To think 42 is too old for a baby?

[UnknownClam]

Posting under a NC for this as I know it might be controversial, but I need to get this off my chest.

A friend of mine has just announced she’s TTC at 42. She already has two DC (youngest is 10) and has suddenly decided she “really wants one last baby.” I know it’s her life, her choice, but I can’t help but feel like it’s too old.

I had my last DC at 38, and even then, I found the sleepless nights brutal. I can’t imagine doing it in my 40s. Also, by the time the child is a teen, she’ll be in her late 50s! And I hate to say it, but the risks of pregnancy complications and things like Down’s syndrome are much higher at that age.

She asked me what I thought, and I just smiled and said, “That’s exciting!” because I didn’t want to be rude. But deep down, I feel like it’s a bit selfish. AIBU? Would love to hear from anyone who had a baby in their 40s how was it?

Be gentle! Not trying to be a cow, just genuinely wondering if I’m the only one who feels this way.

Why?

I'm 58 with a 21 yo - not sure how this impacts him. Many many grandparents are childminding small children

Several children of older parents, including me, have explained why earlier on in this thread. It's not rocket science.

The child will more than likely have to deal with caring burdens and/or the loss of their parents at a much younger age than their peers, which is traumatic and also affects their own life choices.

People are in denial about the realities of aging and like to pretend they'll be fit and sprightly when they're elderly.

Of course not old! In my circle, six ladies had their first (and one her second too) children well into their 40s. Most of them are very healthy, fit, looking at least 10 years younger, educated and can provide for their babies. They are still full of energy and have fun with their kids as they go older too. In fact, it makes them feel younger! I think it varies differently but if you are full of energy and healthy and financially stable, 42 is no age at all! I also hate this ageism here. What do women in their 40s are supposed to do if they haven't had children yet? To be content with gardening and start preparing for retirement !? Hell no!

I wouldn't say 38 for a last child is far outide the norm at all. But I agree, the OP is being very judgemental for a difference of 4 years.

I’m with you OP. Would never willingly try for a baby in my 40s. Last baby at 38 was exhausting

It's not too old.

I think one of the things that changes perceptions is having older children though. For various reasons.

It's less about too old and more about wrong time.

Many people I know are no more financially comfortable at 42, especially if they already have children, than people in their mid to late 20s. In fact they are probably worse off. Many 20-somethings I know are well educated/better educated than many 40-somethings, and have a University Degree, and are on higher salaries than some people 20 years older than them.

A 42 y.o is more likely to still have a mortgage, (and would have had one for some years, but will still have quite a long time to go on it,) they're often in debt, got finance on a car, credit card debts, and other kids at home to support. (Then their income is affected by another baby.) How on earth can a 42 year old having a new baby, possibly be better off financially than the average mid 20-something?!

My mum was nearly 47 when I was born. My brother was 21. She was a wonderful mum and growing up I didn’t know any difference, even though she was older than my friend’s mums. The only downside for me was that I lost her too soon. She died at 86 when I was 40. I wish I could have had her for longer.

4 years doesn't seem like much when you're in your 30s or 40s, but it can make all the difference to a child in their teens or young adult in their 20s.

I had my first at 33 and second at 43. I am now 55. All was easier second time round. My births and pregnancies have no problems and I have no health conditions, the hard bit for me is waking every couple of hours for first few years, and that was much harder for me with my first. So everyone is different here. I did have non invasive testing just before end of first trimester to check and my age related risk for downs was reduced to that of a 20 year old so that was a relief. So all round has been easier with second. You can't assume what her experience will be. Lots of older parents are healthy and relaxed.

But 62 is not elderly by any stretch of the imagination.

That's the age difference between my parents and for me, not at all. Agree to disagree.

My family members were in great health and didn't need any care until their mid 80's. On the flip side, my SIL is 45 with MS and needs cared for her daughter. Life isn't that black and white.

Also, with losing a parent younger than their peers. Look around, so many new parents you see are late 30's early 40's. The childs peers will likely be in the same boat, life has changed alot since you were a kid.

I’d be fine with having a baby in my early forties. You’re acting like it’s elderly. I haven’t slowed down at all!

