How old is too old?

[Dartilla]

To become a parent?

My DH is older than me and I wondered if a general consensus even existed about how old is too old to become a dad, or even a mum?

Is there an age where it becomes selfish to have a baby? I'm trying to get my own opinions straight, as naturally I think each to their own, but then I wonder if there's a line?

Does age matter? Would you personally have a 'cut off' age, as such?

I’m mid-30s and this would be my cut off. I had my two DC in my twenties and it’s worked for me.

My DM had her first two (me and DB) in her very early twenties and then had another mid-40s. Whilst she loves my younger sibling, she said she wouldn’t recommend being an older mother - she does find it more tiring than she did 20+ years ago and we’ve had to have conversations around caring for my dsis, should anything happen to her or my stepfather.

Totally personal circumstances. Depending on how you feel, your health at the time, what you want at the time.

It’s fine looking way into the future saying I don’t want to be 60 with teenagers - understand that completely- however I am friends with extremely active and young minded 60 year olds who have children of all different ages and all are fantastic parents. No one can predict what the future holds for anyone’s health.

Weigh up your personal circumstances, yes there are statistics about things as you get older but it is a completely individual choice. Go for it.

I was going to post a very similar thing. We are similar ages to you and we already have one but have no desire for a second right now. Don’t want to rule it out forever though. Not so bad for me but hubby is older and I’m also wondering how long is too long to wait.

Also agree with a PP about the differences in values, i.e. parents in their 60s not understanding what life is like for teens nowadays. Again it depends on the person, but my dad would have been far more conservative than my friends' parents.

I think 50 is probably my cut-off point for either parent, simply because the child is more likely to have to deal with parental ill-health at a relatively young age, and I don't think that's fair. Yes, there are people who are hale and hearty in their 80s - but many aren't - and it must be difficult dealing with that at say, 25, when none of your peers are.

Of course, health problems can strike at any time so it's no guarantee. It's v. worrying and stressful for a child/teen/young adult, though, and I think we should take that into consideration when having children.

I had both mine in my 30s and I'm done, couldn't imagine having another now in my 40s!

I had my children at 19 & 24 and now at 37 I couldn’t imagine having another. My dad had me at 29, also fit and healthy into sports, and one day just declined. He’s now very disabled. If he had had me in his 50’s I would still be a child living with a very disabled dad.

bikerunski

The eldest is at least 53 as she went to school with my partner’s brother, but she tells people she’s 49.

Her new husband is at least 10 years younger than her though.

Actually, there’s a lady who looks late 40s had a baby year or so ago, but she’s a midwife. Wonder if that ,ade a difference to her open mindedness on the matter.

I was 33 and DH was 29 when we had our first. DC2 was 3 years later.

I wouldn't want another now (late 40s) as children are just so exhausting. I think it's easier to get back into a career earlier on and, through the same lens, as your children become teens, you'll likely have some flexibility in your working hours, higher income etc when it's needed most (teens are more expensive).

I do think that over 40 seems a little selfish. Of course there can be great older parents but that doesn't mean there aren't significant disadvantages. Not living to engage and be around your grandchildren is one.

My parents were 40 and I'm now looking after one terminally ill parent, one with dementia and trying to work full time and look after my children. However they could both have been healthy for longer, it's luck of the draw. I'd rather be here than not though, of course.

DH and I had our DC late (in our early 40s ) - as we didn't get together until late 30s. Just for the record on older parents - we're just an ordinary couple, not super sporty or health and fitness fanatics but we DO still have plenty of energy and are not over the hill yet even though in our 50s. Some of comments above assume older parents can't do so much physical stuff and DC miss out. We do Park Run with ours, go swimming, ice skating, football in park, rolling around the floor etc - all the typical stuff my younger parents did with me and my siblings.

Did your friend adopt in the UK, Whatsnew? Didn't think you could adopt a toddler in your 50s.

No not in the UK, Concerned.

I'm 39, DH 43, have a 15 month old and a 3week old together - we wanted two and my 'cut off' was 40 so very lucky to have conceived as soon as we did - I don't get the 'selfish' comment tho!?

Age doesn't matter at all when it comes to being a good parent!?!

I don’t think you’re too old, but I’d crack on now.

My personal cut off was 40 (had mine at 32, 34, 36), Dh is a year older.

But had circumstances been different and I hadn’t met dh until I was 40 I’m sure I’d have tried for a baby anyway.

Being an older parent is better than not being a parent at all, would have been my opinion.

I think it depends on the person and the circumstances. I had my children young, so won't be having any in my 30's or 40's, this has worked out well for me and I think they're are many advantages to having children young.

