To not think 41 is that old for pregnancy

[User7778889]

I was lucky enough to have kids in my early 30’s but obviously many aren’t. Dh said that my friend 41 is very old for pregnancy and he worries about her child’s future.

Listen, don't be depressed!! DH and I were together from when we were 21. We got married at 27. We were in a position to ttc at 30, but 3.5 years of infertility followed, and we had DC1 at 34, DC3 at 40.

We all deal with the hand that we're given and hopefully a successful pregnancy will be in your near future x

So many variables here

• age of the dad (some conditions for the baby are statistically more probable when both parents are older)
• it you have kids already (a first time mum at 41 is going to be very different to a 4th baby at 41).
• weight and current medical conditions (someone who is fit and healthy at 41 vs someone morbidly obese with other conditions are going to be very different things).
• natural conception vs IVF ( a lovely friend of mine had her first at 42 and within a couple of years was dead from cancer - doctors linked this to the IVF drugs she was taking and a genetic predisposition for the cancer - so sad.)

just a combo of those tbh.

Ultimately women have had babies at this age forever, but I also think nature makes it more difficult for a reason.

Given the choice no way in heck personally. My last pregnancy at 31 literally nearly killed me, but then again maybe if I hadn’t had other kids to look after I wouldn’t have been so knackered?

My parents had me in their twenties and I lost them before my kids were even born.

There are no guarantees. Health is more important than age and age in itself doesn't equate to poor health

Trust me, it will be fine x

I was 43 when I had my one and only.perfectly normal pregnancy and birth. My midwife friend says its not particularly unusual to be 40+. No.one knows what the future holds. My mum died in her mid 60s, my husband's mum died when he was a kid- both were mothers in their 20s. My dad is late 70s and fitter/ more active than most people half his age.

Well there's something wrong there because my DC3 born when I was 40 has never been embarrassed by me.

Maybe they dress and act old. I don't.

Absolutely. My mum was 19.5 having me and she died aged 62.

I do actually think it's on the older side yes. It's obviously older right? But if you can manage it and want to, who cares?

I only managed to get pregnant with my first at 33 after fertility issues!

Dh said that my friend 41 is very old for pregnancy and he worries about her child’s future.

Has he ever commented on any men who are making babies at that age?

Also is he keeping himself fit and healthy and trying to ensure longevity himself?

My DD's friend has just died, ten days after giving birth, at 28 years old. My DN died at 23, leaving a toddler. Both through illness, not accidents.

I wouldn't have wanted to be an older Mum. My Mum had me at nearly 41. Her energy levels were amazing and she babysat for me in her 70's. She didn't give up work until 78. My GM was still working in her late 70's. We tend to be healthy and then just drop dead. I planned my first as a teen, no regrets. So I wouldn't criticise another woman's choice. I am my DD's full time child care. At nearly 56 I like my two days off and not having the responsibility for school uniforms and the morning school run. I would imagine that it is hard going, I don't have the same capacity to deal with stress, so wouldn't want teen. But then you adjust your life accordingly and cut out everything that doesn't really have to be done.

That's because you had your children madly young!!

I wouldn't have coped with pregnancy at that age!

I'm 48, I have a 26 year old and a 16 year old.

Sorry I'm falling asleep.

If this was to me, I am 47, I know plenty of people in their 60's 2 women I know in their early 60 have been diagnosed with breast cancer ( one for the second time ) this year. The men seem more plagued wtith alcoholism and mental health difficulties. But one has had a heart attack.

At 25 your too young for babies need to live , at 30 everyone worries you haven't settled down and started a family and 35 your considered a geriatric mum. You need to live your own life because fitting into the right situation is about a 5 year window and that is only good if you are married and financially stable.

Still cant buy twenty odd years extra time with him though.

Er they are old, they're both approaching 60 whilst their friends mums are still in their 30s.

Of course it's old for pregnancy, in a purely biological sense. That doesn't mean it's wrong or impossible or that it shouldn't happen. But many women will be in perimenopause at that age. We aren't designed to keep having babies forever. But for some people having their family earlier in life just doesn't happen for whatever reason. And I'm sure your friend and her child will be just fine!

