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.

No way. I even think 40 is pushing it!

Oh god no, I'm 46 and there's just no way I could contemplate going through all that again!! But I'm worn out from working full time and raising kids. Maybe if I'd got to now without having had them, had a comfortable set up, money in the bank, good health etc and a good support network around me, maybe I'd be fine about starting a family. But for me, now, no way.

Far too old, and it’s for entirely selfish reasons.

I understand women that have fertility issues or haven’t settled down, but being a parent is about putting your children first, even before they’re born.

If that's what she wants then there's no harm in trying. At her age there are lots of risks and she only has a slim chance. If she wants a baby, better to look back and say she tried then regret not having a go.

Jamie Oliver's wife recently said in an interview that she'll be trying for their final baby next year when she's 46/47, maybe this has given your friend hope.

It doesn't matter what you think about it, it's what your friend wants and what will make her happy that matters.

Well there are many things to consider at that age but I personally would not. When I went into secondary school my dad was in his 50s and people thought he was my grandad!

Lots of women have babies in their 40s now so it’s not unusual.

It's still very unusual to have your first baby in your late 40s.

It seems that a lot of people answering above already have their children and 'wouldn't go through it again at that age'.

Well that's fine, but if you didn't already have them, and you badly wanted them, would your answer be different? This is the situation the OPs friend is in.

Actually getting pregnant at that age may not be as easy as she's hoping. Just because we still feel young our eggs sadly show our true age and conception can be difficult

If that's what she wants then there's no harm in trying.

There is actully, to the child who could end up losing its mother or becoming a carer at a far far younger age than they should. It's a massive burden to place on a young person who's barely had a chance to get their own life started.

I think there may be too much focus on 'baby'. Yes, at 47 coping with a baby is hard, but not too dreadful. It's doable.

But going on a few years, going through menopause whilst dealing with a tween, coping with health and fitness declining (unless you spend a phenominal amount of time on yourself) once you are over 60, with a teenager, doing University visits whilst pushing 70...

For a very few it turns out fine. They stay fit, healthy and well until a final and sudden decline. For others there are health problems (which are much harder to shrug off as you age) and declining fitness at the same time as a young child needs you to be in full fettle and firing on all cylinders.

So. Think less about the baby years and more about the growing child, would be my advice.

I think it is entirely possible. I had all my kids in my thirties though and am drained by them. I am not 46 yet but Jesus that would be a nightmare x 1000. But then if it is only one, she could do it. And that little person won't exist unless she chooses it, so I'd support her. The yearning for a child when you don't have one must be soul-consuming.

I'm just five years older than your friend and looking after dgs for the day, who has just turned one, exhausts me. Can't imagine how difficult it would be to do it seven days a week, on top of the disturbed nights dd has, at my age. Yet happily wrangled a whole brood of my own without any extreme tiredness when mine were little. Hopefully your friend will have plenty of stamina and support should she have a baby though.

It's up to her, if she can fall pregnant and carry a baby to a healthy birth she isn't physically too old.
I wouldn't have a baby at that age but my oldest will be 25 when I'm 47, so I'm more likely to be thinking about grandchildren than children.

I just can’t imagine how exhausting teenage shenanigans would be in your 60s.

I wouldn't want another one now at 46 with the age my children are as I'm knackered but my childless friends would be fine having a baby at this age I think! I'm so tired as I've had years of children, I'd be quite spritely without them 🤣

It also depends on the age of her partner, if she has one. People condem women for having children too late however the 50+ old Dads don't attract such condemation. Maybe the Dad is in his 20s which would make it easier on the child in the future.

I know someone at 42 who had her first and only one. She keeps herself very young. Depends on the person I suppose

@summer41 If that's what she wants then there's no harm in trying.

...apart from the risk of having a child with complex needs, or a profoundly disabled child, who would need constant, expensive care for the rest of their life. A life which she probably wouldn't be around for much of. It is an incredibly selfish thing to do.

@ivfdreaming

Far too old. Very selfish at that age

Sir Keir Starmer is 57 and has children aged 10 and 8 - is he selfish?

What about George Clooney having twins at 56?

Too old.

Too old. Dealing with my late teens is tough enough at 56. Let alone at 66.

It's up to her but realistically she's going to struggle getting pregnant. Your fertility takes a nosedive in your 40s.

Before contraception became widely available it was relatively common for women to have babies well into their 40s. I think if she feels like she can do it, is financially secure and has a solid marriage then why not?

I'd not do it as a single parent, since the chance of disability for mum or baby is much higher at that age, and it's hard enough having a first baby in your 30s - must be much tougher in your late 40s.

Best of luck to your friend, she'll need your support whatever she decides.

@Zaphodsotherhead

I think there may be too much focus on 'baby'. Yes, at 47 coping with a baby is hard, but not too dreadful. It's doable.

But going on a few years, going through menopause whilst dealing with a tween, coping with health and fitness declining (unless you spend a phenominal amount of time on yourself) once you are over 60, with a teenager, doing University visits whilst pushing 70...

For a very few it turns out fine. They stay fit, healthy and well until a final and sudden decline. For others there are health problems (which are much harder to shrug off as you age) and declining fitness at the same time as a young child needs you to be in full fettle and firing on all cylinders.

So. Think less about the baby years and more about the growing child, would be my advice.

I think this is a very good point.

An adorable - even if demanding - little baby when you're still relatively young is one thing. However, doing the school run in your late 50s? Dealing with a sulky teen when you're almost of an age to draw your pension? Worrying about paying university fees when you're pushing 70?

Also, is there a father in the picture, and what age is he? Or is she going it alone? Having support would make a big difference. Raising a child alone as an older mother would be very challenging without that.

I was mid forties when I had DS.

If your friend is fit and healthy then I don’t see why she shouldn’t have a child.

Older parents often have no money worries and that can make a huge difference. Younger parents are often stressed because they’re working full-time whilst also trying to parent their kids or palming them off on grandparents.

Instead of using grandparents as free childcare, the older parents can employ nannies/au pairs/cleaners etc. to deal with the drudgery so they can focus on the nicer bits.