Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Would you have a baby at 45?

999 replies

84wood · 18/01/2020 17:39

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.

OP posts:
MsTSwift · 23/01/2020 22:07

I thought you were born with all the eggs you will ever have? They will degrade over time. Personally think most 35 year olds in a better place than 45 year old me to have a baby I am fit slim and healthy but periods now erratic and hormones mean I Shudder at the idea of the drudge of babies and early childhood don’t have the patience any more

karencantobe · 23/01/2020 22:12

Yes you are, which is why your mother's health is the thing that has an impact on the quality of your eggs.

I agree about patience. I am way less patient now than I was at 25.

LaurieMarlow · 23/01/2020 22:16

I thought you were born with all the eggs you will ever have?

I believe that’s true, but it doesn’t mean that one woman’s average egg quality is the same as another’s and that they all decline at the same rates.

Some women have run out of viable eggs in their early 30s. Others can conceive easily in their 40s. There’s huge variation.

Jameelia · 23/01/2020 22:20

FFS a younger woman's circumstances arnet the issue. She has time to get grow a career and get better paid especially as the children start school etc. You cannot reverse aging any the complications that come with it. Longevity and living longer does not take into account the quality of life. A PP here said her friend was forced to drop out of uni to be a carer to her older mum. Yes it can happen to a 25 year old but it is highly unlikely. Anytime a poster like @Sakura7 has said I had older parents and a negative experience it is shouted down and minimised and then the whataboutery about young, fat, poor mums.

karencantobe · 23/01/2020 22:23

@LaurieMarlow But the point is that it is your mothers health in pregnancy that influences egg quality, not your health.

LaurieMarlow · 23/01/2020 22:24

A PP here said her friend was forced to drop out of uni to be a carer to her older mum. Yes it can happen to a 25 year old but it is highly unlikely

It’s not ‘highly’ unlikely, it’s less likely. Its a gradual change.

A (younger) mother with a long term health condition is also more likely end up needing care when her child’s at uni.

Jameelia · 23/01/2020 22:28

Some women have run out of viable eggs in their early 30s. Others can conceive easily in their 40s. There’s huge variation.
It's disingenuous to say this like it is equal without pointing out that it is heavily skewed towards older women experiencing declining fertility and egg quality as they age and those that easily conceive in their 40s being outliers as opposed to the norm.

Jameelia · 23/01/2020 22:32

A 40 something old is much much less likely to need full time care than a 60/70 year old. As all the 40-50yo posters pointing out how much fitter they are than 20/30 yo with the mountain climbing and marathons, I'm sure they dont need full time carers right? So why on earth would the 40/50yo need their children to drop out of uni to take care of them?

Strawberrypancakes · 23/01/2020 22:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Cherrygirl3 · 23/01/2020 22:51

Had my youngest at 43, best thing I ever did. Wouldn't change things for the world. Smile

Mirandaqueenbee · 23/01/2020 23:05

Hell no I'm 33 and pregnant and have other kids small ones and I'm done I'm absolutely knackered couldn't imagine anything worse by the time I'm 35 let alone 40s

cookingonwine · 23/01/2020 23:08

Yes ... go for it!

Sakura7 · 23/01/2020 23:09

A 40 something old is much much less likely to need full time care than a 60/70 year old. As all the 40-50yo posters pointing out how much fitter they are than 20/30 yo with the mountain climbing and marathons, I'm sure they dont need full time carers right? So why on earth would the 40/50yo need their children to drop out of uni to take care of them?

Indeed. The idea that the child of a 25 year old is in any way likely to have to leave uni to become a carer, but the child of a 45 year old will be fine, is frankly bizarre. Just another example of the denial of aging on this thread. It's batshit.

SunbeamsOverhead · 23/01/2020 23:16

Yes if i wanted to.

Jameelia · 23/01/2020 23:21

@Sakura7

Right make up your mind. We are so healthy at 40/50yo I can do anything a 20yo can, but if you had a child at 20 and you are 40 now, your child will likely need you to drop out and be their carer at 40 than me with my teens at 60? What????