I'm afraid I agree with your DH. People can do what they want, and someone else's uterus isn't my business, but yes, 41 to start having children, biologically is 'old' to start.

No it's not, and really before birth control was probably relatively common back then too - my mother was born in the 1920s when her mum was 40 and she had another after.
In my limited circle of friends, more than half of us had kids in our 40s, only two vía IVF. I had my two over 40, my sis hers at 45, a friend at 46, and other than the two ivf babies who were only children, five others had their last at 40 or over. All the kids are now late teens/early 20s. All parents are fit and healthy.

I don’t judge others for me personally, that’s too old. I am about to have my last child at 35 and that was my absolute cut off and wouldn’t have had another one if we had been unable to conceive on time.

Several midwives have told me that the risks do increase at 40+, but the health of my parents and in laws hasn’t been great from 50+. Things like cancer and hip replacements. Not ideal if you have a school-aged child. My mum has also claimed to have too low energy since around 60 to the point where she couldn’t be bothered to be involved in my wedding planning. Let alone parent a teenager.

Some people are fit and healthy in 50/60s and some aren’t, as it wasn’t a risk I was personally willing to take.

It's more as the child gets older the parent will be older compared to others. I want to be around when my kids have babies.

Firstly, each to their own.
Secondly, anything over late 30s would have been a no for me.

MN has a particular demographic, which is easy to find out.

In rl wealthier middle class and degree educated women are more likely to have their children later.

There is also another demographic of women, who some of my SILs have worked with, who continue to have children until they no longer can. (My SILs have impolitely described their easy births.)

So if you are or know women in these groups you will know women who have had children in their 40s and even early 50s.

My mom had me at 17, not ideal, but my grandma was 40 when I was born. It’s been awesome having her as a grandmother and she’s been like a second/main mother to me and yet; I would be sad if she was my mom because I am in my late 20’s and she is nearing her 70’s and the drastic decline in health, energy levels, and how rigid her and my grandpa are becoming now they are getting older is palpable. If I had kids today, my grandmother would be too old to properly help with childcare nor to provide remotely the same level of care I got to receive. I mean obviously in her case she is my grandma so she is YOUNG and expectations are completely different to those of a parent.

My mom also had one of my siblings at 42 (she is now under 5yo) and honestly while my mom is still fine overall, her health has also steadily declined, and being very honest my mom doesn’t have a health that makes her likely to be there in 30 years time, and I find it tragic. Similarly, my youngest sibling doesn’t have much of a relationship with the grandparents because they simply don’t have the capacity to look after her for long (I was always over at my grandparents house when little and always going on hikes and trips solo with them, etc…) and realistically speaking by the time my sibling is likely to have a kid (20+ years from now) my grandparents will likely be gone and my mom will be a similar age to my grandma now and likely honestly less physically able than her, based on her already reduced mobility.

Personally I find it super sad because I did get to know my mom young and my grandparents in their 40’s and I do know what my sibling has and will continue to miss out on and I am already pre-grieving the approaching death of my grandparents (even if it’s likely in 15+ years) and I just couldn’t imagine being my age and worrying about this about my own mother. Like if my mom was to die at 80 (and I’ll be shocked if she is still around then) I’ll have known her 63 years, I’ll be on the verge of retirement myself and it will be an appropriate age to navigate the loss of a parent, my sibling would be 38 ! It’s so young! It’s that time of life where if my sibling has kids they would be likely to be young and need motherly advice, but at 80 my mom would likely need care herself vs actually be able to provide any, let alone a very active grandmother relationship with her great kids (something she is likely to be able to provide better to us, older siblings).

idk when I think of my youngest sibling I get sad. Currently my mom is still in decent (even if not great) health and my sibling currently technically has a better version of my mother than I did. BUT in the end this sibling will have to face so much more losses early on and simply won’t get the same childhood with grandparents I had or the same adult relationship with our mother I have had.