Have a 4th at 47 or not?

[baby4ornot]

I will be turning 46 this year and have been on the fence about conceiving a 4th child.
Back story, we had a difficult time getting pregnant due to my endometriosis. We finally had our first child via IVF at the age of 40. Then we had twins (boy&girl) at age of 42. I was wiped out after the twins and had a severe umbilical hernia which I was told by my dr that I needed to get fixed before I ended up in an emergency room. I opted to get full muscle repair with no mesh. I was 44. At the time I couldn't think of having a fourth. Now my oldest is about to start K, and the twins will start next year.
We have 1 embryo left in storage. I have this immense guilt about leaving it in storage and that I should attempt to go through and try having this baby. The embryo has already been tested (after initial MC with first 3 IVF, we had all the embryos go through PGD testing), so it should be free of chromosome defects which would lead to a MC (miscarriage) or birth defects. It would just be a matter of it surviving the thaw and implanting.

I go back and forth on if I can physically handle a 4th at 47 (assuming I start the process this year and give birth next year)? When I was pregnant with the twins at 41-42, my BP was a concern, now I will also have to factor a pregnancy with a sewn stomach. Also we would be going back to square 1 baby stage and infant daycare costs. My husband doesn’t want to give the embryo up for adoption but I don’t want to destroy it either. Hence my dilemma. Anyone w similar situation or thoughts?

We are still deeply things through. He really wants the 4th as he keeps mentioning to people we could have a 4th.

I'm sure they think he's an absolute loon.

Sorry but I do think it would beselfish. It would be one thing if you were trying for a first child (although for me that would be too old too) but you have 3 already. Just because it is possible, doesn’t mean it is desirable. Lots of people with older parents on here (including myself) say they have found it hard.there is newly 15 years between my parents and in-laws and that makes a huge difference in outlook, experience with grandchildren etc. I worry constantly about their health and have done so since I was small.

It is easy to think of yourself as you are now but what if you need to give up work early for ill-health? life expectancy is one thing but you have to be realistic about the stats for healthy life expectancy and what it might mean for the child if your health deteriorates. It is an incredible burden for a child to become a young carer. These are things you have to think through at your age whether you want to or not.

Sorry OP, you were what I would consider on the very upper limit of an ok age to have a child when you had your first and second pregnancies. Now, I’m sorry but in my opinion, you’re just to old. I don’t want to sound rude, but the risks are too high, and why would you risk not being there for the children you have so that you can have another.

My mum was 42 when she had my youngest sister, she was ill after she had her, it really took a tole, as you said pregnancy and birth did for you at 42, why would you consider doing it again being 5 years older.
Also my sister hated having older parents (she was 29 when she had me, so not something i experienced) and my mum felt guilty that her and dad were older and did not have as much energy as younger parents.

I would try and convince your DH to donate the embryo, it seems like the best option for you. Your not giving up your baby, just the chance of having another, and you could possibly help someone have a child.

Tbh I couldn’t donate an embryo. I am prone to worry and obsessive thought and I would spend he rest of my life worrying about the life my biological child was born into. I would only donate to close family. But that’s just me. I say this to stress that it’s not an easy decision - you are trusting that the child will be born into an ideal family setting, that might not be the case.

I also disagree with the accusations of ageism on this thread. Mortality rates increase and health declines as we age. Th level of denial on this thread is startling. Just because everyone thinks they look 21, and know/read about a few mums who gave birth over 45 suddenly age shouldn’t be a factor. Of course it should. 27 is very different to 27, no matter how much we kid ourselves.

47 is very different to 27

'We are still deeply things through. He really wants the 4th as he keeps mentioning to people we could have a 4th.

I'm sure they think he's an absolute loon.'

Absolutely

I hated having an older DM

I was a ‘happy surprise’ and mum had me at 45.

Mums age was if anything, a benefit.

She was happy and secure and more confident, and they had already gone through the child process before so no PFB bullshit.

She was/is very fit and healthy and active for her age.

