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.

You weren’t exactly that much younger than her when you had your last child, that’s the most ridiculous thing about your post. You will be parenting teens in your 50s too. You’re judging your friend when your own choices haven’t been too different.

I didn’t want to be an older mum and so had my children in my 20s, I still wouldn’t be so judgemental of someone doing it later. You don’t sound like a very good friend tbh, it’s one thing to worry about whether they’ll cope, health issues etc, but to make a post about it which comes across as judgmental and wanting others to join in is horrible.

Judging your friend for something that has no impact on your life whatsoever is a dick move.

Be happy for her or leave her be. Even if you don’t say it out loud, she will soon know how you feel.

This is so true. Have a baby outside the accepted age range of 30-35 and MN is frothing.

I think it's a bit too old to TTC, but I know people who have had children in their 40s, and it worked out OK for them.

Had my twins at 43. If I'd had them younger I'd have been parenting with a total twerp and would be even more knackered than I am. All parenting is tiring, whatever age. YABU to be so two-faced. Perhaps cnsider leaving your friend alone to be supported by other friends.

YABU.

I wouldn't do it but some people are very young at 42. My aunt had hers at 42 and 44 and the boys are now in their 20s. My aunt and uncle still go on bonkers holidays in their 60s.

It depends entirely on the person and what is right for one person is not right for someone else.

I was almost 44 when had Mini blondes due to 10yrs ttc and countless ivf and wanted to be 32/33 but Mother Nature didn’t play ball

I found it fine and tho I’m almost now 52 and she is 8 this week life is good

but I have one child

she will have 2 others to look after /drive to activities etx as well

you may have had sleepless nights but dd was 7/7+ by 17w and still does 12 ish hrs now

yes a higher risk of sn tho equally my niece has Down syndrome and mum was think 32 when born and 2 more since and no sn

basically what I’m saying is is she wants to have another baby that’s up to her. She may struggle to conceive or May get preg at once

I did something similar. While 42 isn't too old at the baby stage, she might need to think about being in her 60s with a young person still living at home, which plenty now do. They don't just automatically fly the nest now and you don't get your own life back.

It's not about a woman being decrepit in in her 40s, or about a woman of 43-44 'not coping' with a baby.

It's about thinking ahead ... And the fact that when she is 60, the child will still be at school.

If a woman already has children, whose ages are in double figures (like the OP) she is basically spending 35-40 years raising children.

She will almost certainly be the main carer and nurturer, of said new baby, and any career she may have been able to go back to, or adult social life, is extinguished.

Menopause fucks you up. She will have a primary school age child when she is going through menopause, and a teenager at nearly 60! The teenage years are brutal for parents. Who the fuck wants to be dealing with that at 60?

And you'll be trailing around universities, and running them around like a chauffeur and personal servant in your mid 60s! Children are living at home a lot longer these days. You will very likely still have a child living at home when you're 70!

There is a strong chance that she is setting her new baby up for a life of being a carer when they're only in their 20s/early 30s, or being motherless before they leave their 30s.

She will very likely never get to see that baby's children.

The baby is far more likely to have problems, and health issues, with a mum who is her mid 40s when its born.

The woman is put way more at risk having a baby past 42-43, than under 40.

Seriously, open your mind, and your eyes, and think outside the box!

My gran had her first child at 44 and second, my mother at 46. She was a very active grandmother to me years later. I personally, although already a mother, met and wasted a decade of my life on a man I met at 41. Looking back now, I could easily have had another baby at 42 and I’d have got through it no problem at all.

A friend of mine is pregnant at 42 with 3 much older children. Personally I couldn’t think of anything worse and am wondering why she has decided to set the clock back another 20 yrs but I don’t think she’s selfish for doing it. After all, it will be her and her husband bearing the brunt of it all!

Meh, its her life.

I wouldn't do it...when im 42, I have a 10 and 19 year old. I be living it up haha.

Mumsnet has a weird obsession with this topic and it always seems to be 42 that's the age in question. It's almost like there's an organised group with a hang up about it who keep starting threads

I know! I was 41 when I had DD and I was neither knackered nor cantankerous. I do worry about the state of the health of some posters.

She was still in primary school when I was in my 50s and is now at university whilst I'm in my 60s and we're both happy.

It might not be ideal to become a mum at 42 but nor is it ideal to have a child at 22 and die 16 years later like my mum did.

No one has a perfect life.

I absolutely hate that phrase "age is just a number".

No, it is not. Chances of poor health and death increase as we age. Some people will get lucky and live to their 80s-90s but many won't.

I had to become the carer to my parents when I was very young myself, and it massively impacted the life I was able to have and the opportunities I could (or rather couldn't) take. I was always out of sync with my friends. While they were able to be young and carefree, travel, work abroad, etc, I had to deal with things like dementia, hospitals and nursing homes.

Will this happen to everyone? No. But it is a possibility and if it happens it's an awful scenario for the child.

weirdly all the reasons you’ve come up with are terrible reasons.

Sleepless nights are fine at that age.
Risk of Down’s syndrome. Oh well.

But there are other issues. Losing parents young. Having to care for them when they’re old. Not being around for adult milestones etc.

Oh do fuck off

No one over 60 is saying age is just a number. And I’m certainly not saying that as a 45 year old with a 77 year old mother who is at the end of life. Age is a number when you’re young.

Worthwhile.

Me too, although my DS is a strapping 12 year old. Also we found having a lot of life experience as parents was very helpful.

At that age it depends on the health of the mtb . If she's fit and healthy then why not ? Her life , her body .

This is my point
if i had a baby when younger it would have been with a guy financially, emotionally and physically assaulting me and probably the child. I would have no savings, poor emotional health and would have been exhausted

i had a ‘friend’ who was seeping this attitude out towards me being an older mum, she then seen the life i could offer the children. And predictably the snippy jealous remarks started. The cow is no longer considered a friend

by doing the right thing ‘holding off’ in having children as you have a degree of selflessness and intelligence to not allow a future child to suffer, you are penalised by being an older mother

My dad was 47 when I was born. I was an only child and my life was hell with his dementia, his mental health when I was younger and he lost my mum.

My mum was much younger than him but she was dead by the time I was 11. He lived until almost 90 (all be It The last couple of years lost to dementia).

I did have my dads age in mind when I had my last at 40, but my dh is younger than me by 6 years, and his family, at least, all seem to live very long and healthy lives. So I figured he’d have a better chance of being around and being younger.

I had my first at 22, my first husband was 10 years older than me. I wouldn’t have considered having a child at 40 if I was still with him.

(Which I know actually doesn’t make sense as my mum was young and still died young).

Yes best to be diplomatic, but if am I am being honest I agree it’s too old, especially if you have older kids etc, why would you want to go back to sleepless nights and nappies and the school runs. But aside from the fact of having a baby at 42, I would think more about being 60 with an 18 year old.

my youngest of two is 11 and the idea fills me with abject horror! No way would I want to go back to the newborn days 11 years later in my mid 40s. Eek!

Personally for me, yes. It's way too old.

If she had no other children and it was her first and only chance I'd view it differently.

I think we've sold women a lie in these last couple of decades that it's totally normal and cool, and only the 'clever' women have babies 40+ and the council estates thickos are the ones having babies in their 20s. It's harmful and damaging and out bodies are not designed to be at peak fertility in our 40s.

Just because it's physically possible in some women's cases, doesn't mean you should do it.