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.

Luckily it’s just your opinion.

I had my last baby at 43.
I can make a bet with anyone that I’m fitter than most people in their 20s let alone 40s.

I know it’s her life, her choice
...well just leave it there, then.

Agree.
It's entirely her decision and she is likely to be aware of any risks. There is no need for you to judge.

I don't think it's too old if she can still get pregnant.

I'm 38 and pregnant with my 4th (and final) baby.

Personally for me, there's not much difference between 38 and 42 in years and there's plenty of 40 somethings that are fitter than me.

I’ve seen young mums say this before but it doesn’t really work like that. You don’t stop being a parent just because your kids are in their twenties. They still require support and most kids don’t leave home until well into adulthood now anyway. By the time you hit your forties you’ll be knackered from having spent your twenties and thirties on child rearing duties.

Exactly. It's not as if on your 40th birthday, your hair suddenly turns white and you develop arthritis.

Thank god for all the replies saying it’s not too old. We have just started trying literally this week for our first child at 40 and I’ve been feeling hugh amounts of worry and anxiety I’d left it too late.

I personally think it's a bit on the old side but it's not horrific. I think 49/50 is too old though.

But it's not me that's doing it so as long as people are aware that there will be a higher risk pregnancy and they will feel more tired then it's up to them.

I was done a week before I turned 31 and I'm glad that as I approach 40 my children are getting more independent and self sufficient. I don't feel like I could cope with a baby but I'm so far past the baby stage I can't even see it anymore and have no desire to go back. Others feel differently and that's fair enough, their life, their choice.

I feel like anything 55+ is ridiculous and 49-55 is a bit dubious. All of those men having kids in their 70s are off their rocker but again, not my circus, not my monkeys.

My grandma had my mother at 41 (I think) and then my aunt at 43, but this was in a time where you had no control over it. They just kept coming.

I wouldn’t simply because I don’t want to get to retirement age still raising children. Absolutely not. I would consider it maybe if I knew I was financially set for life.

On the physical side though I don’t think it would make much difference. I feel absolutely fine and energetic. My coworker had his first child at 40 and he and his wife are perpetually moaning about it though, but I honestly think they’re just on the low energy side.

But then following that logic if you have a child in your 40s they’ll send you to an early grave from being knackered through your 40s and 50s.

If you're still able to have them, you're not too old by definition. Nature doesn't make mistakes.

I agree with this.

If the OP found "sleepless nights brutal at 38", just wait till you are 48 and a menopausal woman with hot flushes, sleeplessly tossing and turning at 4am every night.

I assume you're joking given that lots of conditions are caused by "nature" literally making mistakes during the copying of genetic material?

It was a bit of a family tradition to have a last baby in your forties, several of my aunties did - all OK and healthy and family dynamics fine. I think my parents would have done the same if my Dad hadn't been made infertile from radiotherapy. My Nana had her last at 46 (as did one of her sisters). I certainly got broody around that age. So far none of my cousins have followed suit!

Hmm? You are able to have them when you start having regular periods, so technically a preteen or a young teen could, but it would very much be a mistake and dangerous from a health perspective - on top of all the other humongous issues.

It’s very hard to read your post charitably. Why do you care…? I wouldn’t want to have one in my 40s because I feel old and I have 3, but my experience isn’t everyone’s!

My SIL had her second at 42. Healthy baby.

I mean I don’t know why you care OP? 42 and 38 are barely any different in terms of how much energy you’ll have?

But that means that surely women who have kids in their 40s will be continuing to parent them in their 60s? Wouldn't you say that's more tiring?
And isnt the chances of health related issues higher as you get older? I'm not saying that it will defo happen, as I am aware young people get unwell too. But I'm saying probability wise, it is more likely.
And yeah your right about that, most young people even through their 30s are living at home due to the cost of living. So that means that if a woman has a kid in her 40s, her child might not leave home until shes in her 70s.
Whereas if she had her child in her 20s, they will probably leave home by the time the woman is in her 50s.
Like I said, I'm not crucifying anyone who has their first/second child in their 40s because for them it really is now or never. Plus it's harder to find decent men these days.
But in this woman's situation,I'm really not sure why she wants a third, especially since her baby/toddler years are over? Plus having previous children ages you much faster.
Anyway tbh I dont really care, she will have to deal with the consequences of her choices

It's patronising because the poster is coming up with imagined scenarios she thinks that no woman TTC in their 40's has considered.

Also it's mainly opinion not facts.

Yes it is a fact that there more risks to Mum and baby with increased maternal age (however most likely outcome is still a good one). But the rest of that post is the same pretty negative opinions about older Mums. 'School run at 50! Teenagers at 60! The menopause will destroy you'.

It seems any women making choices to have a baby outside the 'accepted' age range is either irresponsible or selfish (younger Mums cop different but essentially the same judgment).

'

No, but your eggs are exceptionally old and most aren't viable and in fertility years , you are indeed 'old'

I don't think anyone needs to "be gentle" with you when you posted a thread on a public forum clearly looking for people to agree with you judging your friends "unsuitable" choice.

Women have been having babies in their 40s forever. The fact that you don't want to do that is neither here nor there.

Oh god I couldn’t even imagine going through pregnancy and having a toddler in my 30’s let alone 40’s! But it’s none of your business op.

But not on the day you turn 40. The OP seems to think that there is a magic cut off point between what is an acceptable age and what is not.

Is that a joke? Do you have some sort of health condition?

Yeah. It's called 'ageing'