To think it's not right that DD(19) has a 61 year old mum

[LornaDuh]

Don't know why it's just hit me at 10.45 on a Saturday night in June.

Just feels weird that a girl not yet out of her teens has a mum over 60!

My mum had me when she was 19. I was embarrassed that she was younger than other kids' mums. I had my daughter when I was 45. If she's embarrassed by my age ( she doesn't seem be) , I don't think it will do her any harm. There are advantages and disadvantages to both old and young parents.

How ridiculous! Parents seem old to their children no matter what age they are.

The worst part is when people have children late they often only have 1 child, meaning they don't even have siblings to lean on.

I'd hoped this thread wouldn't turn into MN Lonely Only Bingo but ... having been bereaved as a teen (Mum was 41), I can say that having siblings is no guarantee that you will have someone to lean on. It really isn't.

DD has a large friendship group from school college, uni and this gives me a lot of comfort. When one of them lost her mum last year the friends were, and continue to be, amazing.

I know, I hate this too. I could have fitted in a second but it would have meant more time out of my career (spent time building it to get the flexibility I have), more years of no sleep and I'm already knackered, DH is older than me and works in quite a demanding (physically) job so more sleep deprivation might actually see him off. We'd have to move to fit both kids in because we have a small 2 bed, but that would mean a less desirable area. Twin run in my family so we'd also run the risk of moving into MN bingo territory of 3 is too many.

And then we get into the reality of siblings. I love my sister, I really do. She doesn't have a bad bone in her body. But she is not support for me. She needs support. When my parents need support, that will fall to me. When decisions need to be made, they will end up being mine. When we lose my parents, supporting my sister will become my job.

She is married and (supposedly) independent. But she cannot cope with anything outside of her norm or anything negative. She leans on my parents a lot still. They do an awful lot for her because she doesn't cope well. They also shield her from a lot. I could write several MN posts about it.

Siblings do not always equal a support system.

Is this a begining of a murder-suiscide scenario? Like what are the other options at this point? 😅

My mum was 41 when she had me. Never been an issue.

Ds may be an only one but he has several half siblings on his dad's side. Although they are a fair bit older than him he luckily finds it a support system.

It does sound old, as my parents are about the same age and I can see how they're just ageing in general and losing energy and a lot of capacity. They're very active, healthy and intelligent individuals who push themselves whether in work or social life or mind or body, and way more youthful than many in the same age range (60s), but age just slows you down that little bit. They didn't even have me very early, at 30 or so!

But that'll probably be my own reality too as I'll need to sort everything out before having kids! In general this will be the reality for most kids in the next generation...

No offense but I think if you weren't a reasonably grown child when she was 40, and all you've ever known is 50 year old her, you won't be able to tell the difference. You never got to meet the youthful version of your mother.

If I looked at my parents now, I'd think they were active capable adults... But actually, they were so incredibly energetic and youthful in my memories when they were in their 30s and even early 40s.

No. I was having a chat on an Internet forum. Why are you so angry?

Another thing I feel sad about is that my kids will only know an older version of my parents, who might perhaps have lost some capacity to interact fully (be in their 80s or 90s, or.. no longer around) when my kids are 10+ years old, the best age to bond.

My grandparents were very young, bursting with energy, and a HUGE wonderful part of my life. We made so, so many memories together.

They become too old and slightly dementia-ridden to do much when I was a young adult, but my bond was strong enough that I saw them for who they were. Some of my friends who only grew up with older GPs like that aren't close to their GPs at all.

What a weird thread. It's perfectly normal to have children around the age of 40!

When I'm 60 my oldest grandchild will be 23 so it seems old to me.

However, there's nothing wrong with being an older parent and there's also nothing you can do about it anyway.

