To give up contraception at age 52?

[TemporaryNC1234]

AIBU to think that I can give up on contraception at the age of 52? Or perhaps this is more a WWYD?

We've used condoms since conception of DD 20 years ago. DH is now not getting on well with condoms (understandable at his age - early 60s) so we'd like to stop, but the very last thing I need is an unwanted pregnancy.

It feels ridiculous to be worrying about contraception at my age, but NHS says you need contraception until 55 unless you've gone a year without periods. I've been on HRT for a few years and still bleed, so it's likely I'm peri still as otherwise I probably wouldn't bleed on the type I'm on. Really can't face changing anything hormonal so don't want to do Mirena or anything like that as I've only just found stability with the HRT I'm on and hated being on the pill when I was younger. WWYD?

YABU - keep going with the condoms
YANBU - no contraception necessary

Your partner could get the snip

Withdrawal. Not as safe, but at your age you can probably live with that and absolutely no side effects or downsides.

Ha ha. Indeed!

Withdrawal is NOT a method of contraception and absolutely foolish if you genuinely do not want to get pregnant.

Well, it's used as one. I did recognise that it's not the safest, but also OP's risk is not the highest, so...

I have a friend who conceived at 50. She decided not to keep the pregnancy but obviously the whole thing was an emotional ordeal. Have you looked into using a diaphragm?

So… unless OP potentially wants a pregnancy absolutely do not do this 🤦‍♀️

Again it is not a method of contraception.
It is foolish.

"Again it is not a method of contraception."

It's included in the websites I consulted as a method of contraception. Some of them report its failure rate as quite similar to the contraceptive sponge.

I've been reading stuff today about the risks of getting pregnant at my age (53) after this thread scared the bejesus out of me. It seems that my risk is under 1% - which is the same as, or less than, most contraception. So essentially I'm about as at risk of pregnancy as I was when I was using Mirena/the pill in my 20s, or less so.

Why would I need contraception now, that being the case?

I'm genuinely stunned at the amount of 50-somethings on this thread that are convinced they are still at risk of conceiving a baby.

I just asked ChatGPT: What is more statistically likely, getting struck by lightning or a conceiving a baby naturally at 52?

The response:
Statistically, getting struck by lightning is more likely than naturally conceiving a baby at age 52-especially without fertility treatments.

Try it yourself if you don't believe me.

Unfortunately dh's sperm was in the 'no chance of pg' zone when I conceived both my dc, so not sure I'd find the tests completely reassuring! I was told you should use another form of contraception for a year to be safe.

Slightly baffled at all the people scoffing at the chance of pg and quoting it at 'under 1%', and therefore no risk.

And yet a 1 in 100 chance of down syndrome is considered high risk.

Fact is, something with a 1% chance will happen 1 in 100 times. So for any 100 women who use no contraception at this age, 1 will on average get pg. If you consider the number of women in their 50s who think it's safe, it's no wonder that some of them get pg.

The chances of having a healthy live baby at the end of it are, unfortunately, much lower than that. So even if they are getting pg, you wouldn't necessarily see a lot of pg 50 something year olds, because the vast majority of them would miscarry.

Which is a shit thing to have to go through.

That's quite selfish of him really. My DH said, after I'd had all the babies and what I'd gone through with that, it was the least he could do and his turn.

I should have rephrased it to “it’s not a recommended method of contraception”. It’s on websites to highlight how it is unreliable like a “this doesn’t work, please don’t do it!” method. Given it’s such a high user failure rate most legitimate websites will quote it as 20% failure rate (when used alone). So 1 in 5 will get pregnant with the “withdrawal method”. That’s an LOT! Even at 52 with reduced fertility - why on earth would you want to risk it?! It’s irresponsible to rely solely on withdrawal as a method of contraception.

Big Pharma?

I stopped at 54. Haven't conceived 🤞

OP - you haven't said why your DH is struggling with condoms now. If it's because of the quality of his erection then he should see the GP about that separately. It's not uncommon at his age, but while it could be erectile dysfunction (Viagra can be prescribed in most cases and usually successful) it could equally be a sign of another health issue, or a psychological problem.

If it's an allergy, you can get hyperallergenic ones.

If it's not either of those - what is it? If it's cba, tell him to buck his ideas up!

"Given it’s such a high user failure rate most legitimate websites will quote it as 20% failure rate (when used alone). So 1 in 5 will get pregnant with the “withdrawal method”. That’s an LOT!"

As I said, it's similar to the risks for the sponge. The Planned Parenthood websites call it 'better than nothing'.

"Even at 52 with reduced fertility - why on earth would you want to risk it?!"

Because she doesn't want to mess with her hormones and her man has problems with condoms, as is normal for men his age.

240,000 people worldwide are struck by lightning each year. I take precautions against being one of those people. I'm also going to continue to take precautions against getting pregnant, even though it's highly unlikely.

That's good for you, I guess

Yes it is.

I thought it was funny that you were comparing conceiving naturally at age 52 to getting struck by lightning, as if that was something that never happens. Neither are likely but both are possible.

I was 52 when I came off the pill.

(My mum had a hysterectomy in her early 30s I believe, that was due to her heavy/flooding periods)

7 years later I’m still period free, so I guess that’s it for me thankfully.

Does ChatGPT give proper sources for its information on this? I've found it talks a lot of nonsense on some topics where I know the answer. It really isn't the last word in an argument without further backing up.

Im 51 and I don't use protection with my partner. I've never been pregnant, so for all I know, i can't! But I was 7 months without a period. I'm now on HRT. The doctor did say there is still a risk of pregnancy, but i decided to take the risk.

When my periods stopped I took a test periodically to see if I was pregnant, but nope.

I know someone who was struck by lightning so I agree it's not exceptionally rare. However, he worked in the garage of his home, which most people don't.

I avoid standing under a tree or having my umbrella up in lightning, but other than that I don't avoid using electricity or a landline phone when there's a storm. Our behaviour has to match the risk.