AIBU to have another baby

[Yourcatisnotsorry]

I’m 41. No health issues. Kids are 7 girl and 4 boy. I work full time in a ‘big’ job but can have a years maternity leave. Finances are not an issue. We have a large house they’d have a bedroom each. Good childcare is available near us.

I long for another baby, having tiny ones was the happiest time of my life (I’m also happy now).

husband is happy with having another or not, he leaves these decisions to me which is sort of helpful sort of not.

my main worries are:

• exhaustion from a new baby now that I’m a bit older (previous kids did not sleep properly til age 3)
• environmental/selfish
• impact on the other two who are very close and who already perhaps don’t have enough time with me as I work full time
• if the baby is poorly/special needs and potential impact on my other Kids long term (eg Down’s syndrome risk much higher, I would not have a termination)

I realize I might not be able to get pregnant/carry to term as I’m now a bit older, did have tests recently which showed good hormone levels and didn’t previously have issues with conceiving.

wwyd?

yabu - don’t have one
yanbu - try

Similar to you with set up, finances and age. I went for it. Its hard, baby no3 not the best sleeper until about now (age 3), I would say I have definitely missed time with my other two. But overall I would say for us a family it has been great and I absolutely love being a mum again ❤️

I went for baby number 3.
To be honest there are cons and I feel that my two older ones miss out on a bit to cater for nap time for the 1 year old etc.
However the pros to our family far outweigh the cons and he has completed our family and he is adored by all. We are very lucky x

I wouldn't, you have so much already, and I think your existing 2 would miss out on time with you. I'm one of 3 and would never have 3 of my own! And for environmental reasons.

I wouldn't. I have a 7yo and 1yo. My baby consumes our entire household time. It is NOT enjoyable in the least for any of us. I absolutely cannot wait for her to grow up a bit. I'm also 41 and I would not do it- don't underestimate the level of exhaustion at this age. If you have a poor sleeper then it's absolutely hell. The biggest effect on our family is the time the baby needs and balancing the needs of my older one. Your 2 are at a great age and I think you are coming through the other side. I personally think it's madness to even upset that now. Also a lot of things are catered for a 4 person family, you would have to really rethink a lot of stuff.

Go for it! You have the money, the space and the love to give. 41 is not too old to complete your family. given that you’re healthy it’s just an arbitrary number. I have three and all mine get lots of attention. It’s just about choosing how to spend your time.

I've had number 3 at age 38.

It's been the best thing ever. Older siblings adore the baby, and it's brought out a wonderful caring responsible side of them both. Being on maternity leave again (also have big corporate job) has been great as I get to spend more time with my older children as well, and do more 'mum' type things like organising play dates. I find it more relaxing than being torn between home and work.

I feel like I won the lottery having baby 3.

I ld say if you long for 1 more to go for it, but I personally wouldn't go ahead if there was a diagnosis of DS, I wouldn't burden my other children as secondary carers once the parents are no longer capable.

Stopped at 2 so glad we did. Lovely dynamic they get on so we have done loads as a family more resources time and money available for them.

Teens and young people demand far more of parents financially and emotionally than our generation did. Ours are relatively easy teens but even so regularly Dh and I eye roll and say thank god we don’t have to do this a third time.

I'm a bit younger than you at 35 so didn't have quite the same health risk worries but I've just had my third, older two are 7 and 4 like yours and honestly I tear up thinking that I might not of had him as like you we were weighing up pros and cons.

Yes I'm exhausted, I think it's harder to handle the sleepless nights than when I had my other two but I just adore him already and can't imagine my life without him in it. (He's two weeks old). I was quite worried about how my other two would take to a sibling, but they love him and have been great. Life feels complete now

Agree - point 3 is the most important.
Your kids are now getting to that fun age when you can do all sorts as a family, play games with them, do more exciting things on holiday etc.

My parents had number 3 at around 40 when I was 10. I love my sibling, would never wish they weren't born, but I can't pretend it didn't have an effect.

Much harder on my mums body, she spent a lot of time in hospital while pregnant. Sibling is also autistic. Not non-verbal but requires medication to function and still very dependent on parents in their 20s. Parents have missed or almost missed events such as graduations due to their melt downs. Holidays could be horrendous. We ended up not bothering.

Even now my parents are on road to 70 and still caring for sibling a lot, and needed to care for them while also caring for their own parents when they needed care in their 80s/90s. It takes a lot of time and effort. They missed a lot for me and middle sibling. I live less than 2 hours away. They maybe visit twice a year max, never overnight. Visit my other sibling (a bit further away) maybe once a year.

It's a risk, just got to decide if it's one you want to take.

I would say not to have another, because you won't have time. Two is also plenty for environmental reasons. Plus, if your husband is wishy washy it probably means he isn't keen (although I agree with you he should take a stance, I can't imagine being wishy washy on such an important issue) It is your call, of course, but who's to say that you won't be broody again in another few years? They don't stay babies forever and you can't just keep having more to ride the new baby high.

