 21/09/2016 08:08

but medically, it's not advisable.

Grin Grin Grin

A quick Google brings this up straight away:

The risks associated with being over 35 and pregnant tend to be exaggerated. If you're in this age group, and are healthy, you can generally expect to have a successful pregnancy, so try not to worry.

In addition to this, medical professionals are aware of the risks and they are therefore managed. For example, screening tests, checks on the wellbeing of the mother and the baby, managed delivery if need be, and so on. Where I live, higher risk mothers (including those at higher risk due to age) have a consultant appointment at 12wks to plan what care they'll need. Some of them won't need to see the consultant again, some of them will need to be seen again, and usually a scan is offered at around 34wks to check all is well.

Statistically, even when you're 35 and therefore old and decrepit, you are still far more likely to have a healthy pregnancy and a healthy baby than not.