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?

Socially, it's a normal age these days. But our bodies don't always know that, do they? We have a family history of early meno, I'm glad I was able to have mine when I did.

It's more normal these days but not young. The body isn't designed to have babies in your late thirties and there are more risks so yes, it requires more monitoring. I do wish they'd remove the word geriatric and replace it with something else though!

I had my fifth and final child at 35 and was never made to feel old. In fact, after his birth, when I asked to be sterilised the doctor said I was fat too young and talked me out of it and into getting my then husband to have the snip instead!

I think its common now to have babies in your mid 30s, but its not young.

This is just complete nonsense. I've had 2 pregnancies over 40 and wasn't once classified as high risk.

I don't think it's "young" to have a baby. I think young is mid 20s or under, average late 20s to late 30s, 40+ I'd class as older.

No. I was 19 now that's young.
36 is quite late to be honest.

The term geriatric isn't particularly helpful tbh. The NHS changes care to consultant led at 40.

I would say it's quite late to have a baby, although it is a personal decision.
I wouldn't do it as I wouldn't want teens in my 50s, but some people won't mind that.

Geriatric mothers were 26 and over when I trained!

I don’t know I wouldn’t say it was ‘young’ but it’s not ‘not normal’. I had mine in my 20s and tbh can’t always tell which mums are younger or older than me at the school gates.

That aside... do they still use the term ‘geriatric mother’ on notes etc? I remember reading about outdated language in maternity care and the need for change and this was one example... however that was years ago so I’m surprised if they still haven’t replaced it with something less awful?

The term geriatric is based on biology, not whether you think it's old or not.

😲

I think it is really normal to have children mid-late 30s. But I'm always surprised when people have kids in their 20s, although not in a judgey way just in a "wow that is so grown up" way. To some extent I think views on this are dictated by what your peers do. None of my close friends had babies pre-early 30s and most mid-30s. Neither way is right, just your own bubble I reckon.

Science, life and medicine arent going to change facts because your offended.

You fertility starts to decline at 28 and ramps up at 35 and goes off a cliff at 40... yes people can get pregnant after 40 but the the genetic risk are greatly higher.

You body attempts to use up the 'best' quality eggs first by 36 most people have been shedding the 'best' eggs for over approx. 25 years and the suply is not as strong as it was not matter how young you feel.

Had my first baby at 34, second at 37. I was told at the beginning of my second pregnancy that I was now classed as “geriatric” but there was no difference in my care as far as I could tell. So those people saying “I wasn’t geriatric…” you were. It’s probably just that no one mentioned it.

No it's not young. The trouble is, our society puts pressure on a lot of women to get a degree, then sometimes another degree, then concentrate on a career. It all means that many women are mid thirties before starting a family. It's normal but not biologically ideal.

I am 36 with a young baby and wasnt classed as high risk. Because of what I'd read online I thought I would be but nope. No extra interventions. Nothing. And told what I said in my post above.

But no, its not young.

I have a friend from a town in the Welsh Valleys who had her first daughter at 13. Her daughter also had a baby at 13. My friend is a grandma now and she's still not 30.

I wouldn't say 36 is young but I know plenty of women who have had children at that age and older. I had my child at 40 and was never once referred to as an older/geriatric mother by health care professionals. Care pathways differ by trust - in my area women who are 40+ get a couple of additional growth scans in later pregnancy (as do women who smoke, those with a previous large/small baby, gestational diabetes etc). That was it. Was all midwife led care. Consultant led is only for women 45+ now in my area (unless other health indication). Used to be 40+.

It's on the older side if you think about what age a woman can have a child. I would have considered a 3rd but I wld like a 4-5yr age gap this time and not willing to have a baby in my later 30's.

Honestly, the nonsense spouted on this thread like it's a fact. I had a baby at 40 and am pregnant again at 42. I have never had my age mentioned, never been classified as high risk, and have never been consultant led - my first I was under the care of the homebirth team from the start, and am under them again for my second. I only go to the hospital for the 12 and 20 week scans. That's it. Never met or spoke to a consultant. You may have been consultant led over 40, but don't state that as a universal truth because it isn't helpful to other women considering pregnancy at 40+

This is true.

Although also I was more knackered ten years ago (when my youngest was 18 months old and my older two at preschool and early primary) than I am now.

I work with children with autism, behavioural difficulties and learning disabilities and it's significantly more work than toddlers, especially as atm I have my class of 8 children by myself due to unfilled vacancies and staff sickness.

My colleague (who is off sick) is in her late 20s, doesn't have children of her own and is young enough to be my daughter technically and from what she says is far more exhausted at the end of the day than I am.

I think exhaustion goes in phases perhaps.

I certainly wouldn't want another baby, but my kids are teenagers and nearly teenagers. I do think that the age difference is a massive factor - My eldest was 5 and a half when DC3 was born and I already found that a big gap!

I went to school with people like this and find it quite shocking and sad. Thirteen is still a child. It's no age to become a mum.

Where I live in London it’s the norm and 34/35/36 for a first baby is very common. It’s so rare around here to meet a mum having her first baby in her 20s. I don’t see it as young in general though to me that’s mums in their late teens early/mid twenties. I think around here you aren’t classes as being geriatric until 40 plus. I have to say though some of my friends who’ve had babies later have had various complications like gestational diabetes which they didn’t have in earlier pregnancies, on the other hand I know some who’ve sailed through pregnancy at 40plus. It’s just the stats are more in your favour when you are young.