How old is too old for baby #3?

[OohIdreameditagain]

How old is too old for ttc baby #3?

Id love another child, but can’t realistically ttc for another 6/7 months due my company Mat
policy but I’m a bit concerned about leaving it too late.

how old is too old for number 3?

Do you mean biologically or in life

Biologically - fertility goes down after 35, you have to be lucky to conceive in your 40s. But if you had two with no problems you should be fine for a bit (you can get your egg reserve checked if you are worried)

In life - it’s totally up to you. I think MOST people would say it’s best to be done before 40 when possible (accepting of course that is not always possible).

Had my second at 42.
Financially I'm stable, I have plenty of support and am mentally young in myself.
Everyone is so different in all these respects is impossible to define an appropriate cut of age overall. If you feel able and are healthy and want a child or makes no difference, everyone is ready at different stages.

I'm almost 42 and think would find having a newborn very exhausting

I have an almost 10 and an almost 7 year old

Yeah on another thread someone said a lot of my friends would be concerned about my child's future because I had him at 41. Helpful.

Anyway in answer to the OP I obviously think mid thirties is not too old!

Had my third at 43. Then a fourth at 46, to go with my first two at 39 and 40. Exhausting is not the word 🙂

Good lord I'm 32 and haven't even started yet - I still feel about 18!

I mean at that age I've not even been working 10 years yet (after uni etc). Not ready to suddenly switch life

I had my AMH checked when I turned 30 and it was 46 which is apparently high

meanwhile in the 'real world', most children of parents under 40 don't end up with 'dipshit waste of space fathers' either, even if parents separate....

Everyone says whatever validates they're choices at the end of the day, don't they.

thats quite personal to people though isn’t it. Too late for one person wouldn’t necessarily be too late for another. It all depends on your views, the age you started your family, the general trend of health in your family, your own health and that of your partners. There are so many variables.

for me as someone who had kids young and has a family trend of poor health in your 60s I wouldn’t plan to have a baby in my 40s. But for other people it works out fine. If you’re in good health and there’s a history of longevity in your family you would probably feel more comfortable with being an older parent than I would. It’s a personal thing.

@VisionsOfSplendour
Are you suggesting my comment is ridiculous because I admitted I'm menopausal and exhausted?

I agree with what you say that there are many hundreds and thousands of women over 40 with young children getting on with their lives....but does the experience of some of us who are living it and tired not matter?
Do you get to decide who the OP should listen to?
OP asked for opinions. Not just yours

Nah, don't worry. I'm a much better mother now than I could possibly have been in my 20s or early 30s. I have banked seniority at work that means I work much more flexibly, have a nice house in a nice place and generally have much more time and patience than I could have had.

probably 43 for me. I always get baffled by people saying they're so exhausted and couldn't contemplate it in their late 30s. I had my first at 37, pregnancy was no problem on my body and I feel pretty much the same as I did 10 years ago.

Thats fair - but I think 40+ years ago women started their families at a younger age (on average). With the age of first time parents being on the rise, I think it will be a lot more normal for children to have parents who are hovering around 40 (give it take) when they started. So the ‘nan’ thing may not feel like a thing if it’s normal mum age.

My mum had me when she was 22 and while she had energy, she made some really naive choices. Like I was an early Autumn baby and she appealed to have me put in the year above when I started school because she thought it would be advantageous to be youngest in the year….!

My personal cut off to have my last child has been 35.

It really depends on the individual. I'm 42 and one of my best friends, same age as me, has just had a baby. Myself, I'm fitter and more energetic than I've ever been, following the start of a health kick. Whereas I've a couple of friends who had children very young who go on like they're 80 years old. So it's a very personal thing I think.

It's all down to personal preference.

For me after having DC1 at 18, DC2 at 32 and due DC when I'm 34, 35 is my cut off.

I had my kids aged 35, 37 and 40.

They are now 21, 18 and 16.

The teen years have been hard, but that was nothing to do with my age, lockdown for example was crap for my teens.

I am laughing at all the people saying - Oh I'm 32 and wouldn't want to be any older. Honestly it is so personal to you, your circumstances and your health.
You make the family work whatever age you are.
There is no perfect age. Or age gap.

If you are young you have lots of energy.
If you are older you have lots of wisdom!

If you want a third, just go for it.

Surely a lot depends on the state of your general, as opposed to reproductive, health? I fell pregnant with my first at 36 and had my second at 39. I think it has kept me younger rather than ageing me, and I certainly didn't feel exhausted. I can't relate at all to some of the views expressed here.

Did you mean to tag me, I haven't said anything about your post. My comment was about the assertion that appears on most threads about this that all women suffer badly from menopause and that if you have a teenage at the same time they will be most definitely be challenging

Clearly that's nonsense, I waant relating it to any individual person

Where as I’m far less tolerant and patient now in my late 30s than I was in my early 20s. I’m also much much worse without sleep than I was then despite being fit and active.

I have more money now, but when I had kids young our lifestyle didn’t take much money to support and so in a way it was easier. Our Parents were younger and happy to help with childcare. I also didn’t have a real career and so was happy to work around the kids. They never went without, little kids don’t need loads of money spent on them, but they always did plenty of clubs and activities, days out and had really young, enthusiastic, engaged parents.

I honestly wouldn’t change it and laugh to myself when people say that having kids in your 20s is a bad idea. For us it was great. But it’s personal and everyone’s different.

For a first baby I’d say into the 40s, but for a third, when you’ve already got kids, the risks start to outweigh the benefits. I’d say 30s would be my cut off. Thinking about no 3 now and I’m 36.

I had my third at 34. My personal cut off point was 35.

I was going to say 36, OP, then saw that this is how old you might be. Good luck.

I always said my personal cut off was 30.
We tried from 28 to 31 for number 3, having had DC1 at 23 and DC2 at 26, it didn't happen.
It turns out I was destined for an early menopause, I like to think my body knew this and that's why I felt ready to have my children young. So what I'm trying to say is if you think you are still broody your body can probably manage another.
For the record, the children are late teens now and I'm still happily married to the children's father after over 20 years.

That’s interesting. Being a young parent myself I know lots of young parents who’s kids are now young adults/ older teens. I’m surprised at your friends as on the whole were a very youthful bunch who are going out, studying, travelling and enjoying life. Most of us also have very close relationships with our young adult DC too as we’re not so far removed ourselves.