To consider having a baby at 44

[littleloopylou]

I already have one child whom I love dearly. She desperately wants a sibling.

My partner and I met late in life.

We are financially secure.

I am aware it might not be possible.

YANBU to consider it, but I think you've got to really want another child yourself and not be doing it because your DD wants a sibling. They might not even get on if you have another child. The fact that you would be approaching your mid sixties by the time the child reaches adulthood would put me off, personally.

Go for it if it's what you want, but I'd go for IVF with donor eggs assuming you don't have any frozen. The chances of successful IVF with natural eggs at 44 is only 1.6%

How old is your dd?

My ds is 10, my dd is 4 and they bicker like mad, they don't get on because they have nothing in common being so far apart in age.

I'm 43 and would never consider another child because, as it is, I will not get my freedom back til I'm 61 and my husband will be 71!!

Of course your daughter wants a sibling-imaginary siblings are always fantastic. My very real sibling was cruel to me throughout childhood has not changed even as an adult. Please don't have another just because your DC thinks it will all be amazing.

My DD is 7. She is an extremely caring and loving child and I think that unless the hypothetical baby were a terror, she would be all in.

I wouldn’t have one just because your other child wants a sister / brother, you and your partner should be the ones to really want one,
I know plenty of people in their 40s who have had babies, some with IVF some without, one friend had one naturally at 45, there are obvious risks though and how would you and your partner cope if a child were to be born with a disability which is a possibility…..not sure I would have the energy for a newborn at 45 and a toddler at 46/47 which is the age you will be.
Im 48 and my energy levels are nothing like what they were 10 years ago

For some it is, but may not be if you have family of your own such as a partner or children and close friends supporting you through it. Siblings don’t always step up to care for parents, nor do they always stick around and support one enough. A close friend of mine would argue her sister washing her hands of caring for their mother (and similarly disappearing when their father died) and leaving it all to her but expecting a whack of inheritance and demanding she go through their belongings is much more distressing.

Just as some only children may be lonely, equally some siblings do not have a bond, nor do they take care of each other. Instead of hypotheticals of the future to decide wouldn’t it make more sense for the OP to consider and decide whether her body can take another pregnancy and baby over the whims of a child who doesn’t really understand what’s she’s asking her mum to put herself through.

I absolutely wouldn’t for all of the reasons on this thread. Is not even about the baby - which would be high risk, 44 IS old to be pregnant let’s not pretend it’s optimal - but teens / university / young adults into your 60-70s?!! Absolutely NOT.

my cousin is having his first at 42 and that’s mad enough imo, his wife is a little younger but not by much. Don’t underestimate the impact of teenagers, you only have a 7 yr old right now which is the easiest phase .

I was in your position at 41 nearly 42. I talked to the GP about it and she said if I was going to do it better get on with it. Baby was conceived later that month. I have been told many times in this pregnancy that having a subsequent baby after 40 is much lower risk than having a first baby after 40. If you want to do it, go for it.

She's likely to be 9 or so when the sibling is born. I have a brother 9 years younger, whom I have always loved and with whom I was especially close (unlike our older brother - they don't speak).

And then I went away to university at 18. He was utterly bereft - it massively affected him, because he was then an "only child" and he suffered mental health issues as a result.

The "sibling" thing shouldn't be part of your equation - because it's a scenario you just cannot predict.

My DD14 went through a phase of wanting a sibling. It was just that, a phase.

Having 1 is so much easier, I have been able to afford great holidays and private school too.

I also wouldn't do that to my body again back then but I'm now 52 and have a lot more freedom etc I had her "late" and that was hard enough.

They're a child, they cannot understand that their mum is putting her health at risk. And there is zero guaranteed a sibling would be around to help with elderly parents.

I mean, you’re not ancient. Women’s eggs don’t suddenly curdle as soon as they hit 40.

However, don’t have a child to give to another child. And your life is settled and happy, a baby, while lovely potentially, does make it much, much harder for a really long time.

The rates of successful natural conceptions are much lower in women in their forties than in younger women. But that's not because EVERY woman in her mid to late forties has a very low chance of natural conception. Most women of this age will be infertile, but some (probably about 5-10%), with lucky genetics, will be as fertile at 45 as they were at 25.

Your chance of late fecundity is determined by genes that are linked to longevity.

Women who conceive a child naturally in their mid to late forties are likely to live longer than average, so the chances of their child being orphaned before adulthood are much lower than the doomsayers on mumsnet would suggest.

Statistically pregnancies in older mothers are riskier, but it's not clear how much of that is related to general health. If you are slim and fit, you're probably at lower risk than an obese woman in her twenties.

If you are prepared to test and terminate for chromosomal abnormalities you have no more risk of having a disabled child than a younger woman.

