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?

Not in my trust, they have stopped using that phrase (and with no substitute either). I had a baby at 40 and am pregnant again at 42 and not once has anyone mentioned my age, not my GP, the midwives, anyone at the hospital, nor any health visitor. It's just not a 'thing' anymore. Thankfully. Women should have babies whenever they want and not be needlessly labelled as 'old' when doing so

It's not 'young' but a perfectly normal age to have a baby.

I am mid forties and my eldest is now just an adult.

Some people have babies at my age… I applaud them and can’t imagine it.

A newborn now would finish me off

It's not over 35yrs anymore. It's over 40yrs.

Well at least it wasn't at the hospital I was at. I actually asked as my friend had her 2nd son at 35yrs and was classed geriatric. I said am I classed geriatric and the midwife said no that's changed now, it's over 40yrs and we don't say geriatric - we just group together as higher risk pregnancies. I was in the low risk group!

I'm 36 with my 2nd a 9 month old it's not ancient at all. All the baby groups I go to I'm about the middle definitely not the oldest and definitely not an old mum!

I definitely think it depends on the area around here early 30s is about the norm for first baby.

The ages for what's considered a geriatric pregnancy have also changed its now 40 is considered higher risk not 36.
If you want a 3rd then go for it!

Not young

I had my second this year at 34 (and a half) years old. When I had my dating scan the ultrasound technician said: 'It's low risk based on your age'. Later on in the pregnancy I spoke to a consultant about some worries I had and she said: 'Very low risk, given that you're young and healthy'. Had I been a few months older, would this sentiment have changed completely? Although fertility obviously declines after 30, I think the idea of some kind of cliff edge at 35 is nonsensical. I don't think 36 is young, but it is also not particularly old. I know quite a few people who had their (first, even) baby in their mid to late 30s and my friend is pregnant with her first at 41 – all going well.

I had my second at 36. He is 17 now, l am 54. I was fine until the menopause kicked in. My friends had their children much younger so we are at different life stages, most of them are Grandparents now.

Yes...my mum says having teenagers while going through the menopause was Godawful too.

No. I didnt feel young having mine at 30 tbh.

Isn't it all relative? It's young to someone who started having babies once they hit 40. It's old to someone who had their kids in their 20s. If you want a 3rd child it's up to you. I was 34 when I got pregnant with my 3rd child. Was it more challenging for me ohysically because of my age, not really. If anything it was more tiring because I had two other kids to take care of.

No it's not young, I was 36 with my first and had my second at 38, I'm definitely an older mum.

If circumstances were different I'd of had children in my mid to late 20's, unfortunately didn't meet my husband until I was 33

These threads make me SO angry. Every single time, there are so many posters lining up to say that "It's biology!" and that, come 35, your fertility somehow drops off the cliff. They are wrong.
There is a reason why 35 was defined as the age of "geriatric pregnancy," and it's a reason that is no longer relevant. It emerged in the early days of amniocentesis, when doctors tried to find a way to explaining to women the risks and benefits of the procedure. They looked for the statistical point where the risk (the risk of the procedure causing a miscarriage) became the less than the benefit (the likelihood of the amniocentesis revealing something like Downs Syndrome) shifted, and found that to be 35. Hence, 35 became the point at which expectant women were described as geriatric.
Since then, the statistics have changed, as amniocentesis technology has improved. If they used the same measure today, "geriatric pregnancy" would be around 32 years old.
Does fertility decline with age? Yes, of course. But do all the different things that determine fertility decline at the same rate? No. And is every woman different. Yes.
Fertility declines on a continuum, and yes, the steepness of the rate of decline accelerates with age. But it isn't as if a switch is flipped at 35.

I can't stand the phrase geriatric mum.

Yabvu.

I don’t think it’s young, but it’s certainly not out of the norm in current society. Had my 3rd at 37, and several of my school year friends had babies around that time too. We actually found it amusing that we were classed as geriatric.

There’s no question it’s on the older side OP, and I say this as someone who had their second and final baby at 36.

Yes, people have babies older than and into their 40s. It doesn’t negate the fact the 36 is pushing it.

I honestly don’t know why you aren’t relishing your two healthy, happy, increasingly independent children. But appreciate that’s very much just me.

I just had my first baby at 34 and the nurses kept calling me young which really surprised me! Maybe they thought I looked young, 6 months later I’ve aged horribly. 🤣
Earwigging in the reception waiting for appointments I was at the younger end of other mothers waiting but not by a huge amount, most people were 35 to 40 odd. However when I’m out and about with the baby I see loads of fresh faced 20 somethings with prams & I feel like an old swamp hag.

Its a medical term. In general life 36 isn't old but in fertility terms anything over 35 is classed as geriatric as you are classed as high risk

No longer class it as really old maybe a tad old . I see 30-35 average for now. Over 35 is biological quite old though!

biologically prime is 19-25

Had baby at 32, infertile by 34 with useless old eggs, I am still absolutely furious with all the people who told me that my twenties was too young to think about babies.

OP with respect - you are lucky. You won the biological lottery and you could still have babies in your mid to late thirties. Good for you 👏 👏 Check your privilege before coming on the internet to whinge about not being old. You are old, so am I.

I felt ancient having my son at 32 but he was a screamer with bags of energy. I'm 36 and only beginning to feel normal again no way would I want to have another at this age. However I know plenty who do and cope just fine.

@Hdaniels11 My 27 yr old friend was termed an “ Elderly primagravida” -
Late 30’s is definitely not young when it comes to human reproduction.
Older men , too can linked with various birth issues- Less than optimal sperm quality.

I wouldn't say it's relatively young, but about average to above average. Although some people do have children in their forties, it's not usual or expected. 36 is about the latest you would want to leave it (if planned).

I had my first at 33 and second at 36. I feel young to be honest. I mentioned the geriatric thing to my clinic first time round and to the midwives second time and they suggested it's a bit outdated now to call it a geriatric pregnancy at my age. Also that fertility does decline but not as sharply as suggested though it does from 40

So I wouldn't call it relatively young but also not old either just normal. Depends on your circles though. People I went to school with, its old. Most had teen pregnancies and have teenagers now but people I went to university with, its normal.