The only advantage I can think of for having children later in life (by choice) is the fact that you're probably more financially secure, own a house etc, before DC's arrive.

I feel that being younger I am more in touch with my children than older parents, we have more in common and I find it easier to see things from their perspective. Having said that, my mother had me in her late 20's and my youngest sister at 42 and she was equally out of touch with both of us. So maybe that's personality.

I coped with the sleep deprevation much much better in my early 20's, far better than I think I would now, even in my 30's let alone my 40's. DD2 was a terrible sleeper, I'm not sure I Would be able to manage a baby that never slept, a moaning toddler and a very physical job in my 40's as well as I did in my 20's.

However if life circumstances had been different and I hadn't had the chance to have children young, I think that I would have still gone for it up until maybe 42 for me and late 40's for a partner. It wouldn't have been my ideal, but life isn't always ideal. I think as long as you are both in reasonable health then go for it, but sooner rather than later.

I think as always there is a bit of ageism on MN!

I am in my 60s and so is DH. It's not old these days. The retirement age is now set at 67 for state pensions and DH still works with people in their 70s who are working p/t.

If you look after your health you can be fitter at 60 than some 45 year olds. My DH does wall climbing, cycling and running with the DCs.

To counter that all I'd say is that when your children become young adults, they still need you around. Parenting doesn' t end when they are teens.

We had our youngest as we approached our mid 30s.

My own dad was 38 when my sibling was born. He ended up living at home till he was 30 so my parents were still hands-on parents in their mid-late 60s.

My personal cut-off is 35 in ideal circumstances. I say this having had older parents like a few other posters. I always noticed a difference and I have worried about their health for years. But, If I had an ‘accident’ later, I’d find it hard to abort based on age unless I was over 40 (and even then I’d find it tough).

For me, if you have children later, you need to think about the potential financial impact of early retirement (due to ill health or redundancy). There will be individuals who are healthier in their 50s than those in their 30s but you’re rolling a bit of a dice. It is not enough to think about life expectancy but also healthy life expectancy (which is far lower).

Anything over 45 for either parent is way too old imo.

My personal cut-off is 35 in ideal circumstances. I say this having had older parents like a few other posters.I always noticed a difference and I have worried about their health for years

Surely it depends on how long they live?

My parents had me in their late 20s. They are now early 90s. I am early 60s.

My Mum had me at 35. She's a very young 66 and her and my father are both young and fit. I had my first at 31 after over a decade of infertility. Sometimes you just don't have a choice. My cut off for #2 will be 41. After that we'll give up :)

I think many of the posters have to bare in mind that the OP is using their opinions as a gauge as to whither or not she and her DH decide to have children. This is a massive decision and a very personal one. I feel strongly that all the posters who had their children younger and are fine with that are really of no help at all as that boat has sailed in the OP's life.

What is of much more interest is people who had children later in life or people who are the children of older parents. These are the only life stories of any relevance for the OP.

I loved my dad dearly, but having an older father did impact on me and influenced my own personal cut-off of mid-30s (I was 34 and DH was 36 when youngest was born).
I wouldn’t judge anyone else though.

Pros and cons as others have said, I am 60 with a 17 year old (DH is a couple of years younger than me). I know lots of 60 year olds who are already grandparents.

Definitely a financial advantage for us we’ve never needed to struggle financially, mortgage paid off years ago, DS has been able to go on the big school trips etc. I had plenty of years before I had DS to develop my career, travel etc so I am now happy to have a part time job that I really enjoy and is fulfilling but relatively low paid, but I have time with him for university visits etc.
There were times in my 50s when I found it harder, friends would be off on nice city breaks abroad and I would be helping with scout camp . But overall I am glad I had my DS when I was older rather than being a younger mum, lots more life experience which can only help in my opinion.

“surely it depends on how long they live?

My parents had me in their late 20s. They are now early 90s. I am early 60s.”

Yes and no. Dealing with parental ill-health in your 30s when you have your own young family, career stress etc is a very different prospect to being in your 60s. My friends have parental support for childcare that mine just couldn’t do physically. Life stage makes a massive difference.

I don't think that 45 is too old for a man to have a first child.

What is important is that he makes an effort to stay healthy- as everyone should anyway.

Life expectancy for men is almost 85 so anyone having a child at 45 could be around for some time!

But you need to get on with it. The age of the man does contribute to birth defects too. I think for me, 50 would be the absolute cut-off point.

It depends how much you both want children. Someone I know got married again at 50 - wife was 42- and they decided they were too old and didn't want to risk a child with birth defects which do become quite a significant risk for the over-40s.