Would you have a baby at 45?

[84wood]

Hello

I am considering having another baby. We’ve already got a lovely DC who’s 5 and we’ve really enjoyed being parents. I had a trouble free pregnancy and had my child privately so I’m lucky to know all the best doctors and units. I’m also in very good health. It would be a bit of a financial struggle as DC is in a private school but not impossible. How would you feel? Would you try?
Thanks so much for reading and for any advice.

@fascinated oooh the snobbery in your post!

Probably not I had ds2 at 41 and always said that 42/3 would be my stop point in having a second. We experienced too many age related issues and heartache at 39/40 trying to have ds2. Also at 50 now the thought of a lively bouncing 4/5 year old would be exhausting.

Im not being snobby i am stating facts. I personally would rather it wasn’t so, but the two groups honestly don’t really mix. And I know for a fact this is true for a lot of small commuter towns, this demographic split.

PS I wasn’t implying the younger women aren’t healthy or good looking — quite the opposite most of them look amazing but it is generally quite a different look and it is clear who is older and who is younger.

While I feel this debate lacks some balance I do ferl the need to challenge this statement:
If you are knackered at 45 you need to look at your diet and fitness. A woman who naturally has a baby at 45 is likely to have a later menopause than average anyway.

Er no. For some women the peri-menopause results in real and sometimes unexpected changes. Women present in significantly higher numbers for almost all autoimmune ilnesses like Arthritis, Lupus, thyroid issues etc and often develop symptoms around the 40 year old mark onwards. Why? fluctuating hormones have a lot to with it. And for women who are already ill they often find symptoms get worse.

It is also very posdible for the menopause to hit soon after having had a child

There is a lot of ignorance about how the peri-menopause is linked to later ill health in women and the truth is that for some women dealing with sleepless nights at 45 is incredibly knackering. I was a dead woman walking with ds 2 at 26 almost halucinated I was so sleep deprived. I'd have the experience to do better at 44 but I would fear how tired I 'd be. And I'd be sensible to plan for this.

But having said this if nature allowed me to I see no reason why not. Risk is a fact of life. Dying while your children are young etc....life unfortunately. So I'd get on with it OP.

If you decide to try it needs to be soon, I think, for biological reasons.

Personally I wouldn’t (I’m 43) but I also have children who have hit their 20’s so have done my child rearing so looking forward to a bit of freedom back. I am looking forward to becoming a grandparent though (one day, not on the cards yet).

It’s also a fact that uni educated women are more likely to be older mothers — how is that snobby?

Not a chance!

I agree with @BugBasher that 49 feels different to 45. At 40 I felt no different to 20 and that continued up to about 45. I am quite fit, thankfully no health issues but I’m starting to age more quickly, quite tired at times(not anaemic, no under active thyroid etc) just from working and running a household with teenagers. I get to lie in at the weekends and have time to myself but can’t imagine having the energy that a small child needs in their waking hours. This time is about more independence for DH and me.

God no, coping with a young child and going through menopause would be a nightmare combination. I'm in my fifties, there is a huge difference in energy levels and feelings of wellbeing in your fifties compared to forties in my experience. I wouldn't do it for all the other reasons given, plus population issues and the environment.

With my uni education, I was broke for years paying back debt. Then working long hours meeting someone just didnt happen.

Going on maternity leave whilst still having to make repayments on my debts...

Yeah that's why it didnt happen for me younger.

I was 32 when I had my first - she's now 5 and desperate for a sibling. I'm completely torn on what to do, so worried about the risks due to my age, not just for the baby but me with a second section. And if the baby was disabled my daughter would miss out on our time and attention, and finances would take a hit. Also, the burden of caring for them could pass to her when we are old.

But then people say we are selfish for having an only child, when we are old all the care and heartache falls to her. And she has no siblings, she's alone :( I don't know if I can take the risk but will she resent me when I'm older for the brother or sister she never had.

I think if you have your first in your 40's and all went well then trying for a 2nd close in age is worth a try for a sibling. I read a thread here once about the burden of being an only child when your parents are older, similar to what pp wrote about a friend up thread :( ...

Personally at 48, I could not imagine having a 3 year old and having to start the whole primary school journey again then sorting child care, baby sitters, manic schedules, holidays etc. My dc are 13 and 11 and I often wish I'd had them when I was a bit younger but in 4 years dc1 will be 18!Hope to be mortgage free by then.

Good luck with whatever you decide. Apparently your fertile eggs have that last push before menopause so you never know!

@IamMoana No one knows what would be best in that situation. I have seen families where siblings are loving and having a sibling enhances their lives, then others who even as kids never seem to take to each other and have nothing to do with each other when they are older. I also think certain personalities probably do better as an only child, while others do better with siblings. It is a lottery.

Of course if you have one child I think you have to be prepared for lots of playdates/clubs.

No I think it’s too old.

For me 40 would have been the cut off point, as it happens I was 36 when I had dc3

My parents were in their 40’s when they had me and I did feel they were old parents. Too old. Having said that I am enjoying being alive so I’m very pleased they decided it was a good idea...

My parents are around 60 and they look after other grandchildren an awful lot. My mother does on her own a lot too. No issues. And they have them overnight weekly

What on Earth has that got to do with this thread, Newmumatlast? It’s perfectly normal and average to be a grandparent of young kids at around 60. That’s the same as 2 generations having their own children at 30!

Just because you can grandparent young kids easily when you’re 60, it does not mean you’ll find it easy to be a parent to a 5 year old at 50. For one, you’re older yourself and for another, there will most likely be no childcare at all from your own parents who will be MUCH older than the 60 in your own example. Not much fun to never have any break for overnights/weekends away without the kids to celebrate your 50th, and the kids miss out on what can be a lovely relationship too.

