Aibu to think that 36 is still relatively young to have a child?

[Hdaniels11]

I have a Dd who's 9 and a Ds who's 6 and i'm thinking of having another baby. I'm 36 now and was amazed when i find out once you turn 34 you are classed as a geriatric mother! I always thought 25-38 was the prime time to have babies. Aibu to think you shouldn't be classed as an older mother until you are in your 40s?

Haven’t read all the responses but @GelatoQueen is absolutely right. I was 36 when I had my third and in my (highly educated and admittedly affluent) circle, 36 was viewed as young to have had three children…as most of my friends were having their first babies at 34/35.

Biologically though, 36 isn’t young to be having a baby - though this whole ‘fertility drops off a cliff at 35’ is a bit misguided…for most of us, it’s a slow decline over the 30-40 decade.

36 is not the age of a young mother.

Some of us who had children young built a life alongside the children growing up. It's not all doom, gloom and poverty if you have them young.

No, not young. And not in the "prime" fertility years.

Who had decided this cut-off age of 35 to be classified as old? Yes there are increased risks (of infertility, miscarriage, genetic disorders, complications etc...) as you age but those risks don't go from 0.1% before 35 to 99.9% after 35. Those risks increase gradually from 20 years old thoroughout our livres. There are more risks of downs syndrome or gestational diabetes at 28 than at 23, yet nobody thinks that being pregnant at 28 "old".

I wouldn't say it was young, but I gave birth to DC5 a few weeks before my 31st birthday.

I wouldn't say it was old either though, especially for baby no3.

Yes, this!! Feel like so many of the responses here are so negative

Ehhh school days are very fresh in my (older) mind too! I'm not sure it makes a difference if primary school was 10 years ago or 20 to be honest. I can remember much of it incredibly clearly, I certainly don't remember it any less than when I was 20.

I had my first at 20 second at 33 and last one at 39 , this was far from a judgment but just stating that seems to be common . I went back to uni and do have a successful career so I agree not all doom and gloom at all :-)

As mentioned yesterday a previous poster - 36 is fine for a subsequent baby provided no horrific medical history. If it was your first baby, risks would be higher.
I would personally be more concerned about the increased risk Down Syndrome but you can always test for that early on if you are too.

OP it’s not ancient at all.
For some reason on MN it’s always the same story when these sort of threads come up. Everyone saying that at mid 30’s you are past it.
In real life, 36 is a completely average and normal age to have your 3rd baby. 36 would be a normal age to have your second or even 1st baby where I live.
Yes fertility is less than in your 20’s but absolutely possible and normal to have a 3rd baby. Loads of women in decades past had babies in their late 30’s or early 40’s

I conceived my 3rd child last year when I was 38. I was surprised to get pregnant the second month of trying. I'm not in the UK and where I am, women have babies much later. I went to my gynecologist and thought she would be really concerned about my age. I asked her was it a problem and she said I was at a slightly elevated risk of miscarriage but other than that, nothing serious. I was asked if I wanted genetic testing, but I declined and that was fine. She said she generally only has concerns about much older mothers, ie, well into their 40s. I switched gynecologists and the new one seemed to feel the same.

Anyway, the pregnancy was completely fine but I really felt it: the pressure as I got bigger was intense. The baby was born at the start of the year and is perfect. I'm enjoying motherhood even more than I did before! This baby is like a pampered little puppy and I am so glad I went for it. I turned 40 this year and couldn't believe that I'm 40 with a baby! I would be open to a 4th if I was just thinking with my soppy heart but my head has decided to stop while the going is good.

I understand it’s difficult to get a clear picture of fertility rates in late 30s early 40s as most women aren’t trying to conceive at this age. If every woman in the country over 35 took part in a giant experiment to try and conceive maybe we could get some really sound data that would put this to rest - worth a try?

It's not young says me who had a baby at 40. But it's a world of difference having your 4th at 40 than starting at 40 IMO. Biology is not friend pushing 40 no matter how normal it is. Not that I'm against it. I just wouldn't risk my fertile years WAITING until I was 40 ( I know most people trying for their first 40+ didn't choose to wait btw so don't mean it in a nasty way)

Your most definitely not to old but I was a geriatric mum at 29. It's was over 25 = past it medically 😄 I guess that's changed. Thinking you can overdue at 40? Not a chance. Going over due at 33? No one blinked. It's just Biology. The stats aren't the same at say 25 and 36.

I had my first at 26. My sister had her first at 36. Both are 'normal'.

Relative to fertile years - 36 is old. Relative to the length of time you'll live - it's young.

I wonder if I'm the only one to be a little upset at some of the comments on this thread. In 1997 I had my son, my only child, I was 43. From the age of 30 to 35, I went through various infertility tests and procedures. My then husband was told he was all OK, and I was told that I appeared to be infertile. The marriage failed. I met and married my DH a couple of years later. He had 3 sons (6, 10 and 12) who lived with him 5/6 days a week and visited their mother for 1 or 2. Knowing I couldn't have children, we didn't 'need' contraception. It was with shock and delight I found I was pregnant at 42. I must be an exception to the rule.....Years of 'infertility' then pregnant in my 40's, a perfect and trouble free 9 months with no health scares, a beautiful baby boy (I felt and still do feel blessed). He is now 25, I am 68 and my DH is 76. He has 3 loving Half Brothers 5 nieces and 5 nephews. I hope he doesn't feel he was brought up by geriatric parents. I dont think he does.

Between the ages of 17 and 35 is considered to be the prime time, biologically, for giving birth - younger or older than this age range and the risks of pregnancy, childbirth and birth defects are statistically greater. Modern medicine helps alleviate a lot of the potential issues, of course. So, biologically speaking you are relatively old, but socially speaking it’s a pretty normal age to be having a baby these days, even a first baby.

By the time I was 36 my kids were 14 and 12. They were both in high school and we could leave them alone while we went shopping etc. By the time I was 40 they were 18 and 16 and we had a life of our own again.

My mum was 41 when she had my sister and I vowed I would never have kids later in life. Its your choice though, just not mine.

I had my third baby at 39, everything was fine, it was so relaxing and I didn’t stress about needless things. Would do it all again. There was a 44 year old mum in the next bed to me, her daughter was in the ward next door with her new baby.

no. i feel early 30s is old nowadays judging by these posts!!!

would i have a baby past 40? no. I would not have the energy - fair play to those who do !

For a third baby, I don’t think it’s horrifically old or unusual. It is considered quite old for a first, but it’s becoming more and more common for people to have their first in their 40s.

In 93, I was termed a geriatric primigravida aged 26. Could've theoretically been pregnant 10 years before (late developer) . Costs of housing have shifted first children more than anything else...

no, this is great!!

Just like you I had my 3rd at 39 , I was fine , baby was fine and no doctor was ever worried with age ( I’m in the U.K. ) I love being a mum as much now as I did in my 29, and 30’s ( oldest is 20 middle 5 years old , baby almost 1 ) . I could still see myself having one more .
I think the replies on MN are filled with so much gloom sometimes

Don't take those comments under your notice @akindredspirit. I had my eldest also in 1997 when I was 34, and youngest when I was 40, and I couldn't give less of a fuck what anyone else thinks!

Those posters screwing up their noses at older mums were clearly more fortunate in being able to plan their family the way they chose, but a lot of us didn't get that opportunity. They don't actually have a clue what they're on about. I think it's lovely that you had your son, and he is a blessing.

As for those who think being a young mum means you get longer with your children - not necessarily the case. My mother had me a couple of months before she turned 20, and she had completed her family at 28. She was 62 when she died...