Is 46/ 47 too late for first baby?

[Everythingnotsaved]

My friend really wants a baby & is nearly 46 & would probably be 47 by the time baby came. I always read really really different views on mumsnet about babies and pregnancy and age so thought I’d ask:

Yanbu- it’s too old
Yabu- it’s entirely possible

I am assuming shes looking at donor eggs but is it just about that - what about the child too with older parents? I don’t know what I think really.

Way too old. About 7/8 years too old I’d say.

Is your friend wealthy? The actress Patricia Hodge had her first child at 43, and her second at 46. I shouldn't think she's short of a bob or two.
If your friend is wealthy and healthy - and IMO both are important in this situation - i don't see why she shouldn't try.
She may not succeed but if she does life will be infinitely easier if she is blessed with good health and enough money to buy quality help at home In the form of housekeepers, 24 hour nannies and cleaners.

I’ve managed to raise mine quite easily without nannies and cleaners to be fair! And with a full time job.

I personally wouldn’t dream of it but really it’s down to the individual. My mum loves babies - after raising 5 children she got a job cooking at a nursery and I will never forget when I went to see her one day and she was helping with the baby room - the look of bliss on her face. She’s 73 and looks after my sister’s three children under 5 while my sister and her hubby take overseas holidays. My mum has more energy than me - gets up early and goes to bed late. Her aunt died at something like 108 and her dad died at 96 and he was active and living alone until the few months before he died so she has this energy and longgevity in her genes.

My first thought was yes it's too late. But plenty of folk do have a baby in their early forties and this is only a few years older. I would imagine it's hard to conceive at 46 or after but if your friend is intending to use a donar egg then that wouldn't apply.

Gosh, looking after an elderly parent when young and possibly an only child is something you would have to consider - unless you are especially minted.

Too old unfortunately

I wouldn't advise it unless someone was guaranteed external help.

I had my first and only at 41. I was fine with pregnancy, birth and the early years, but once my dd reached three, DH and I really started to struggle.

Looking after an exuberant toddler, as well as working full time and keeping the show on the road, in our mid 40s was exhausting, despite how much sleep we got. We had next to no outside help at all, and at times, I felt it was dangerous. DH was falling asleep in the middle of the day and there were a few incidents where I was hit by a wall of utter exhaustion while I was driving.

Had we been even five years younger, I think we may have coped a lot better. And if we'd had regular familial help or had a nanny, I suspect we would have been fine.

But without it, I would never encourage someone over 45 to think about having a baby without seriously considering how they would cope with a toddler at 50. I certainly could not have done it.

Well I’m 48 and my youngest is just a teenager, I feel really old having a 13 year old compared to friends whose children are all adults. I think it’s far too old to have a baby. I have friends this age who have grandchildren.

Gosh, looking after an elderly parent when young and possibly an only child is something you would have to consider

This was my experience. My dad's dementia started when I was in my early 20s. He died this year but really I lost him years ago. My mum's health deteriorated over the years and now she's dying from cancer. They won't see me get married or meet any future grandchildren. I never knew my own grandparents for that matter.

My friends still have their parents, mostly in good health, and my DP still has his granny. It's hard being the only one in this situation.

I haven’t read all the posts as there are too many but can see the general consensus is that it’s too old...selfish, unlikely to conceive naturally, birth defects, other problems, so on, so on....

I had my perfect, bright and complete joy of a daughter just after my 47th birthday. All our own work and she really is a dream. We have absolutely no regrets....I can’t imagine there ever will be, how could there be? She’s two years old now and lights up our world daily 🥰.

I do have 3 older children (14/17/22) so I realise it’s slightly different to the OP’s friends set up.

How about 42?

Too old. Not fair on the child

Too old.

Nobody else’s business apart front the parent to be and their medics .

*from

Your genes don't dictate when you die hmm. Unfortunately, they don't make you impervious to disease or accident.

disobedienthamster disease or accident can happen at any age if you are fit and have a good life expectancy 47 is a perfectly reasonable age to have a baby.

I had dd when I turned 33, I am exhausted. I was much younger when I had my eldest and sometimes struggled then.

There is no way I could have a baby at 46/47, but that's just me. I'm sure there are others out there who would.

Drives me nuts when people say its too old yet no doubt if the mother was young but the father was 47 (or older) no one would bat an eyelid.

disobedienthamster disease or accident can happen at any age

The risk of serious health issues increases as we age. That's a verifiable fact, and it doesn't matter how good someone feels at 47 or 50, it's no guarantee they will be fine at 60 or 70.

It's up to her, I don;t think she's that old that it's unfair on the child as you could potentially get pregnant naturally at that age - but I wouldn't want to.

Drives me nuts when people say its too old yet no doubt if the mother was young but the father was 47 (or older) no one would bat an eyelid.

Been addressed several times on this thread. Nobody is suggesting it's fine for a man but bad for a woman. 47 is too old for either parent imo (I say this from experience, as someone whose father was close to this age).

I was most of the way through peri-menopausal by that age...

But... If they can get pregnant the old fashioned way (shagging) and can get pregnant without intervention, then I always figure they're ok. What's the difference biologically for a first baby to the 17th child after a long life of sex before contraceptives? Many women had late babies through all of human history before we invented the pill in the last century.

If her body can do it - fine; your body is younger then mine from a hormonal point of view. If you have to force it - not fine and sorry but you just left it too late.

@SazzyB100

Drives me nuts when people say its too old yet no doubt if the mother was young but the father was 47 (or older) no one would bat an eyelid.

It won’t be the father at an increased risk at childbirth for a start... it’s a mans world no point in arguing about it. Very unfair but it is what it is!

This is such a tough question. I feel for her and wonder why she is so late to have her first? Career, meeting the right man, infertility?
It's so easy for people who already have children to say this it's too old (I agree) but this is her first and she obviously wants to be a Mum. We've all been there with that yearning feeling.
I had mine late. First DD at 37 and then DS at 42. We didn't intend such a gap, that's just how it happened. We had given up on second but we're then so happy (and anxious because of age) to be able to give DD a sibling.
But, we both find it hard going, is it because that's the norm or because we're older? Who knows?? We don't have anything to compare it to.
I'm peri menopausal which doesn't help matters. I so wish we had had them younger but it's not like we can change that now.
Someone else mentioned that people forget that babies grow! That's a very good point to make. Toddlers and kids are such hard work!
Does your friend know anyone with young children? Perhaps she could spend some real time with them? So she can see the reality.
I don't regret my kids even remotely but I do wish we were younger.