To delay TTC by six months when I’m already in my 40s?

[Wetdayinoctober]

I’m 41, and we have a 11 month old. Hoping to try for another soon.

The complicating factors here are that I need to work until at least may to qualify for enhanced maternity package. So originally were thinking of TTC again in May / June.

However, logistically a baby born September / October would work so much better. It would mean I could take advantage of the summer holidays at work and DS would be nearly 3 which means he’d qualify for some free hours at nursery. However, it would mean I was pregnant at 42, having baby at 43.

On the one hand there doesn’t seem a massively dramatic difference in baby born March 23 and baby born September 23. And we had no trouble conceiving DS.

However I am worried about my age.

Wwyd?

OP it's clearly not the replies you wanted to hear, but you wanted impartial opinions, do you not concede the overwhelming majority disagree with your approach? You've had well over a hundred replies, I'm very surprised you're still resolutely sticking by your stance, I'm not sure why you posted this.

@Wetdayinoctober

The problem is none of us know.

So since we don’t know we can only really make plans based on the information we have.

That information is firstly, that women in their 40s often struggle to conceive - but I am already in my 40s.

Secondly, I know I am fertile. But this could change.

It isn’t my intention to sound petulant but it is upsetting being told I don’t care about a second when I absolutely do but I do have to balance this against what is best for the people who are here.

I mean for instance my mum died at 45. I know I might die any time and I have a will and life insurance and a pension but just the same I don’t live my life assuming I’ll die prematurely. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe I should assume I won’t conceive. Just don’t know, can’t know.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers that post was pretty horrible.

OP you are being obstinate. You don’t “know” that I am fertile. As I said at 36/37 it took me 7 months, I have a significantly higher than average egg reserve, totally regular cycles- ovulating normally, had conceived first time two years earlier. There was nothing wrong with my fertility at all. Egg quality also matters and there is no real test for that. It took my body 7 months to find that good enough egg. This isn’t the same as “oh I could die at 45”. At 41 there is a very good chance you will struggle somewhat to conceive- hopefully it happens , but it may take a while. Of course it may happen instantaneously again but that would make you part of a lucky minority- not the norm.

*you are fertile

Really sorry you lost your mum so young, OP. I did too.
With that experience, I've always felt that if you want something -don't put it off.
For context, I have one DC and am happy with that. Circumstances made it that way (not fertility related).

And if you're so sure you're fertile I don't understand what you're worried about and why you're posting?

Only wait if you are ok with not having a second baby. You are discounting the higher rate of miscarriage after 40. It isn't only managing to get pregnant that is an obstacle to having a live birth.

People on here know a disproportionate number of older mother's and they declare that they definitely didn't have intervention. But no-one knows that I had intervention to have my second because of secondary infertility.

The longer you wait, the higher the risk of miscarriage and congenital problems and the greater the chance that you won’t be able to have a second. Personally I wouldn’t risk it. I conceived my first without much difficulty at 37, tried for a second for over a year from the age of 40 and didn’t conceive once despite all the supplements, ovulation sticks etc.

Ps no one is trying to tell you how much you want the second baby, or whether it is wise to have one, they are giving you advice that you need to decide what is most important. If having a second baby is the difference between happiness or not, I’d say go for it - don’t wait and worry about the finances later. However, if you could be happy with just one, then it does sound like waiting is the more practical choice. x

All you know is you were fertile, you were fertile when you conceived. You asked about something that has caused so much pain, to so many women and their families and you've been sarcastic and exaggerated in your sulky replies, over reacating because it hasn't gone the lighthearted way you hoped for maybe. Start trying, or not, but don't be rude to women who have been there, or who never got the babies they wanted so much. Nit picking over 6 months is a fantasy, fortune telling about the future over things you can't control is pointless. Start shagging, or not, might take you years, or not, depends how much you can live without it and how it will affect you if you didn't try and missed an opportunity or end up grieving losses, nobody knows what will be, but so many women your age have so much experience and wish they hadn't waited.

It’s fine to wait if you want to and feel strongly that you should.

But the overwhelming consensus on this thread is that to do so might risk your chance of a second d baby.

It might not. But you increase your risk of not having a second child the longer you wait.

If that is acceptable to you - if you will be at peace with not having a second if it doesn’t happen for you, and will not have a lot of ‘what if’ regrets - then wait till May.

But as PPs say, in the grand scheme of things, unless your financial situation is very knife-edge (in which case you need to consider if a second child is responsible at all) less maternity pay is a small absorbable issue over the long-term.

If you are sure you want another child there is no way I’d delay. I feel pregnant with my first whilst on the patch. All fine, no issues in my late 20s.

