Would you become pregnant at 47 if....

[Noangelbuthavingfun]

*Also posted in pregnancy

You desperately know you've always wanted a 2nd child and it never went away ... tried but failed many times.... would you go for donor eggs and partner sperm and just do it ? Many celebrities do it late into 40s.... its now or never. I'm just thinking you regret the things you never did... aibu to just do it ? Has anyone you know or have you done this ??

Good luck!

I wish people would stop throwing out adoption like it’s the simpler answer. It’s unlikely the op would be a candidate at her age (unless fostering first). It’s a hugely mentally taxing process, your whole life is taken apart under a microscope. And even being given a child, it comes with a lifetime of issues. Children given up for adoption often come from very different backgrounds or circumstances of conception. You are far more likely to have a child who needs lifelong care. And out there will be a mother who will very likely to be always looking out for the child they had to give up. Never mind the child who grows up wanting a connection with their biological family, there is a huge amount of emotional upheaval. Adoption is not for people who are just really really not done having their own babies.

There's a lot of talk on this thread of selfishness and how having a baby at 47 isn't for the child it's for the mother... so what is it at age 30 or age 20?

People have children at any age because they want to have children, not because those children want to be born, as that isn't possible.

Life expectancy for men is about 7 years lower than for women and yet people often tell women not to have babies past 40 as they'll be too tired and get ill when the child is younger, but I don't hear anyone saying this to men in their mid 30s. What a surprise 🤔

That's probably mostly because men don't give birth and aren't normally the ones doing the bulk of the early years care.

@LostTheMarble, I completely agree, and tried to make a similar point a long way upthread. I believe adoption is a very different matter in the US, more like it was here in the 1950s and 1960s pre Pill when there were lots of healthy babies being given up at birth because of the huge stigma against being an unmarried mother. Possibly that's what people are thinking of, but it's not been like that in the UK for a long time.

Also, who do people keep saying nobody ever criticises older fathers? I've seen it many times, every time some male celebrity is in the news for having a child in his 60s or 70s. Incredibly selfish behaviour.

I wouldn't. I couldn't bear the thought that I'd be more likely to die when my child was young or I'd have health problems which would mean I couldn't support them as much as I wanted to as a teenager/young adult. Sure I might be lucky enough to be fit and healthy pensioner but I couldn't take that risk. Have you really thought about that? It sounds a bit like you are focused on the 'having a baby' bit and not considering the long term.

Thank you for this post. I wonder how many of these judgy posters are themselves happy to have babies with 47 yr old men! (Or at least wouldn’t judge another woman who did).

I don’t think old men should be having babies just because they can either. sperm quality goes down older men get and increase risk of disabilities.

Most men in their late 40’s/50’s are doing it for do over families too. Major judgement.

Well … it’s actually 7 years to be precise.

When you add in that people’s health differs, it’s not necessarily much more than a few years.

I know someone who conceived via ivf at 47 then again naturally at 48, ( sometimes seems to happen after an ivf pregnancy), born when she was 49. They are her absolute joy and centre of her existence - and they keep her young. Not sure I could do it myself, but clearly some can.

Most men in their late 40’s/50’s are doing it for do over families too. Major judgement

👍🏻

No, absolutely not.

If i was childless and not happy about that, i might. But not if I already had a child.

My friend did. She was 47. She had twins.
Her first set were 17!

Oh and my view on the age applies regardless of whether its a man or a woman. We're not meant to be parenting babies at that age.

Wrong.

My friend had a planned pregnancy at age 48 and he's now a strapping 23 year old. She's in her 70s and as fit as a fiddle.

I have to say she had a natural delivery (again), but is wealthy and doesn't need to work. All healthy and well so far. Her DH was 50.

"Well … it’s actually 7 years to be precise.

When you add in that people’s health differs, it’s not necessarily much more than a few years.

I know someone who conceived via ivf at 47 then again naturally at 48, ( sometimes seems to happen after an ivf pregnancy), born when she was 49. They are her absolute joy and centre of her existence - and they keep her young. Not sure I could do it myself, but clearly some can"

We all know of miracle conceptions when someone is in their late 40s. It doesn't disguise the face that we are on the cusp of menopause at 47 or 48. A baby at 47 means a young teenager at 60 when a lot of us are planning when we can retire. I'm 55 and can't believe it sometimes but it's a fact. My 18 year old tests me to my limit but I couldn't imagine a 7 year old running around. Once I turned 40 or so I made my peace with my wonderful only son.

But the likelihood of a parent dying whilst the child is still young is far greater if the parent is 45+ when they have said child. That is a fact.

This 'you can lose a parent at any age' argument doesn't hold water.

I don't hear much mention of giving birth being the issue.

It's all about dealing with the toddler years or teenage years which has nothing to do with giving birth.

Very sexist to have a go at women more for having children older as women often do more of the child rearing - extreme sexism.

Which is my point.

Very very sexist to say it's an issue for a 40 year old to have a child as their life expectancy is 85 but then not be bothered at all by a 35 year old whose life expectancy is 80 having a child.

You should remember OP that parents planning and having children in their 20s are doing it because they want it.

Same at 47.

There is no selfless 20 year old who is planning their first child for the good of that child despite themselves not wanting children.

You will be 58/59 when the child starts secondary

In your 60s when they are teenagers.

Mid to late 60 when at university.

It gets harder when our bodies get older.
Dealing with everything is harder.

I really feel for you. I had to have IVF and if my own eggs hadn't worked I would have considered donor eggs but I don't think I would do it for a second child. I would be too worried that I would see the child I wasn't related to differently and not bond with them the same.

IVF is really tough, can your lifestyle accomodate taking medication and injecting yourself at the same time everyday?

Are you planning on telling your son that you're having fertility treatment? Teens are smart and likely to figure out something is up.

Ultimately it's your decision but you should weigh up the impact on the family that you already have before deciding what to do.

A friend of mine went the donor egg route but it split her relationship as her DH didn’t want to effectively have a baby with a random woman he didn’t know.

Yes, 35 not 20. 😂

Define “child is still young” and define what you deem an acceptable age to have a baby, and what you think is your cut off/ unacceptable, and let’s look at the actual maths in terms of risk of death…. It will be tiny, and there will be many other factors that are more important, relating to health, genetics, family history…. Shall we start dissecting those to see who’s worthy of reproducing without being called “selfish”