I wouldn’t. You say your children already don’t have enough of your time?

"Environmental reasons"

I didn't realise this propoganda was beginning to be believed.

At the moment a thousand very rich people most if not all in private jets fly for a meeting in the middle east to tell us all how to reduce our carbon consumption and make us all poor. How nice of them.

If there really was a problem the meetings would be on Zoom.

As the head of COP28 has said there is no science behind phasing out fossil fuels, and there isn't.

Covid taught us all a lot, a valuable lesson to all, why can't people just learn from it?

During Covid I objected to the measures, on the whole they were nonsense. The reaction was being labelled a covid denier. But that's a lazy position. My position was Covid obviously existed yet the measures taken to mitigate the issue were enormously damaging, 2 different things. We have circa 400 excess deaths a week at the moment, are the BBC reporting this every day? No, because they only want to count deaths that have tested for Covid. The truth is slowly coming to light all across the world and the past believers have an issue, learn the reality of what occurred or double down.

Now we have CO2 levels rising, I don't deny that but it is worth noting the earth has warmed and cooled of its own accord for billions of years and CO2 levels could be rising due this warming. Correlation does not imply causation.

...and even if it did, just as with Covid people need to ask themselves is there any justification for such punitive measures?

I’m pregnant with DS and have two DDs already - they’ll be 10 and 3.5 when he’s born.

DH and I had actually decided not to have DC3 because of the expense but I found out I was pregnant a few weeks later. They are both so loving and excited for a brother already and DD2 keeps asking if he’s here yet. We know it’s going to be challenging having 3 of them but also know he will be so loved by everyone.

Having a baby carries all sorts of potential negatives however many you already have. We had an "afterthought" - the other two were 6 and 8 when she was born. It was a huge success - effectively number 3 had 3 Mummies - the other two mucked in with nappies and pram rides etc. and treated her very much as their property/doll. They love her to bits now as adults.

My second daughter has very profound special needs.

In your shoes and at your age, I wouldn’t risk upsetting the quality of life your family enjoys now and complications are significantly more likely. It is a good thing that we see more more diversity on TV and film now, including actors with disabilities and peoples with disabilities in adverts, however it is almost always people with high function being happy. When you spend a lot of time in hospitals and special schools and clinics, you see the full spectrum of disability and some are very, very hard on the person who has them and / or their family. I didn’t opt for screening during either pregnancy, as it happens my daughters disabilities aren’t genetic so wouldn’t have been picked up anyway, but with what I know now, I think we were naive not to screen, and I would make the opposite choice now. You still have a choice if something is flagged and further tests can sometimes indicate severity. However as the risk of complications at delivery also increase, the absence of genetic or in útero problems doesn’t ensure a healthy baby.

It sounds like you all have a lovely life. I wouldn’t risk it. Not just because of the risks to your health and the health of the baby, but because of the unknown effects on the dynamics of the family you have. I know a lot of adults who feel they suffered through being the middle child of three for example.

Even with you financial security, I wouldn’t personally try at 41. You have a nice,secure set up, why change it.

Maybe part of the enjoying the little ones was the time you spent at home, spending times with your babies without the pressures of work.

It's not a question of whether or not you are unreasonable, op, you've weighed up the pros and cons and at the end of the day, the decision is yours.

Personally, I would not. I think you are fine as you are. This feeling may also be a phase, it's quite normal to feel broody at different times and does not always last. I've heard many women say the same who were glad they didn't give in to it; I too felt that way at 37 and am glad I did not.

However, I wish you well whatever happens.

No I wouldn't in your position. I get the want for a baby...I absolutely adore babies but I also know it's a short phase and doesn't last long.

I wouldn't. You already recognise that you don't have enough time to spend with your dc. You would even less with another.

I had my second aged 42 and I've had no problem with tiredness or any physical health issues. DC is healthy and developmentally fine, but we had a TFMR a year before she was born.
But I wouldn't go for a third if you already have 2. For us, 2 is perfect because they can each have attention from 1 parent. I find it too busy and stressful to have both dcs on my own so I wouldn't want 3 and have to deal with more than 1 dc more often. It's hard enough now trying to help with homework and ferry eldest to activities with one younger sibling - adding another baby would make it really stressful (and realistically in bigger families I think the parents just let the kids get on with school work on their own and they end up not doing as many activities, so the existing dc miss out).

In your position I'd consider adoption.

No environmental issue to feel bad about; no genetic worry due to your age; no further strain on your body.

Get to enjoy the early years again and provide a stable home to someone who may not otherwise have that.

If adoption not an option, in your shoes I'm not sure. Possibly.

In your circumstances I would! I’d love a third but finances and my health condition mean it’s not possible