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.

Can you can pregnant with first baby around 40+?

110 replies

TheP0 · 29/12/2019 05:33

So a cousin is ttc her first child and is 40.. She will be 41. She's worried (and so am i for her) about missing the chance and boat to have a baby. Is it really possible at that age or not? She said that doctors say at 40 you're eggs are almost gone and there's hardly any left.

All it states on the internet is that a woman isn't very much fertile once she hits 35 so it's becoming worrisome.

Sorry English isn't first language but i tried!
Thank you!

OP posts:
SoftSheen · 29/12/2019 09:45

I knew someone who was single at 42, and by 44 was married and had given birth to her first (and only) baby. So it is possible for some.

dontyouwishyour · 29/12/2019 09:45

Had my first and only child at 40 and ds now at uni. Text book pregnancy but horrendous emergency c section. Had endometriosis in 30s so didn't expect it to happen. Went through menopause when he was 6 months old. Tough time but all turned out well.

BlouseAndSkirt · 29/12/2019 09:46

@Ragwort “I am amazed that the figure is as low as 5% without medical intervention”

It isn’t. The poster was quoting bollocks / misunderstands statistics.

Dowser · 29/12/2019 09:48

Friend at triplet boys at 45

K456789 · 29/12/2019 09:48

I had my first baby at 39, 7 months of trying. A lot of my friends of a similar age are also having their first babies.

doublebarrellednurse · 29/12/2019 09:49

The studies about women's fertility dropping after age 35 are very very flawed. They've been proven to be poor evidence of fertilities links to age based on century old data.

Also not having a child isn't the worst thing for everyone. Some people are quite happy childless.

Some interesting bits of insight into it:

Jean Twenge, a psychologist at San Diego State University in the US, was 34, recently remarried, and looking to start a family, when she heard it from her doctor.

"That was very frightening to me, as it is to many women who are in their 30s," she says.

Confronted with those odds, she wanted to find out where the statistic had come from. And she discovered something quite amazing.

"The data on which that statistic is based is from 1700s France. They put together all these church birth records and then came up with these statistics about how likely it was [someone would] get pregnant after certain ages."

These are women who had no access to modern healthcare, nutrition or even electricity. Why would any researcher think they can tell us something useful about modern-day fertility?

The most widely cited is a paper by David Dunson published in 2004, which found that 82% of women aged between 35 and 39 fell pregnant within a year. That's significantly better than the two-thirds chance drawn from the 300-year-old birth records.

But can we be confident it's more accurate?
Yes, says David James, of the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) fertility guideline development group.

"It was a single study undertaken relatively recently of about 780 women, in seven different European centres. The important point about that was that these were women who were trying to conceive," he says, adding that it is "much more realistic".

The main problem with the historic data, in James's view, is that the women may not have been trying to conceive.

Indeed, they may have been actively trying to avoid becoming pregnant. They may not even have had intercourse.

"There's no doubt that intercourse becomes less frequent the older the couple are," James says. And in the 1700s, people aged more quickly than today.

Another finding of the Dunson study was that, while fertility declines with age, it does not appear to do so as quickly as we have been led to believe.

Among women aged 27-34, the study showed that 86% will have conceived within a year of trying. So the 82% figure for women aged 35 to 39 is only a little lower.

Dowser · 29/12/2019 09:49

Triplets were ivf btw but were her first and only children

Spitsandspots · 29/12/2019 09:52

MIL had DH when she was 42.

MyDcAreMarvel · 29/12/2019 09:54

I am amazed that the figure is as low as 5% without medical intervention.
It’s 5% every month.

WaitrosesCheapestVodka · 29/12/2019 09:54

You don't know until you try, there are so many variables, one of which is ahe and egg quality.

I started TTC at 27 and due to miscarriages wasn't pregnant with a viable pregnancy that went to term until I was 29. Some people try in their late 30s/40s and get pregnancy immediately. If she is desperate to conceive as others have said it would be sensible to start the ball rolling on fertility tests.

Evalina · 29/12/2019 09:54

My great grandmother had her only child when she was aged 46 in 1913!

As others have said there are plenty of people who do have babies in their 40s without problem, but also many who can't.

MyDcAreMarvel · 29/12/2019 09:57

I was pregnant at age 40 after four month off ttc, miscarried and became pregnant again successfully age 41 ten months later.

Selene28 · 29/12/2019 10:00

My mum had 4 in her 40's. Last one at 46

misspiggy19 · 29/12/2019 10:01

**MN seems to have every woman on here, or their relatives, who have conceived and had a live birth, over 40.

Statistically the odds are against you and for most, it won't happen.**

^This. Don’t be reassured by the responses on MN.

doublebarrellednurse · 29/12/2019 10:05

Statistically the odds are against you and for most, it won't happen.*

But those statistics are deeply flawed and from poor research. There is very very little research of any quality which are focussed on fertility over 40. So quoting statistics is pointless because they are shit statistics.

People are individuals not their age. There could be masses of other factors other than age which are poor fertility indicators but all we know about the person in question is their age.

CondeNasty · 29/12/2019 10:18

Exactly @GilbertMarkham my Dr explained it to me and where the erroneous statistic came from. Its fascinating and so frustrating!

Statistically you are more likely to have a successful pregnancy and birth in your 40s than not. However, you don't know which group you will be in till you try and the lack of time limits your options.

Pilot12 · 29/12/2019 10:21

I conceived my first baby at 39, came off the pill after 15 years and conceived straight away. Baby was born when I was 40. Normal pregnancy and birth. I conceived again at 42 (tried for five months) but miscarried at 12w (that could happen at any age). Conceived again four months later and my baby was born a month before my 44th birthday.

When I tried to conceive my 2nd baby time wasn't on my side so It used the Clear Blue Advanced Digital Ovulation Test together with the Ovia app.

I think success is more down to the health and fitness of the woman rather than age. There are women who easily conceive at 45 and women in their 20's who can't.

Splodgetastic · 29/12/2019 10:21

I am about that age OP and never had children. I suspect it won’t happen for me. I think women are probably like horses. If you have had one earlier you might be able to have another, but if you haven’t it’s harder.

Dontdisturbmenow · 29/12/2019 10:22

My grandmother had her first (and obviously only!) child at 45. She had a miscarriage at 42.

I, on the other hand started the perimenopause where it would have been extremely rare to be pregnant let alone carry a healthy child, at 42. You never know the cards that are being handed to you.

thegreylady · 29/12/2019 10:35

My best friend had her first at 41 and her second at 43 and this was over 40 years ago.

LazyDaisey · 29/12/2019 10:41

My best friend got pregnant 4 times at 40-41. None of them were successful pregnancies. But she wouldn’t post on here about it. So your responses here are completely skewed.

olivesnutsandcheese · 29/12/2019 10:43

My cousin is 40, she's expecting her first child next month. Hopefully it will happen for your cousin too but there's no way of knowing, she just needs to try I guess

wheresmymojo · 29/12/2019 11:04

It's quite common in my area (South East) to have children between 35-45 so yes, very possible.

wheresmymojo · 29/12/2019 11:08

The statistics quoted by people are usually incorrect as they are based on very old data and almost certainly don't apply anymore based on changes to our longevity

The 300-year-old fertility statistics still in use today www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24128176

Orangeblossom78 · 29/12/2019 11:09

Apart from the fertility rate there is also the miscarriage rate though- it gets much higher with age apparently. So that is also something to think about