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 when you think it’s too old to have your first baby

466 replies

Stripyseagulls · 05/09/2019 04:56

My good friend is desperate for her first baby & has had loads of treatment but it’s not working. I really feel for her a lot & she’s not ready to even start to think about not trying & is hoping to use donor eggs. She’s nearly 45 though.

I would never say this to her and I am trying to be positive but when is it too old? I almost feel like it’s a topic that can’t be discussed generally as it comes across as ageist. For me, the thought of having a 10 year old at 55 isn’t great to be honest - still having to be at primary school etc.

Aibu to ask what age you think is too old? Should I even ask the question?

OP posts:
Kiddofreddo80 · 06/09/2019 21:17

35 I think

AlmostAJillSandwich · 06/09/2019 21:21

30+
My mum had me at 28 and died at 48, long lives aren't guaranteed, and im devastated to have only got 20 years with my mum, a good half of which i can't remember as i was a child.
I'm 30 in a month and feel im too old to try for a child now.

EmeraldShamrock · 06/09/2019 21:23

Neither do I believe in ivf etc
@raspberryk
Can you explain it, I'm thinking you dont believe in ivf for older DMs like the 73yo in the news.
IVF is an amazing science I don't know lots about it but I am very grateful many scientists discovered it.

Roozy123 · 06/09/2019 21:25

"Can you explain it, I'm thinking you dont believe in ivf for older DMs like the 73yo in the news.
IVF is an amazing science I don't know lots about it but I am very grateful many scientists discovered it.

I agree

Ginger1982 · 06/09/2019 21:25

@AlmostAJillSandwich

I feel for you. My dad was 30 when I was born and died at 43 so I only got 13 years with him. But that wouldn't and didn't stop me wanting children. I was 34 when I had DS after IVF and everyone agrees he is the spitting image of my dad. That brings me such comfort.

Please don't rule yourself out if it's what you really want Thanks

BooseysMom · 06/09/2019 21:32

I think being 40 and having a 5 year old is okayish, but 50 with a 15 year old less okay (personally!!)

I don't get this. If you're 40 with a 5 year old or 50 with a 15 year old, you had the baby at 35 which is the most common age to have a baby, so how is that bad? Confused
I'm doomed in that case..i had DS at 41 and will be 56 when he's 15..oh shock & horror! I will no doubt be in for a torrent of granny-bashing by his vile school 'mates'!! Shock

Paintedmaypole · 06/09/2019 22:08

Isn't being 50 with a 15 year old commonplace?

EmeraldShamrock · 06/09/2019 22:14

Isn't being 50 with a 15 year old commonplace?
IME yes, we are all turning 40 this year and most of our group have an under 5.
Granted a few have 15 year olds too.

DontGetMeWrongBaby · 06/09/2019 22:22

I raise an eyebrow at over around 41 or 42, but it’s none of my business, to be blunt about it,

My grandmother had her last child at 44. I have two aunties who had last babies at 46 and 47 respectively (with very different outcomes - one had a perfectly healthy child who has been a fairly easy ride, the other had a profoundly disabled child and is still caring for him in her 70s).

I always said I wouldn’t have a child after 35, but actually I think 39/40 is a sensible cut off all round.

I had my DC at 27 and 31, and that was right for me, that’s all I can really say. I’m 42 now and would be horrified at the idea of doing the baby and toddler years again now, or at entering my 50s with a primary school aged child. But I can understand why someone who had never had children for whatever reason and had the Chance in their 40s might feel differently.

edgeofheaven · 06/09/2019 23:51

Having a second or third child in 40s is different because that means the burden of an aging parent can be shared with others.

If you’re an only born to 44 year olds, you may be facing issues with your parents’ health needs when you’re too young to help support them.

PILs had SIL when they were over 40 and they now have health problems. Luckily DH is much older than her so he can take the lead as she’s just finished her university studies and is in her 20s.

lifesnotaspectatorsport · 07/09/2019 05:10

@UsedtobeFeckless No regrets from me either (first time mum at 37 and pregnant again at 40). I didn't feel remotely ready before 35 despite being with DH since I was 20; too busy with career, friends, endless travelling, nights out and long lie-ins. God, it was good! I feel having kids is 'slowing down' and 'settling' Wink But I'm ok with that now because I already did so much.

