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 and when I specifically asked they suggested I wasnt really. I'm assuming perhaps the studies its based on are old or something as it wasnt really a thing. Though maybe if a year or two on from now?

Can I please request some evidence based research that supports your flippant claim that there is a greater genetic risk (you could start by explaining what 'genetic risk' even means? Genetic risk of what?)

I’m currently 38 weeks pregnant with my first child at 36, and will be 37 in a couple of months.

Perhaps consider that it’s not always straight forward for someone to have children, and not always as easy as just getting pregnant before stating 36 is ancient!

It shows a pretty weak strength of character that your decision would be made solely on the responses to this thread.

I am sure I read a mainstream news article a few years ago debunking the 35 fertility cliff thing. It suggested that fertility was fine up to age 39 for a second or subsequent baby for most women.

It is not really young though. But most people I know have had babies in their 30s (30-39).

@canyoutoleratethis Down’s syndrome and other genetic diseases. This is commonly known.

I had my first at 22, my second at 34 and my third at 40.

34 was the one that I had no shitty comments about.

According to the twats of the world who couldn’t keep their mouths shut, I was too young the first time, and too old the last. So only my middle child was acceptable.

1/300 risk of down syndrome at 36 vs 1/2000 at the age of 20.

Undortunately it's not young at all...😰🫣 all I'll say after 5 years of secondary infertility- I wish I started sooner!!! But you have your two and bedt of luck with your third one😍

To add to this 36 definitely isn’t old it’s just normal. In the past pre contraction women were having babies from their late teens/early twenties until their 40s. 36 is just very average in terms of childbearing.

Put it this way. If you want a baby at 36 and can have one, who cares what the realms of old, young and normal are? Too old is by default, when you're past menopause.

Oh so if it's 'commonly known' it must be true 🙄. Yes, there is some evidence the risk of Downs increase with maternal age, but that change is from a very small risk to a slightly less small risk. The absolute risk to any single woman over 40 isn't statistically great enough to warrant your level of flippant scaremongering. And what about these other 'genetic conditions' you mention?

Pre contraception that should have said

It very clearly means the risk of genetic disorders (such as downs syndrome) and as such miscarraige and complications increase.

This is common knowledge and heavily documented and researched, If I do the work for you, I will waste my time and you will skim it and learn nothing so I suggest you do some research yourself on AMA and genetic risk, Pubmed is a good resource.

@canyoutoleratethis, as you correctly assert, there are absolutely no studies that support @mam0918 's claims. That simply isn't how it works. Yes, fertility declines with age, but the idea that at 35 your risks suddenly rocket and your chances of pregnancy plunge is patently false.
In my earlier post, I explained where the idea that 35 is a geriatric pregnancy comes from, and why it doesn't mean what people think it means.
The amount of ignorance on this thread is staggering, and ignorance presented with such confidence.

I will say through, my consultant with my last pregnancy at 40 was very encouraging about me having more! I said I felt too old and be kept saying, “nonsense!”

Even when he was sewing me up from my section he kept commenting that I was “good for at least one more section, perhaps two.”

No bloody way, I’m done!

Increased risk of chromosomal anomalies canyoutoleratethis - this is not only common knowledge but extremely well and extensively researched and very easy indeed to find evidence based research on, although of course increased risk is always only statistical at a population level and doesn't tell anyone their individual risk. Risk of miscarriage also increases with maternal age after 35, but this is one of countless studies on risks of genetic anomalies:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3784117/

Its not young no. Average age of UK mother is 29. But as it's your third probably a common age, but definitely not considered 'young'

I think most would consider a young mother to be under 25

I have a degree in this.

I'm also not your professor and not going to condense a 7 year degree down into laymans terms for mumsnet, you can continue to be wrong or you can study proper research.

@mam0918 oh I researched the risks plenty before choosing to be a mother after 40, hence I know very well the absolute risks. It's important people do understand the full facts before making an informed decision on when to have a child, but meaningless phrases like 'genetic risk' don't lead to a helpful discussion

Same. Cannot remember where but it was also explaining the age of the studies on which women's fertility and the over 35 thing is based are very old. It dips and declines but not the steep plummet. Similarly risks. It's much older that this is the case. And that was echoed by doctors and midwives during both of my pregnancies (I asked as I was worried re age).

The risk of Down syndrome does jump significantly with age... 1 in 100 pregnancies for a woman age 40. I suppose you can look it as ‘still 99% chance of NOT having a child with DS but even so it is a big big difference in chance compared to a woman in her early 20s.

Likewise, 40-50% of pregnancies end in miscarriage for women in their 40s, which is quite a big increase.

It's not 'relatively young', but it's quite 'normal' both in the sense of pretty commonplace in our society, and also in that it most likely won't be particularly problematic. Somewhat more likely to have problems than someone younger, sure, but the majority of 36 yo mothers won't have genetic or pregnancy problems.

I am early 30s. Just had my first. Really wished I would have started earlier tbh. It’s a lot for the body. Think I have just got away with it this time with everything going back - minus the boobs they seem long gone!. I can guarantee things are not going to be going back as smoothly with the second.

@mam0918, as do I. What you present is a gross simplification and, in many ways, inaccurate. Your statement about the body "using up the best eggs first" is simply incorrect, and you know it.

Definitely an older mother. You’ll be going through the menopause when your child is in the teens. I don’t think women think about that enough to be honest.