@RoSEbuds6
I had my dd at 39 and sailed through it all, and loved every minute of it, but now 13 years on I'm perimenopausal and possibly not in the right headspace for a hormonal teen.
THIS! ^ This is what people don't take into account. Whilst most people will be very healthy and fit and energetic in their late 30s and early 40s, and think 'I am fit, healthy, and vibrant enough to have a new baby at 40-42ish,' they don't think outside the box.
Like, the fact that they will be in their early 50s whilst the child is still at primary school. And the fact their child will still be at school when they're almost SIXTY years old.
And even though SOME people on mumsnet think someone of 60 is barely middle aged, and everyone in their 'social circle' runs a marathon every 2 weeks at 65-70, and is running their own business at 78; the fact is that the vast VAST majority of people will have much less energy, and will be starting to get more tired and wanting their peace and quiet more by their mid 50s.
In addition, for many, their health will have started to decline by their mid to late 50s, some much more than others. You also run the risk of leaving a child with no parents when they are still quite young, when they need their parents most...
The thought of having a primary school aged child in their 50s, and a teenager at almost 60, is something that fills most ordinary people with sheer horror. That's why the vast majority of people simply don't do it.
I can count on the fingers of one hand, the amount of women I know who had a baby past the age or 41/42. Even though it seems to be every third woman in the country over 40, according to some on here.