I personally was lucky, conceived naturally in one month aged 45, had a normal pregnancy and uncomplicated home birth, and am still perfectly healthy, with the energy to work full time and ferry my teenager around, in my 60's.

They only test for the common chromosomal.abnormalities, my son has a rare chromosome disorder of which there are many the impact of which varies massively from person to person .

"All in" for what? She may love a sibling if she has one, but that wouldn't make any difference for you. She's not going to be a built-in childminder. They would be at least 8 years apart, and their lives would be on totally different trajectories until at least both of them are well into adulthood. This is just my experience, but I grew up with a close circle of six friends. One was an only child like I am, and the other four had siblings that were all at least 7 years older. None of them had any relationship to speak of with their siblings, and now that we are all 50, this remains true to this day. They have essentially nothing to do with each other.

It's very difficult to ask strangers what to do, as it's really down to your lifestyle, health, family, expectations.

I had a child at 44 after trying to conceive for a very very long time. We adore him and we adore our family life! We don't feel too tired or too old, compared to the other parents of our son's age. He's a very very active little boy, now in school and we are 50 but with enough energies to bring him to classes, activities, days out, museums, holidays etc. We are actually looking forward to do even more travelling when he's older!

I am not worried about what my 60s or 70s will look like with him as a teenager/young man and don't really understand why it's inconceivable to have to live with a teenager when you are around that age. My plans, with or without my son, haven't really changed..... But, again, this is us and everybody else has a different story!

You can pay privately for more comprehensive testing, my daughter did. If it's possible I recommend it.

In your circumstances I wouldn't and it's nothing to do with your age.
The first reason you give for having one is because your DC wants a sibling, that's not a good enough reason for having another child, also you say you worry about having a child with special needs. If you feel you couldn't cope with a child with special needs I wouldn't try.

100% this

Being wistful when you see other babies is also an absurd reason to have another child.

So many threads like this start off with the ‘just go for it’ posse, and then as time goes on, more people start saying things like ‘I wish my parents hadn’t been so old when they had me’, or ‘I tried at that age and had multiple losses and it was heartbreaking’.

You’re 44 now with an IUD. You’d be minimum 45 by the time any baby arrived, likely more like 46 or 47, and that’s even if you can actually have another baby without intervention. Meanwhile, you’ll be focusing on trying to cheat biology to have another baby rather than the child who’s already here.

I’m all for women pushing boundaries. But at a certain point we have to accept the limits of biology. Especially when there are more studies coming out about the decline in sperm quality as men age are coming out.

I wouldn’t. I had my last at 36 and that’s been hard enough. Even if you get all the tests there’s a lot you can’t pick up like autism for example.

She's 7 and doesn't get to dictate the size of your family. A lot of 7 year olds wish they had a brother / sister, more siblings, less siblings etc. It's just part of her realising that other people have different families. My friend's 5 year old cried one night because his friend at school has two mummies and why did he only have one! An 8-9 year age gap is big and she might be less keen on having a much younger sibling in a few years time - a 5 and 13 year old have very different needs and requirements and satisfying both is very hard.

x2boys I am sorry about your son, I hope he is ok.

I did not have any testing for rare conditions, but they are rare. Sadly there are no guarantees of a completely healthy baby in any pregnancy. But it is the aneuploidies, particularly trisomies, which common and are the big increased risk with maternal age - karyotyping will show if a fetus has an extra or missing chromosome.

I wouldn't do it. I had a sudden rush of "let's have another!" when I was 42, but it didn't take me long to discover the increased risks of a whole host of special needs, from autism to Down's syndrome, not to mention the extra toll a "geriatric" pregnancy takes on your own body, and the exhaustion that comes with being and older Mum, which will in itself make dealing with a child with special needs much harder.

A friend had her last baby in her mid 40's and had a beautiful baby boy, but his special needs, though mild, are such that he is very likely to need some level of care and support for the rest of his life. Of course that can happen if you have a baby at 21, but the risks are so much higher at your age.

Your life is lovely now. I really really wouldn't invite such risk into it at this stage.

Also the sibling thing is kind of nonsense. They'll only be close if they are very very close in age, which it sounds like would not be the case if your existing child is old enough to express this desire. My teen is always suggesting I just crack on and have another baby so she has a little sibling to play with. Doesn't mean I have any intention of actually producing one at my age (other side of 45!). She'll be off at uni and I'll be standing outside the local primary holding a micro mini scooter in the rain again!

I would only consider it if it's what you really want. The fact your daughter would like a sibling is irrelevant. With the best will in the world, with a 7 or 8 year age gap, the novelty will soon wear off for her. I had my two at 41 and 45. DS2 has severe OCD and Crohn's Disease and I am mentally and physically exhausted with the practical day to day management and the stress. Not a great situation for a menopausal woman! I genuinely believe I could have handled things more effectively if I was a few years younger. So there are things like this to consider. Everyone is different though.