Having my kids abroad now where I'm fortunate to have a good career, domestic help, no money worries. Wouldn't change a thing. In fact, I'm always a bit surprised if I hear of someone having a baby in their 20s ... we're all different.

Dongdingdong · 07/09/2019 06:52

Neither do I believe in ivf etc.

Eh? Why? Confused @raspberryk

StepAwayFromGoogle · 07/09/2019 07:03

I had DD1 at 38 and DD2 at 41. Yes, it's knackering but I don't know any parent if young kids who isn't knackered (20 or 40). Obviously having children in your 50s or 60s is ridiculous because you need to see them into adulthood before you're too old to look after them.

user1493759849 · 07/09/2019 08:51

Further to what a few posters have said. DD has a couple of friends who are close to her age - early to mid 20s - and they were both born to older parents. One girl (Lizzie) was born to a 45 y.o. mother and 53 y.o. father - (natural conception, only child.)

Her whole time of growing up she felt embarrassed by them looking, and acting old enough to be her grandparents, and yes, like in some cases mentioned on here, she was bullied for it. I know people will blab the old chestnut 'people are bullied for lots of things' but so what?! Hmm

She got to 18 y.o and her parents hit 63 and 71, and her dad became ill and went downhill very quickly, and could no longer leave the house alone, or drive. Her mum became his carer. Then within 6 months their mum had a stroke, and they were both housebound; couldn't get to appointments, or do their shopping, struggled with cleaning the house/doing the washing etc. So Lizzie ended up being the sole carer of them both at NINETEEN!

She had to drop out of her university degree, and become their full time carer. At 25 she still is. She does everything for them. She has NO LIFE of her own, and has not had for 6 years. The time when she should have been at university, travelling, building a career, partying, and going out with her mates, she is full time carer to her parents ...an elderly and infirm couple.

As a pp said, it wouldn't be so bad if there were older siblings, because at least when the parents' health declines (when the kid is still teens or early 20s,) there are older siblings to share the load.. And also older siblings will be there when the child born to a 45 y.o. mother loses her parents at a young age.

Another girl (Sarah,) who is friends with my DD, was born to a 46 y.o. mother, and a 50 y.o. father. (IVF.) Both her parents died when she was 22 (when her mum was 68 and her dad was 72.) Just 5 months apart.

She is also an 'only,' and had to deal with THAT with no siblings for support, no grandparents, and both parents dead, whilst still was in her early 20s. She also had to deal with both funerals at the age of 22!

Anyone who thinks having their first (and probably ONLY child) past the age of 41-42 needs to give their head a wobble. Seriously, it's not all about you. You need to think outside the box and think not about how old YOU are now, and how FIT you feel at 45/46, and how you can EASILY cope with a baby. It's about how old you will be when that 'baby' is a teenager, and the fact that when they are in their 20s you could be infirm and needing care, or possibly not here anymore...

And also the fact that you will be in your early to mid FIFTIES when they are at primary school. If that ain't weird and uncomfortable for a little kid (whose friends parents are mostly 25 to 35 ish,) then I don't know what is

I know several more young people in their mid teens to mid 20s who have a 70 to 75 year old dad, and mums in their late 60s. It's just weird and wrong IMO.

And yeah I KNOW people can have a baby at 28, and still die at 51 when the child is only 23, and leave them behind, OR have a baby at 29 and become very ill and infirm at 50 when the child is only 21. But that is a LOT less likely than if you have your baby in the bloody mid 40s!

Bingbangbong89 · 07/09/2019 08:56

Neither do I believe in ivf
I promise it’s real.

AliTheMinx · 07/09/2019 09:08

MIL remarried and had a DS (naturally) at 47, which IMO is too old. Her DS is now 17 and she's 64. It's hardgoing and tiring for her - although she'd never admit it, and I think hard for her DS too. My DH is 41, so there's a 24 year old gap between siblings.