We started TTC when she was 6 months old. I’ve now had three miscarriages. We wrongly assumed that everything would be fine. I’m also 29 and not in my 40s. There is no way I’d postpone because you just don’t know, the longer you leave it the smaller the chance becomes.

it is upsetting being told I don’t care about a second when I absolutely do but I do have to balance this against what is best for the people who are here.

This is your perception not the reality of the thread.

No one has said you don’t care about having a second.

Everyone has said if you do want a second it’s best not to wait.

Why did you bother posting on AIBu when you clearly have already decided?
Everytimd someone says don’t wait .. which is what a dr would say ( and I know this because I’m in your age bracket and have a bunch of friends seeing gynaes/fertility doctors , and have been told the same ) you just turn around and say “BUT blah blah blah “

I would get on with it and TTC now. You were lucky the first time but that might not happen again and time is not on your side. Secondary infertility is a possibility, especially at your age. Speaking as an older mum myself. What would you regret more - missing out on the extra money from work or not being able to have a second child?

Op, is it that your DH isn’t keen and you’re looking to justify his choices to delay…whilst trying to convince yourself it will all be okay? There feels like an emergent of that.

2 small children under 2, especially when you’re over 40 is hard work. There’s no doubt about that. Is it that he’s just not as keen as you or can’t face it when the first is still very small?

Does he fully understand the practical implications and decline chances after 40? Has he read this thread? Of course you just decide together, so perhaps you should show him this info. It is sometimes the case that men aren’t as ‘up’ on fertility issues as women and especially if a first conception happened quickly, can assume there is all the time in the world to pick the perfect time.

I suppose you have to consider what’s the worse thing that. Outdoor happen by starting to try sooner and what’s the worst thing that could happen if you delay.

Given there no absolute knowing and financial impacts and even less about whether you will convenience later down the line, it is about risk taking isn’t it. You can take the risk and delay…..and potentially face pretty serious consequences. It’s your choice about whether to take the risk, but don’t pretend there’s no risk.

@Wetdayinoctober

The problem is none of us know.

So since we don’t know we can only really make plans based on the information we have.

That information is firstly, that women in their 40s often struggle to conceive - but I am already in my 40s.

Secondly, I know I am fertile. But this could change.

It isn’t my intention to sound petulant but it is upsetting being told I don’t care about a second when I absolutely do but I do have to balance this against what is best for the people who are here.

I mean for instance my mum died at 45. I know I might die any time and I have a will and life insurance and a pension but just the same I don’t live my life assuming I’ll die prematurely. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe I should assume I won’t conceive. Just don’t know, can’t know.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers that post was pretty horrible.

Dying at 45 is statistically unlikely though. Whereas having trouble conceiving, or not being able to conceive at all, at 43 is quite likely. And it's also likely that the longer you wait, the more steeply your remaining fertility will decline. None of that's meant to be nasty or personal, it's about accepting probability.

You've said you are 'desperate' for a second. I wouldn't wait in your position.

I needed ivf and had an egg retrieval age 38.5 and one age 40 (just). First egg retrieval gave us 7 eggs that all fertilized and all survived the days after and being frozen. My second egg retrieval gave us similar amount of eggs (one more) and bar one they all died in the first two days in the lab.

I never believed that fertility falls off of a cliff, I thought that that must just be statistics but it did really fall off a cliff for me.

Up to you entirely, and to some extent I would agree that six months isn't a huge deal. However as someone who waited for the perfect age gap and now have been trying for our second for fifteen months and have three miscarriages to show for it (and I recognise that in my mid 30s my situation is by no means dire), it's really been an eye opener that things are out of our control.

@Wetdayinoctober

I am absolutely most definitely not trying to be flippant.

I apologise unreservedly if that’s how it has come across.

But - what can I actually say in response to some of these? My original question (delaying by six months) has been a little bit waylaid insofar as people are telling me not to delay at all.

To be clear - a baby born before February 2023 would mean only SMP.

I’m reluctant to do this because:

1. I think a tiny age gap between DS and a subsequent child would be very challenging for me.

1. It would put a huge financial strain on us.

1. It could potentially lead to resentment from DH as I’d be leaning on him financially.

1. It would mean a shorter period of maternity leave.

1. It would mean two children in childcare and the resulting costs.

1. Work would not be as amenable for me going back part time.

As I keep saying, my priority is the child and family I have. I am desperate for a second but I won’t let this desperation drive me to unwise decisions.

I am very sorry for all of you who have struggled. I may struggle too. I am old and I may never have a second. This is the chance you take when you are old.

But it doesn’t mean I can’t make any provisional plans either and be laden with doom all of the time.

Sometimes debating on here can be useful you know now that your priorities are life for the 3 if you, with having an extra child a good bonus to life rather than essential. You shouldn't feel you have to justify that, your existing child genuinely is more important. Good luck with it all.

it is upsetting being told I don’t care about a second

I don't see anyone saying this? I see posters saying, that if you can accept perhaps not having a second, delaying ttc might be a valid option? Which you said yourself, didn't you?