Jiggles101 · 23/01/2020 23:31

Fuck no I couldn't think of anything worse.

I had my kids in my 20s.

I'm having a fucking hip replacement at 45!

Rubyroost · 23/01/2020 23:32

No child of mine would be allowed to drop out of uni to look after me. I'd be about 60 so doubt I'd need looking after anyway, although apparently 60 is ancient even though I'd have another 8 years in quite a hard going job left. Why is it assumed that children are expected to look after their parents?

I had a deal with my mum, that I was not expected to look after her in her old age, and I will have similar with my children. Sadly my mum didn't reach old age, but then she was a heavy smoker all her life and although she had stopped due to emphysema, it still progressed into lung cancer quite a few years later. She died fairly young (mid 60s) , due to lifestyle more than anything else.

MsTSwift · 24/01/2020 05:18

Personally found a huge difference between 40 and 45. A baby at 4O /41 would have been doable physically but have massively aged in last 5 years as have most of my same aged friends.

hopefulhalf · 24/01/2020 06:03

Realistically few need care in thier 60s/early 70s. Also those having children in their 40's are likely to be relatively affluent and in better health for longer. Life expectancy is 10-15 years higher for the wealthiest compare to the least well off.

AllideasAndNoAction · 24/01/2020 06:32

All this talk of ageing rapidly post 45 is going to do nothing to deter people who really want a baby. Especially if they don’t already have children. The yearning is strong. So strong that women in all sorts of difficult and inappropriate/unsuitable circumstances will go ahead and get PG or see unplanned PGs through in spite of a dozen good reasons not to.

I don’t see why we should assume women of 45 who are massively broody will necessarily think any differently to girls of 15.

They want what they want and they’ll do whatever they can to get it. They don’t think about whether it’s the best thing for the child any more than the 15 yo does, or if they do then they quickly push all arguments against to the sidelines and plough on anyway.

LaurieMarlow · 24/01/2020 07:39

It's disingenuous to say this like it is equal without pointing out that it is heavily skewed towards older women experiencing declining fertility and egg quality as they age and those that easily conceive in their 40s being outliers as opposed to the norm.

I am responding to posters suggesting that there are no factors other than age.

Lizzie030869 · 24/01/2020 08:25

@Rubyroost I couldn't agree more. I certainly wouldn't want my DDs to do that. My DM as a child was a carer from a very young age before she was orphaned at 10. I would never wish that on anyone never mind my DDs. That's what care homes for the elderly are for..

Jameelia · 24/01/2020 08:34

@hopefulhalf
Life expectancy is longer but quality of life is not better. No matter how wealthy you are, with the best diet you will still age. Wealthy people live longer partly because of better healthcare treating age related conditions i.e. : better management of old-age, not because money is some magic elixir that automatically makes them healthier. You can live to 90 but how many of those years will be spent living independently, free from dementia, and running up and down the stairs?

AllideasAndNoAction · 24/01/2020 08:41

I agree Jameelia and I’ve been saying for years that increased life expectancy is absolutely not a good thing unless it can go hand in hand with increased levels of health and mobility with no loss of brain function and the ability to live a full and independent life.

We’ve done very little to deter or delay the ravages of old age. We’ve merely managed to artificially prolong it. Hence why we have such a Dementia crisis and care for the elderly crisis on our hands.

Jameelia · 24/01/2020 08:41

-Women over 60are twice as likely to develop dementia as breast cancer.
-Every five years after the age of 65 the risk of developing dementiadoubles.
-1/4 ofhospital bedsare occupied by people living with dementia who are over 65.
-72%of people living with dementiaalso have another medical condition or disability.

Those are just the statistics for ONE age related condition.

www.dementiastatistics.org/statistics/incidence-in-the-uk-and-globally/

Swipe left for the next trending thread