Is 45 too old to have a baby

[Catontoof]

is this fair on a child?
I am seriously considering this as I feel like
therr has been a huge hole in my life.

I literally know NO men who wanted kids in their 20s . None. Where are these men ?

You’re putting ideology over reality, it is a very sexist for you to have because it is what most people experience – I wish it were otherwise. And it doesn’t get round the fact of woman has to carry a child, give birth, breastfeed and that is all shattering at any age

I had twins at 47. My parents were in their late-30s to mid-40s having my siblings and me - they're still healthy in their 90s. Hopefully I'll have the same longevity.

I am 56 and have Dd (15) and DS (7). I had him at 48. I was definitely not too old at 41 with DD - only slightly older than average in my circle - but I am probably too old for DS, mainly because he has ADHD and I am fat 😁. Also because many of our friends now have teens and older, making DS a bit of an outlier on group trips. That said, we have also made a different group of slightly younger friends with younger kids too, and that works well.

In some ways it keeps you young because you have to force yourself to keep going. However, you may also find you have less help than others because your parents don't have the energy to look after a small child, assuming they are even in the picture, of course. Mine had loads of energy for DD but really don't for DS.

I have a friend who had her DS at 45, and it has been fine for them, helped I think by the fact she and her husband were very financially secure. If we were financially secure, I would probably retire now so I could focus on the kids and I think if you may be able to do that or go part time, then go for it. If not, then it could be a challenge.

It's true what people say about the increased risk of problems, but having friends with a child with very complex needs, that is exhausting and a life long commitment at any age. The risks are reduced if you use donor eggs, of course, and perhaps that will be what you have to do anyway. Good luck whatever you decide

You're lucky, my grandmother lived until 91, she was very healthy. Her daughter (my Aunt), lived until 76. She was also fit and healthy. She got cancer (it was a huge shock), and died a few months later. Nothing is guaranteed. We all took it for granted that she would live until a similar age as her dm. Obviously this can happen at any age, but the risk goes up the older you get.

It all depends on genetics and lifestyle

Exh’s family 90+

Females in my family 100+

Only thing I can say that connects the majority of dh’s family and mine with regard to lifestyle is we eat little to no meat and drink little to no alcohol.
Except exh who eats a lot of meat (he always has) and drinks a lot. I doubt he will make it to 70. He is 69 this year.

That probably is true. I still think it’s sexist. My father was just as involved as my mother in my upbringing and my dh is just as involved with our child as me. I appreciate not everyone is the same unfortunately . It doesn’t mean that women should be criticised more than men for having children older though.

I'm glad the thread was helpful to you OP.

You mention that adoptive parents are older, which is true, but they rarely adopt newborns. Also many countries (in international adoption) have a limit on the age gap between parents and child. And also it's not the same adopting or having a baby when you don't have any as opposed to when you already have one or more.

I don't think 45 is too old btw. But I think you will be too old in a few years to start at the newborn stage so you should decide now for good and make your peace with it, whatever the decision is. Fostering sounds like a great option but if what you're yearning for is a sibling for your child, this won't be it.

Maybe your DH is a unicorn. Or maybe you're so used to doing more that you don't notice it anymore.

The fact is that most men don't parent equally. I read a fascinating book called "all the rage" by Darcy Lockman that talks about this specific issue (despite the title she's not frothing at the mouth the entire book, it's a fact-based study and reflexion on the division of labour especially after having children). Things as simple as preparing the DC's bags for school seems beyond the capacity of many (they're perfectly able to do it when they have no choice, when they're widowed or divorced for instance, though more often than not they'll try to rope in a step mum to do all the work).

The only couple I know where everything seemed shared fairly equally was a lesbian couple, which is pretty telling.

I do agree that women shouldn't get flak for wanting the same thing as men, but I disagree that the division of labour is anything near equal.

I was comparing fitness levels between the 20 year olds I work with and myself. The stamina needed to do the job (it involves a lot of fast walking and no sitting down) and anything from 7-15 hour shifts after which I go home and have to clear up after exh who leaves all his dirty dishes in the sink as he isn’t capable of washing up

But there again at 20 years old I was married, I had a house to renovate and would spend any spare time either going for a run or going to aerobics. It was the 80’s and I didn’t drink

Totally agree. If 45 is too old to have a baby (which I don’t think it is), it is certainly way too young to be a grandparent.