You asked for advice. I read almost universal opinions which recognised the dilemma, and in large part based on their own experiences, made suggestions.

You've responded very petulantly & quite unfairly, making inferences that aren't there.
Ultimately, if on balance, you & DH prefer to wait, that's the right choice for you. Along with that, you need to accept it makes it statistically less likely that you'll conceive. Not impossible, but harder. You may be lucky & do so with no problems - but that's part of the gamble you need to take. Good luck. 💐

@Wetdayinoctober

I am absolutely most definitely not trying to be flippant.

I apologise unreservedly if that’s how it has come across.

But - what can I actually say in response to some of these? My original question (delaying by six months) has been a little bit waylaid insofar as people are telling me not to delay at all.

To be clear - a baby born before February 2023 would mean only SMP.

I’m reluctant to do this because:

1. I think a tiny age gap between DS and a subsequent child would be very challenging for me.

1. It would put a huge financial strain on us.

1. It could potentially lead to resentment from DH as I’d be leaning on him financially.

1. It would mean a shorter period of maternity leave.

1. It would mean two children in childcare and the resulting costs.

1. Work would not be as amenable for me going back part time.

As I keep saying, my priority is the child and family I have. I am desperate for a second but I won’t let this desperation drive me to unwise decisions.

I am very sorry for all of you who have struggled. I may struggle too. I am old and I may never have a second. This is the chance you take when you are old.

But it doesn’t mean I can’t make any provisional plans either and be laden with doom all of the time.

Your reasons are fine. It's fine to wait 6 months for TTC. We're not trying to be nasty, just pointing out that if your reasons are less important to you than a second child then don't delay because you simply don't know if you are still fertile and it could mean the difference between secondary infertility or having that second baby.

It sounds like your reasons are more important than increased chance of having a second, and that is fine. We're not trying to be nasty, in the end you're a stranger on the internet and we'll have forgotten this thread by next week, we just want you to make a properly informed choice and not look back in regret and think "what if".

Am I right in thinking your question was should I a) start trying to conceive in May or June 2022 - ie wait 6-7 months to get the additional maternity pay or b) start trying to conceive November or Dec 2022 - ie wait another year to have a September baby AND the extra maternity pay

And many people are recommending c) start trying now and just have SMP even though thats not what you wanted?

Personally I'd wait for the financial improvement (option a)- but I wouldn't delay after that due to the drop in fertility statisically - however if I was currently on hormonal contraception I'd think of coming off that before then and using a barrier method (I did actually conceive first month off the pill each time but I know thats rare - and I was in my 20s at the time)

One thing I will say though is I'm 42 now (nearly 43) and would say in the past 18 months, more so since my 42nd birthday my health and tiredness has massively changed - which I think it mainly due to perimenopasual - whereas at 40 I'd have said I was quite young for my age and no issues - it can change fast (and from just over 41 my periods went haywire)

Honestly if you want a second go for it now and work life factors out later. You may regret it otherwise.

As you age your fertility does exponentially decrease. It's not linear. The fact that you already conceived doesn't mean you are still fertile. As you age your chances of getting a child with disabilities increases. Having a smaller age gaps greatly increases your chance of you experiencing catastrophic birth complications and it also increases the risk of things like autism etc.

You don't really have the money for a second child even assuming and it's a hell of a big assumption that you and the baby come through perfectly fine. In your shoes I'd be grateful for the one healthy one I got and focus on giving that child a better life. You could be back here in 12 months with a very different post. Look up the statistics and really understand the risk to you and your possible next child.

I think the issue here is statements such as these:

I have successfully conceived one child at first attempt so it is reasonable to assume I am fertile

I know I am fertile. I know I am having regular periods. I know I ovulate. So - yes, there’s a chance I may not conceive but at the risk of sounding like the hunger games, the odds are in my favour.

Secondly, I know I am fertile. But this could change

All of these statements are unfortunately completely erroneous. People are trying to make you aware of this - not to be unkind, but so you can make an informed decision. Having regular periods and ovulating does not make you fertile. Most women are still having regular periods and ovulating at age 41 (menopause on average starts significantly later). However, age 41 most women are not able to easily conceive - especially not instantaneously. At 41/ 42 years old, the odds are not in your favour unfortunately, despite regular periods and ovulation. Furthermore, having one child already, and conceiving that child immediately, does not mean that you are fertile now (and that you will conceive easily again), especially when the difference is 39 versus 41/42.

It's a perfectly valid choice for you to wait to try for a second, and it's totally fine being an older mum. But don't make this decision based on totally misplaced/ naïve assumptions about your fertility.