DH and I had our DS when we were both 33. DS is now 7, and amazing - but I don't think I'd have the energy to have any more! Incidentally I am one of the younger mums in my son's year - there are lots of mums to 7-year-olds in their late 40s and 50s.

reginafelangee · 07/09/2019 09:14

@dontgetmewrong

How do you go from 39/40 being 'sensible' to 41/42 being 'eyebrow raising'?

What changes between 40 and 41 that makes such a significant difference?

leomama81 · 07/09/2019 09:22

I think 40+ is WAY too old to be thinking about having a baby! Late 30s is pushing it. It’s not just about increased risk and possible complications it’s not fair on the child.

You're not considered an older mother till 40+ now, I'm 38 and having my first baby and I'm considered low risk and the same as anyone who was 28. I'm at a London hospital and they say I'm one of their younger ones!

You can't generalize - almost all my friends have had kids in their late 30s or early 40s and they are hardly the odd ones out these days, nor are they any less fit or active or capable of doing things with their children.

leomama81 · 07/09/2019 09:23

There’s a reason why 35 is classed as geriatric

It's not anymore - that's now 40.

dirtyrottenscoundrel · 07/09/2019 09:23

I also don’t know why it’s okay to have a baby at 41/42 but absolutely irresponsible at 44?
What difference will 2 years make?

ragged · 07/09/2019 09:25

I don't have a ceiling.
I want to say you're too old when you're frail (physically weak and limited physical capacity) with negligible prospect of getting better.
Yes that could happen at any age. I'm aware the statement could upset some disabled people but ageism is allowed on this thread ... whereas I'm at least talking degrees of disability not a yes/no threshold based on a simple number.
So no specific age limits for me.

FWIW, I was 36 when DS was born. Because I don't dye my gray hair he reckons I look 70. This embarrasses him a lot. If I dyed my hair he wouldn't feel that way (not least b/c I'm quite fit, energetic, enthusiastic, busy, dress young, risk-taking, etc). Meh. He can learn to suck it up. I'm the only 52 yr old who actually looks 52 & I don't mind at all. I feel I'm setting an excellent example of being oneself (energetic 52 yr old) & not pretending to be 30-40yo, ffs.

NameChange84 · 07/09/2019 09:25

@user1493759849 Erm, I’m a Lizzie. I gave my entire 20s up to be a carer and was dealing with family ill health from about 15.

I’m proud of the experiences I’ve lived through and for the way I’ve cared for relatives. I actually have much older siblings but they do nothing but visit once a year for a week and have been no moral support at all.

I was unplanned. Are you suggesting it would have been better for me if I’d been aborted?

I’m very glad I exist. Very glad I have a close relationship with my parents. My experiences, though tough, have made me who I am. It does make me sad that some people may see my life as one to be pitied and used as a cautionary tale.

31RueCambon75001 · 07/09/2019 09:26

I wouldn't say anything changes but it depends what you want. I knew I did not want to be changing nappies at forty so for me, a personal cut off was 37 but as I said up thread for everybody else who would still be in the position of wanting a first, I'd say about 44.

Somebody said something about being 50 with a 15 year old as though it would be unusual! That's the norm surely! I am 49 with a 16 year old and we can go out for a meal if we want to, go to the cinema, go for long walks. She can be challenging of course and does need a lot of support and guidance and even, care, still. But I certainly don't feel any older than any of her friends' mums.

31RueCambon75001 · 07/09/2019 09:29

Have they stopped calling mothers over 35 geriatric!? That's nice. I was 36 (for a month) when I had my son, so 35 for the pregnancy but I remember feeling horrified when the word was used.

Obviously the RISKS are still the same, but the labelling of those risks could be less alarmist.

leomama81 · 07/09/2019 09:32

@user1493759849 that was also quite sometime ago, and her parents obviously very unfit. It is now completely normal to have parents in their 40s and kids will not be the odd ones out with that. My parents are in their late 60s and 70s now and have zero health issues - you could end up with infirm or ill parents who are 30s or 40s - people do die then of plenty of things.

Plus, older parents bring lots of positive things - wisdom, knowledge, often more financial security, experience. Whenever I see parents moaning about parenthood it's always younger ones who resent what they have given up.

Hate the phrase "give your head a wobble" - so, so rude.

Swipe left for the next trending thread