I actually chose not to have another baby in my forties because the risk of Downs is too high, and also because I wanted to get back to my career before it’s too late. But people have different priorities and there’s certainly no reason why they can’t have a baby at that age if they want one.

But 62 isn't 'elderly' is it (the age the poster picked out of a hat and the quote I was commenting on)? Many people are still working then. And that 20 year will be an adult if and when they ever have to deal with their parental 'burdens' later on. Dealing with aging parents and/or their deaths is traumatic at any age.

It isn't 'rocket science' it's over simplication and being a tad judgmental (IMO). Anyone with strong views about it, then don't have children later in life, that's your personal choice. And as I explained earlier on in this thread, several family members had babies in their early forties (up to 46) with zero issues. Plus, for some, a later pregnancy may be their only option for a myraid of reasons or some may have an unplanned pregnancy and not want to terminate. Life's messy sometimes.

I didn't say 62 was elderly. But it's not that far away. And at that stage the child is 20 which is still very young adulthood.

I'm also not saying it can't work out, obviously there are people who make it to old age in decent health (I did say that in my initial post on the thread). But it is a gamble as the risks do increase as we age.

My parents were ok at 62. A few years later they were not, and I spent much of my 20s and early 30s caring for them and ultimately losing them. I had no safety net, no roots, and I suddenly had to be the parent to them. It was a stark contrast to my friends who still had (and have to this day) active and supportive parents.

I do feel most people at better off at 42 than 22, but it's only one reason one might have for choosing to start a family/expand family.

I also think what you are saying about education is snobbish and inaccurate. When I was in my 20s I wanted to make the most of the higher education I'd received and I felt it didn't make sense to me to have a baby within a few years of graduating. I built my career first. However, the important thing is to have children whenever it feels right. 20s for some, 30s or 40s for others.

I think you've misunderstood, I never said 60 was elderly. However when the parents are elderly the child will still be a young adult and may end up dealing with caring responsibilities and loss at quite a young age.

I'm not being judgemental, I'm speaking from my actual lived experience. Obvioulsly my parents didn't intend for these things to happen, but there were consequences to their decision.

Those talking about caring for elderly parents and losing parents young etc, a lot of that is due to the health of the individuals involved rather than solely the year people were born.
Not every 42 year old is the same health and fitness wise just like not every 25 year old is.

There's actually research which shows that people who have children later in life live longer but, of course, there are no guarantees at any age.

Health problems are not unique to older parents. A good friend of mine lost his mum to breast cancer when she was 36 (he was 12/13 at the time). I'm watching another friend in her mid 40's now face MND which has completely turned her life around - she has 2 kids aged 10 and 8 and went from running marathons to wheelchair bound in a matter of months! My cousin is early 30's and has been battling cancer for the last couple of years and put through a medical induced menopause. She managed to freeze her eggs before she started treatment but it will be several years before she can even think about beginning any fertility treatment - not the timeline she would have chosen but sometimes that's life.

Tomorrow is not guaranteed for any of us. If another person feels healthy enough and wants to have a child in their 40's, who the hell is anyone else to judge them for it?
In the poetic words of a pp 'mind your uterus'

No you said it was unfair, which inferred (to me and another poster) that 62 was elderly. As many people are still working then, and, nowadays, it's more the norm to be relatively active then, we queried it.

62 today is very different to 62 decades ago when life expectancy was lower.

Most 62 year olds now are very fit, still working and many are helping out a lot with their grandkids childcare.

Saying a 20 year old ADULT having 62 year old parents is unfair is wild.

But this is individual experience

I had DS at 41 and now older than what people call elderly.

I work alongside DS in a very physical job that can be a 12 or 15 hours day and it’s the younger people who struggle keeping up

Not everyone is dead, in hospital or needs caring for when they get to the age that people consider as elderly

And that's absolutely fine to consider yourself too old to have anymore kids.
I would have hated to have kids in my 20's but don't bat an eyelid at others who chose that path for themselves.

I think the issue of this thread is that OP is talking about her friend wanting a child at that age, not herself..... and who are any of us to judge others for their own life choices?