Incidentally, don’t assume that just because your parents have grandchildren overnight once a week that they love doing that. I’ve heard from so many older colleagues that their DDor DS just expects them to do it or it became a habit after they were helping them through a rough patch. All resent it a little bit but all say they would NEVER say anything. Some of these are grandparents who are still working themselves so you can understand them.

@Newmumatlast I don’t think 34 is old at all! Certainly not in my area now and among my peers. But when I was growing up it was about 10 years older than average. And for me that’s equivalent to 45 now, if that makes sense. I had my son at 31, would like another before I’m 35 if I can.

Er no. For some women the peri-menopause results in real and sometimes unexpected changes. Women present in significantly higher numbers for almost all autoimmune ilnesses like Arthritis, Lupus, thyroid issues etc and often develop symptoms around the 40 year old mark onwards. Why? fluctuating hormones have a lot to with it. And for women who are already ill they often find symptoms get worse.

It is also very posdible for the menopause to hit soon after having had a child

But this also applies to women in their late 30s. If the OP was 39 no one would say anything, she could easily be in peri by 42. But the OP isn't and may well not be this side of 50. She is more likely to get pregnant if she is going to have a later menopause.

The ignorance is that people look at averages and think they apply to everyone. You can hit peri at 35 or 55 it's totally individual like a woman's fertility. Everyone always barks on about women being most fertile in their 20s, that isn't true for everyone either.

Yes it's a risk the OP will have a difficult menopause. Yes people have more illhealth later but if she's still healthy at 45 then it's only a 6-year difference to being in her 30s still. In other words in individual terms pretty insignificant.

My periods and ovulation are still the same at 47 than they were at 37 and 27 I think I could become pregnant (not sure I would carry and not a chance I take) but the changes that are happening to how I feel are quite significant

Women on both sides have had late babies and menopause but the symptoms of peri menopause can last for years and until it starts you really don’t understand the impact even if symptoms are mild

It’s not called change of life for nothing

No!
I’m 48 and no way - I’m getting more niggly health issues, the menopause is looming, I’m more grumpy and intolerant (and knackered) 😆
I have teens and it’s ideal as I can relate to the hormonal rollercoasters they’re going through, albeit 30 years later!
I know parents are having children later but our bodies are still ageing at the same rate, with the same risks of later pregnancy.

Turn this on it’s head and ask if it’s right or fair that 16 yo should be having to cope with you at 82, just at a time when he/she is only 36 and probably with a very young family and a career to juggle too.

Yeah it's not fair, but that, unfortunately is life. I've had some awful life altering things happen in a childhood which I didn't deserve and my parents were young and fit. Thise affect me to this day.

Ask me if I'd have preferred older, wiser more loving parents who would have ensured I was never vulnerable or abused would maybe be able to leave me some financial security, but would be declining when I'm my 30s.

I'd pick the latter.

"Saddling a teenager with a 60+ parent?! Age really isn't what it used to be. I have a friend who is 61 and she is really active and still working fulltime and lots of hobbies and yoga and gym. Poor teenager being stuck with her as a mum"

For me, it's not so much the teenager with the 60 year old (although this really did affect my DH) its the fact that by the time we had children, my FIL was almost 80 and not really able to have the relationship I had with my grandparents.

I'm 30, my mum is late 50s, we still do a LOT together, she has a great relationship with my toddler and is still very active. But if I'd left it until mid 40s to have children, she would early 70s and realistically will have less mobility and less years with us.

There are pros and cons of both really, I had DS at 27 and will be 30 in a few weeks when this one is born. I'm lucky we're financially stable but I don't feel I've forfeited my social life to have children. I've temporarily thrown my career under a bus but that would happen at any age if you want to have children - in my profession it's easier to pause as an associate level rather than a director.

The arguments for having children later on seem to hinge around financial situations which is only one consideration for having children. I will say as someone who has had multiple miscarriages, the prospect of the complete and utter heartbreak is really being played down in this thread. I know it's not really considered until it happens to you, but the toll it will have on someone's mental health can't be dismissed out of hand as it (IMO) affects every aspect of life.

Sorry I should have tagged @MyuMe in that reply.

Looking after grandchildren is not the same as having your own dc where you get all of the sleeplessness. It’s interesting, this thread mostly reflects people’s attitudes to risk.

Some of us are prepared to accept more risk than others and assume things will be ok for them due to unmeasurable factors like their general level of health.

I have to wonder, if you had dc1 at 40, why did you wait til 45 to consider the second - had you not seen the graphs with the risk profile going almost straight up?

Whilst it’s true that anyone can have a child with additional needs, you cannot rule out the clear evidence of parental age as a factor.

Forgot to add, Newmum, your own parents may not actually mind so much caring for their grandchildren at 60 if they had their own children when they were early 20s, as that’s a big gap between being a parent and being a grandparent, to have enjoyed some child free years together in their 50swhile still hopefully being relatively fit and able grandparents when grandchildren start coming.

If they had had children in their mid 30s as is really common now, and their children had them nearer 40, then they will not long have retired and may feel their fitness declining and want to use their fit retired years travelling etc rather than changing nappies and getting up early.

Everyone’s different, but I think this is something people forget. They think of one example where people seem happy with their own out of the norm situation and forget that lots of others will feel very differently.

I think I could become pregnant (not sure I would carry and not a chance I take) but the changes that are happening to how I feel are quite significant

If you are in perimenopause I think that is unlikely. It is why women struggle to get pregnant in their 40s, particularly after very early 40s and even that is hit and miss at population level.

But unless you try you never ever know so we can't say for certain either way.

I think a lot of women believe they are still fertile when they probably aren't.