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.

Not a chance. I'm 46 and the thought of having another baby now horrifies me!

No, I wouldn’t.

No, pretty much because of what everyone else is saying.

Unless you're absolutely desperate to try, no I wouldn't. There are a lot of benefits to having one child and chances are you may struggle to conceive at that age and there's a greatly increased chance of problems too. I'd count my blessings.

I would not

No way.
45 is imo to old to have a newborn.

I'm almost that age and the thought of having a child now fills me with utter, gut wrenching horror.

I had my children in my 30s and even that annoys me as I would much prefer to have had them in my 20s.

@eminencegrise "The fact is that more and more conditions increase with parental age; there is increasing evidence that autism, which cannot be screened for prenatally, does."

NO... Autism can affect any child, and I know mothers who were very young who have autistic children. Also the studies that you're claiming to be fact are not without scepticism, and more focused on the fathers age than the mothers so as she hadn't said her partners age, it's a moot point...

I wouldn't leave it until 45 by choice, but I'd still be trying at 45 if it was my only chance.

Thank you all for your replies.
DH is keen. We met fairly late so had my first DC late. I certainly wouldn’t have changed that as I enjoyed being young and child free throughout my 20s and most of my 30s. We’ve just loved having our child. I’ve got a flexible job and have always worked full time earning a good salary. I’ll continue to do so. We can just about afford two sets of school fees and private health etc. We have a good life. Thanks again.

If I had one or none then maybe, it’s entirely up to you. I have 3 DC and had my last at 38 and I’m bloomin knackered so knowing what I know now there is no way I’d have one at 45. My eldest is 10 and I am now 42 and enjoy their company.

How likely do you think you are to conceive naturally? Or are you considering a donor egg?
It's entirely up to you. If you are fit and healthy, and come from a family where people live to a ripe old age, and you want your child to have a sibling, then go for it.
You already know the risks associated with pregnancy and childbirth at 45.

Same as pp, I couldn't have my first til in was 33 and I wish I'd been younger. I'm pushing on 40 now and it pisses me right off dc2 will only be 3. A baby would finish me right off.

I mentioned the risk of miscarriage earlier and wondered what it would be at age 45, so I googled it.

At 35 it is 20%

At 45 it is 80%

I don’t say this to scare or upset, I say it because my miscarriages were some of the hardest things I’ve been through and I would always look into possible problems and share information about risk and prevention, if I can.

I wouldn’t, no. I think if you wanted a second you should ha e done it ASAP after the first.

I know this is a very unpopular opinion these days but I don’t think it’s fair on the children to have them when you are already middle aged. 40 is when you should be finishing having your children, not starting.

No I wouldn't. Can't imagine handling a teenager in my 60s. Plus the risks would be too high for me. Also how old is your DH? Risks increase with his age too.

No. it's not for the child's benefit, is it? Who wants a mother who's that old?

As someone whose dad was 49 when I was born (my mum was in her early 30s) don't do it.

I think there's a good chance it wouldn't happen at that age anyway. The statistics for live births at that age are pretty low.

I'm 44 with a five year old so didn't exactly start early myself but I wouldn't try for another now. We wanted to have two children but 42 was my personal cut off (thinking I didn't want to be over 60 when the child turned 18) and it didn't happen.

Me personally? No I wouldn't. Already have 2 DC and the youngest will be 10 when I'm 45. Too much of an age gap and too much of my life spent parenting young DC and too much of a drain on family energy and resources when the older DC have different needs.

You? Your choice.

I had my son at 45 ( he is 17 now) He was a surprise baby after a 21 year gap and I love him to bits BUT I have found the teenage years challenging. Attitudes are so different to when my older children were teenagers. His older siblings helped a lot though in terms of babysitting etc so we were able to work and have nights out and weekends away . It is definitely more tiring than when you are younger but worth it .

Yes. I had my second at 43, first at 35 (sane dad). A baby at that age is easy, a 5 year old at 48 is more of a challenge but well worth it.

You’ll hear many anecdotes of “my friend had a baby at 50 and all is fine” but -

The issue is not your strong finances (clearly - given private birth and private school), your network of private medical professionals - and the variety of things in your control.

The issue is the body, the age and quality of the eggs being produced, the chances and risks of difficulties with conception, the risks of difficulties with the baby, the consequences for your body, your family and your existing DC particularly if there indeed is a difficulty with the baby given egg age, and the experiences of the 15 year old with 60 year old parents. These are all out of your control, cannot be bought with money and thus in your position I personally wouldnt

No.

Absolutely not, not for ten million quid!

No.
I had my youngest DC at 37. I’m now 60 and have only just finished driving him backwards and forwards to the other end of the country for uni. It’s much harder work in your late 50’s/60’s.