It's too late, right?

[TrackDay]

I'm 40. DH is 52. Happily married for 15 years, childfree.

Hormones have hit me like a freight train - I want a baby.

It's way, way too late, right? It's just hormones. It'll pass?

Sad but true

Your dh is too old, imo.

Close friend if mine had hers at 39 and 41 she's a single mum and amazing yes it's tiring but tbh if you are financially comfortable and you live an active and healthy enough lifestyle (both of you but especially you in terms of being pregnant) then you are already in a brilliant position to have a baby still! If you genuinely want a baby now then don't let your age stop you it's too important.

If you're well off then I'd think about hiring a nanny, cleaner, gardener - essentially outsource what you can afford to give you more time and energy back. It's knackering, so the easiest you can make life the better. At that age I think you're perfectly fine to do it, but it will be a lot lot harder with a lack of funds or if you don't use those funds to help you!

Hope all goes well for you!

It’s not too late - barring any individual medical issues.

It’s on the late side for a first baby but it’s less unusual than it used to be so you will not be on your own.

I was born to an ‘older’ Mum in the 70s - that was mid 30s and most of my peers had either parents who were ten years younger or they were the youngest of 3-4 siblings.

The huge benefit you have - assuming all medical issues are okay - is that you have experience and time that someone building their career in their 20s and early 30s does not.

The downside is you don’t get the same level of support or time with grandparents for your child.

I would recommend doing a medical - go private if necessary and get a full health screening and then if you still feel strongly go for it.

Yes, I'm not disputing that. But it's out of HUNDREDS of thousands of births. It is not the norm to have a baby in your 40s in this country, even if it is in your circle. The facts are there. Of course it happens, and what you say is totally true, yes, tens of thousands of women in their 40s DO give birth in the UK each year. OP could well be one of them. But people upthread trying to assert that it's totally normal and average are just incorrect.

My parents were quite old when they had me. When we had guests the youngest other child in the room would be at least 7 years older than me. I was 36 when I lost my dad, he was in excellent health throughout my childhood, same for my mom.

So, my opinion is based on experience, don't call me bloody irresponsible and quote me, when you don't know me.

Thank you!

Yeah I know that but to go into it like the previous poster is wrong. We all know 35 onwards your known as high risk etc.

Isn't it 5% in each cycle? So that if a 40 year-old tries for a year, the chance of getting pregnant within a year is well over 5%, on average?

I had my youngest at 41. DP was 38.

But 52 is still a relatively young father if fit and healthy. A good friend of mine had his DC in his early 50s and brought him up as a lone father after his (late 30s) DP suddenly died. You never know when your number’s up.

At 41, I sailed through the pregnancy, very easy home birth post-Caesarian. Plenty of energy when they were a toddler and now teenager.

If it’s what you want, go for it.

A very good friend of mine married her longterm partner at 40 and post marriage had two children naturally. So no its not necessarily too late but everyone is different.

I don't think the percentages are accumulative. Each time, you start from the same baseline. So the chances will always be 5% on each try.

You’re irresponsible because you’re basing your opinion on being the child of older parents. None of you egging this woman on will have deal with a high risk pregnancy, increased risk of birth defects or the 18 year old with a pensioner dad. It’s easy to blithely encourage someone to do something when you’ll never have to deal with the consequences.

I cannot even with the " 52 is a relatively young father". In a universe where everybody else is Mick Jagger and Al Pacino maybe! Not in the real world.

If each cycle is 5% it doesn’t increase with the number of cycles you try for. So if you have 13 cycles in a year it’s still 5%. I think! My maths days are long behind me. Happy to be corrected 😬

Whats stopped you having kids over the last 10 years? Are the factors that made you think "nah, we're ok without kids" still there?

An element of this is hormones (the "last hurrah" is not unusual!) But that's as good a reason as any if you do actually want children. But if you maybe aren't fussed, how will you feel when the hormonal urge vanishes into perimenopause?

same happened to me at 40 (nearly 41) for me, it happened very quickly & I had my baby girl at just turned 42! No issues at at in pregnancy or birth! And I’m a massive mard arse but it was a doddle for me!

Go for it op 😆

From what you have said it breaks down like this:

Pros: Stable, loving marriage. Ideal finances, home, and lifestyle to support a child into adulthood. Good health in both partners. Have thought through the long-term implications and still want a child.

Cons: health risks associated with older parents.

I would suggest you look into the health risks to make sure you have the whole picture; then make a fully informed decision.

FWIW in your shoes I would 100% go for it.

But 52 is still a relatively young father if fit and healthy.

Relative to what? Robert DeNiro?!

No, you're right. If the chance is 5% on each cycle, the chances are only ever 5%.

What are these fertility tests everyone keeps mentioning as though they are some kind of sure fast way of telling you if you can get pregnant?

A word from the wise: they are not. Most infertility is unexplained. You can on paper have nothing "wrong" with either of you, but still never conceive.

It's a massive head fuck and I'd strongly advise not going down this road if you are happy as you are.

If you want to have a 15 year old when you are considering retirement, by all means. I can’t say I would fancy it myself. Assuming your husband remains in good health too.

Is adopting an older child or fostering of any interest to you?
A newborn at 53 would mean a 63 year old dad at 10, potentially caring for a 73 year old and 60 year old at 20 if health problems arise with no sibling support. I'd consider carefully with DHs age.
Obviously health isn't a given at any age, but it's worse odds.

Just to put that 5% into context - at age 35 there's only 15% chance of conceiving per cycle, so 5% is not as low as it sounds initially. There is obviously some drop-off in fertility but it's not quite as dramatic as that stat sounds.

I believe the stats suggest there's a 44% chance of getting pregnant within a year. Again, the stats haven't dropped wildly different compared to younger women - at age 30 there's a 63% chance and at age 35 there's a 52% chance. So a 44% chance at age 40 isn't too bad really.

Lots of women have children in their mid-30s so really, you're only a few years behind. Admittedly your partner's age isn't ideal, not from a fertility perspective but from a mortality point of view. But you're still plenty young enough and an older but present father is way preferable to a younger, absent father (of which there are plenty!) so I don't think your child is getting a bad deal really. And I say that as someone who lost her dad when he was in his early 60s, so I know what it's like.

Finances can change in a heartbeat.

Also, often it's not the struggle with DC that I have noticed with older parents, but with their own parents. As they are often in a position where they need help or even care to stay in the home. There are Dr appointments and nurses visits, medication reviews and care assessments as things change with processing illness and frailty.