Really? I'm married to one we had our first child before we were even in our twenties. They're definitely out there I've got quite a few work colleagues who are men in their twenties who talk about wanting children but just haven't met the right women/saved enough money for a bigger home with space for children yet. Not to mention the colleagues who are already fathers in their twenties and seem really happy with it

My bloke became a grandparent at 44, I don’t think he felt too young.

yes really. All the men I knew were out partying and travelling in their 20s. A know a few who had kids but they weren’t planned. Women get criticised for waiting but in my experience most men don’t want kids younger. I appreciate this is my experience and not everyone’s though.

I don’t think he is a unicorn. I work full time and I wouldn’t put up with it if he didn’t parent equally. We take turns making school lunches etc. Most dads I know seem to share the workload significantly but I don’t know what’s going on behind closed doors I suppose. The only time we didn’t parent equally was at the start when I was breastfeeding , a lot fell on me at that time.

I think the age of your other child will not work well with a newborn. When the eldest is needing your attention at home and quiet peace for revising and going through one of the most important parts of their life, they will have a noisy baby or toddler around. There will be reduced options for you doing things with your elder one, such as mini-breaks/holidays or they will always have to be the kind where the younger one is catered for. Lots of things that you won’t be able to attend with your elder one without constant need for family support and babysitting - I.e uni open days, graduations, awards evenings, parents evenings. Yes others attend stuff when they have multiple children but they’re often older and can either be lugged along with mum or stay home alone.

You mention this will benefit your elder child but I don’t see any benefit if I’m honest. They will be too old to have any close relationship and actually may feel pushed out and more likely to fly the nest completely at an early age. My friends son did this and left at 18 as although not explicitly asked, he felt he was expected to help babysit when home and that the dynamics at home totally changed.

Men should also be - not criticised - because I am not criticising anyone here, but warned about the pitfalls of having children later in life, because it's also selfish of them to do so. Biology is a bummer, many of us feel and look young until relatively late in life now ,but as many others have said our bodies are still changing - I'm in my late 50s and so many friends are suddenly being diagnosed with cancers and other life-shortening illnesses.

Having kids is a selfish act regardless of the age of the parent. I have a dc myself but I do think it’s true.

My dad did a lot of parenting. I also have a good friend who’s an equal parent to his children. My dd’s dad chose to do other things (he is my ex now). One example (or two or three) doesn’t prove a rule.

From speaking to friends with kids, almost universally the women are doing far more of the parenting and the domestic mental load than the men. Saying that isn’t sexist, or condoning it, far from it, but pretending it’s not the societal norm means we can’t even address it as a problem.

I agree that women should not be held to a different standard than men wrt family planning and age, but that said, it impacts on women much more as they are doing the pregnancy and going through the birth and possibly breastfeeding. Then you get to the life-long parenting as I discussed above. The OP has asked about having a baby as a single woman, which is reflected in the comments being made.

Agree that’s why I said I appreciate not everyone is the same.

@AlertCat also I meant it’s sexist to criticise women more for having children later and not criticise men because they “don’t do as much of the parenting “ when this is NOT completely universal nor should it be.

With a few exceptions, I've found that people (men and women) who did not go into further education had kids younger, while people who did go into further education tended to have them later. The latter generally seemed to have a timescale in their minds of 'married by around 30, kids soon after".

If the couple was a mix of the two situations - they tended to default to the longer timescale.
(And occasionally I've seen one half of a couple that didn't go into further education as young people, go into further education after they had their kids).

I have to say, though, that I wonder how purposeful/planned it was - on the part of the men who had kids young. Some may have done it purposefully but I got the impression in many cases that the first child was a surprise (to him anyway) and any further kids were then agreed upon so as not to have big gaps etc. I don't know what percentage of them truly planned and agreed upon having kids in their twenties, especially early twenties.

Absolutely brilliant on all accounts & not unusual. I'm amazed at the amount of people who believe if women give birth in their 40s they assume the mother will be a physical wreck in their 50s & 60s & worse they won't live to see their child into adulthood. My Grandmother had her last child at around 46. She remained mobile & relatively well until she died from heart problems at 94. My auntie also had her last child in her mid 40s. I realise not everyone is the same but you can't assume everyone becomes physically unable to work & raise children once they reach their 40s, 50s & beyond. It may be more tiring although parenting at any age can be exhausting.

It's not an ideal age, however it is your choice, in your position I'd go for it.

It's a lovely experience. My friend had a baby at 47, she had regrets not having a child and decided to do it alone at 46.

The little girl is 11 now and they're so happy, like a team, as it is your first, you'll find the energy to enjoy it.

Best of luck.

It's not her first, she already has a 14 yr old