And she says I kept her young :-)

On the subject of different ages, outlooks and interaction with grandchildren, we had this too. Difference being both sets of parents were almost exactly the same age. My parents were always very hands off and expected me to entertain my younger sisters, worked all hours and employed a nanny when they had young children. They had me at 25 but played a very hands off role with the kids, never even picked them up post babyhood (though my mother is s newborn hogger, she expects the baby to be removed to have its nappy changed and returned to her).

My in-laws were totally different and very hands on, hiking with the kids, playing chasing games, carrying them and swinging them about - same ages as my parents.

My in-laws are in their sixties and could pass for eighty!

My in-laws are in their sixties and could pass for eighty!

It’s entirely your choice

Personally I wouldn't but my opinion doesn't mean you shouldn't

@fenellamaxwell we are older parents (had DD at nearly 42 - v straightforward pregnancy and conceived first month) and my 4 year old DD is the only one of her peers who can both ride a bike and swim. I’m now 46 and notice no difference in my energy levels and that of the other mums. There’s no way I’d be considering another one at this point but that’s because we are enjoying getting our freedom back now. But I see no reason not to based on age. In the OPs circumstances I’d be worried about the health implications though.

@Smellybluecheese with respect there’s a big difference between having a child at 41 and at 47. Or possibly even 48 by the time OP would give birth. Do you really think you would be up to starting all over again with a newborn in 2 years’ time?

It’s great that at 46 you don’t notice a drop in energy levels but if you RTFT, you will note that isn’t the experience for the majority.

I would consider 47 much too old for a baby, especially a fourth.

@fenellamaxwell I already said I don’t fancy starting again but then we only ever wanted one so it’s not been a dilemma for us. However physically I am no different now than at 41 and obviously I have no way of knowing whether things will drastically change in the next two years or not. I don’t think age is a reason for a child not being able to ride a bike etc. My dad (in his 70s) taught my nephew so no idea why someone in their 50s wouldn’t be able to. I don’t know many (any) completely decrepit 50 year olds. I haven’t read a majority of older people in this thread saying they have no energy. I have read a majority of people younger than 40 saying they think they would have no energy in their 40s. And that they are tired in their 30s with multiple children and wouldn’t want another. Not the same thing. I know several other older mums (my close uni friends and I all started families in our 40s) and all of our children are taken to the park/ bike riding/ swimming regularly etc. We were out running after DD on her bike this morning and I’ll be taking her swimming tomorrow. None of this exhausts me and I’m 46. Things would have to change a lot in the next two years for me not to be capable of taking a toddler to the pool.

Good luck with your decision OP

I’d say no as the child is likely to be an orphan from a pretty young age.

Assuming OP lives to this average age of a female in the UK (82), her orphaned child would be 25 years old...

TYPO - 35 YEARS OLD!!!

Good luck OP 😳 do you know how unlikely it is to get pregnant at 47??

My DH’s parents were older when he was born. DH was never taught to ride a bike, or swim, because they frankly were exhausted. DH never went on playdates because by the time he was 5, his parents were in their 50s and all his friend’s parents were 30 and they found it awkward. All in all he had quite a lonely and unfulfilled childhood due to his parents’ age

And my BF at school had a lovely bike riding, swimming, sleep over-ing childhood ‘despite’ being raised by her grandparents (who were older than 47)

I am not saying that my DH’s experience would be everyone’s. But it had to be taken into consideration as a possibility. OP already has health concerns and isn’t likely therefore to bounce straight back after this, so she needs to consider how ill-advised it would potentially be.

He really wants the 4th as he keeps mentioning to people we could have a 4th.

It’s easy for him to talk. I would have a very low opinion of a man who would be this nonchalant about his wife giving birth again at the age of 48.

Fuck no!

What are you thinking?

We had 3 frozen embryos and had angst about what to do with them.
I always presumed we'd donate them to another couple but the thought of possible future children who were genetically ours didn't sit right.
We gave them to research, our embryologist was working on implantation and we figured without research we wouldn't ever have had our DC in the first place.
I'd enjoy the children you have.

"He really wants the 4th as he keeps mentioning to people we could have a 4th."
Way to go, get other people to push his their expectations onto you. What a prince amongst men he is.

It's not his body which is going to be doing all the work and taking all the risks. I would be very angry with my husband if he did this to me.