@LornaDuh sorry to hear you went through it too. I too still really miss my mum who died nearly 25 years ago, but my dad is but a distant memory really, plus we had a much more complicated relationship.
i didn’t have therapy at the time, I was getting married and so much was going on and it wasn’t such a ‘thing’ then. I’m actually having therapy now - privately (have had nhs version but I didn’t find it useful really) and my anxiety is lessening. It’s not specifically bereavement therapy but I’ve talked a lot about what happened. My next session is tomorrow and you’ve just reminded me of something I’m going to bring up. Have you had counselling? I do find it very useful in that I go and blurt it all out - things from the past and current scenarios as well.
I was lucky to have 10 years of an adult relationship with my mum, so am thankful for that.

Selfish twunt

It was imperative for me to not be too old when I had children, due to witnessing how awful it can be for the child.

I am in my very early 40s now and my children are older teens. If I had them now, I might never get to meet my grandchildren, and they wouldn't have the amazing, close relationship they have with my own parents who are still in their 60s.

It certainly wasn't for me, especially with the additional risks involved. But, my thoughts are just that. What's for me might not be for someone else.

Could you expand on what you've witnessed that's so awful for the child? Just so I know what my ds will have to go through. Thanks.

22 is a perfectly normal age to have a child.

Yes, this is surely a wind up, DH and I were discussing this morning how much older 60 looked when our a grandma’s were 60. Where we live most people have had children post 35, however I’m not being defensive about this as we are early 40s and have a 17 and 13 year old, wea we’re at a party last night and many people wee haven’t seen for ages can’t believe we have a 17 year old. DH works in a senior position in Architecture in London and every single client, colleague can’t believe he has a 17 year old as most of them at his age are only in the toddler years. I think it entirely depends on location and lifestyle now.

Wow! Did she carry them naturally? If so, how was the birth? I am impressed.

It's common but not ideal. 2 generations of having children at 40 means the 3rd generation will not have grandparents as children/teens, or grandparents in any proper sense – 90 to 100 years old, probably riddled with dementia and incontinence as all of us will be at that age!

Also, much less time to spend with your parents once you really start appreciating them (usually past mid-20s) and your life also starts being less turbulent. Your parents will also be reaching 70 then so you'll be limited in what you can do together.

Also, anyway, the most obvious point is that 50 year olds can be energetic for 50 year olds, but will never be as energetic (both in body and mind) as 20-40 year olds. The child will have a different sort of childhood.

No judgment as that'll probably be my reality if I remain in the UK! I do think there's something wrong societally (financial, institutional structures) if we contradict our basic biology so much. Not that I think having kids at 20 is good, there is a happy medium.

Actually I come from a (first world) country with public/universal housing (like the housing version of the NHS, for all) and so parents can have kids at more biologically favourable ages. Been thinking of moving home for that reason.

For me over 35 is too old. I wouldn't want to feel I was approaching being an OAP when my kids were still in their teens. But if you decide to have a child in your 40's then you obviously feel differently and you clearly wouldn't be without your daughter.

I would love to have a child, but at 37, and with a partner of the same age and being both only children, I have sadly had to accept that it wouldn't be fair on the child. I couldn't leave them with the possibility of losing their only family (my partner and I) as a child or young adult. Sometimes I think you just have to put your own wants and desires to the side and think of the life the child will have.

Not sure it still is considered that. When I was pregnant, my midwife told me that the average age of first time mums has risen and is now somewhere in the early 30s. 35 used to be "geriatric" but they've recently raised that threshold to 40.

People are living longer, healthier and medicine has advanced. Women are now able to make more choices around their family planning and are doing so.

Also, at 22 I still felt like a kid myself. I was still at uni (year out and a 4 year course). It would have seemed ridiculously young to have the level of responsibility that comes with being a mother.

I never had a grandmother because she was so old when she had my DM.

I'm not in favour of much older mums (and dads) for this reason.

My mum and dad were 25 and 32 respectively when they had me and I didn’t have any gp’s growing up (from day one). I had both my children in my early forties and at the ages of 19 and 21 they’ve recently lost their last gp. They grew up with far more gp’s than I ever did.

It wasn’t my intention to have children late, that’s just the way it was. Luckily I looked far younger than my years at the school gates, in fact a lot better (and physically fitter) than some of the much younger mums.