Sister says my husband and I are selfish for wanting a child in our 40s

[MyTaupeSwan]

I’m 40 this year and my husband is 42 We have a son who just turned 4 and started school in September, and now we feel ready for another child. We left things quite late in terms of having kids we’ve been together 18 years, and in that time we’ve had a lot of fun, traveled, and done everything we could while we had the chance and without too many worries.

Now that we’ve finally settled down, we got married 9 years ago. We were one of those couples that were engaged for a few years not because we didn’t want to get married or weren’t sure, but because we wanted to experience other things before having a wedding. We did couples counseling to make sure we were a good match, both for parenting and for marriage. I was worried about repeating my mum’s mistakes, so I did individual counselling as well.

We’ve always wanted children, but we wanted to have our freedom and experiences first, because having a child is such a big commitment. We’ve faced a lot of judgment, mainly from my family, but we feel ready now. I think we’re great parents even though it’s only been four years, the journey has just begun. Our son is the light of our lives, and we really enjoy being parents.

I’m glad we got to do all the things we wanted before having children, but I do feel judged sometimes. My mum thinks I was selfish for not having kids in my late 20s. I’ve told her that we’ve been trying recently and struggling, but she doesn’t really offer support just says I’m old and should have done it when I was “more fertile.”

My husband and I have had a lot of conversations about this. We’ve decided that if trying naturally doesn’t work, we’ll try a few rounds of IVF, and if that doesn’t succeed, we’ll continue living our lives. We’re lucky to have our son, and he is incredibly loved.

Is 40 too late and are we being selfish.
Seeing my brothers and sister with all their children and their children having siblings, I want that for our son. Maybe I should have spent my 20s having children and we wouldn’t have this issue

40 is not too old at all, especially when you have a 4yo.

And who asked your sister's opinion??

Well it’s my opinion, you don’t need to understand me not understanding.

people choosingto have their children later and later in life, just because medical science has made it feasible to do so.

Natural biology has made it feasible for women to have children later in life for centuries. Women have always had children towards the end of their fertile years. Which can often be well into their 40s.

Just look at the thread by the woman who found herself unexpectedly pg last week, and SO many posters reported late unassisted pregnancies.

It’s contraception that has enabled women to control childbearing earlier in their lives.

And whatever your overall sociological views, not nice to moralise and lecture an individual woman who would like to have a baby.

Your mother’s opinion is completely irrelevant!

And the same applies for some of the nutty answers here. 40 is far from uncommon these days especially if you already know everything is functional.

Very selfish. My parents had us in their mid 40s and I’ll never forgive them for it. Our upbringing was miserable and they were utterly worn out by the time we were pre-schoolers.

I had my youngest child just before I was 40, she was our ‘last ditch’ attempt but because of repeated losses, not my age. I’ll be 60 by the time she is through university (if she wants to go - but we’re working on the basis she’s financially dependent on us until 21) and then we’ll retire. Both sets of grandparents are still fairly healthy in their early 80s so hopefully at least one of us will live that long and she’ll have a parent around in her 40s. Something unexpected could happen at any age but I’m not intending to drop dead before I’m 60 and leave a motherless child.
My SIL is pregnant at 44 and we raised an eyebrow slightly but more because her current youngest is 12 and we couldn’t imagine going back to nappies etc when they are all leaving home or at secondary. That doesn’t apply when your son is still quite little. It’s none of our business what anyone else chooses anyway. Crack on!

How odd. My dm had me at 42 and dsis at 44. She was constantly on the go, and still did 3 days a week in a charity shop in her 80s.
I had my ds at 45, he's 18 this year and I still ski and practice karate with him, and run parkrun while he lays in bed on a Saturday morning.
Maybe your parents just weren't very fit.

No, Not true. I've been very clear all along that the risk factors come from both older men AND older women. I have frequently talked about 'parents' rather than just mothers and I've referenced men specifically more than once.

I think if you know you want children, then choosing to put them off until you are 40+ when there is no absolute necessity to do so is short sighted, ill judged and foolish. And yes, a decision often made for trivial or shallow reasons when one considers all the drawbacks. People who have delayed parenthood until 40+ and taken the view that 'no need to rush, we can always just get some IVF if it doesn't happen by itself' will get cognitive dissonance in trying to rationalise their own decision making though.

I think I've made it more than clear why I feel this way. If people don't agree with me that's entirely up to them but I feel strongly about this and no amount of debating it is going to change my mind.

My mum had me at 42 (and had my sibling at 44). I had my kids at 47.
My mum is now a healthy 95 year old.

Like a previous poster my mum was very active with us. I go skiing, ice-skating, swimming etc with my kids. I think having kids late keeps you young.,

I think I've may border on selfish. It would take lots of time and energy. Id be worried about the time scale with ivf

Also I was so proud of having an older mum. She had to give up work once she got married (Ireland in the 60s).
So she and her peers waited to get married until their late-30s, since they wanted a career first. The kids of her friends were around my siblings age, so it felt normal to me.

How odd that someone had a different life experience to you?

How...odd

This is so ridiculous, I'm 43, we spend our weekends with our kids swimming, bike rides. Parks, trampoline parks etc etc and because our careers were established pre kids we were able to take longer mat leave and manage a few years part time. I know plenty of younger parents who aren't up for half of what we do in a week. I also have kids who love looking at photos and videos of our travels, kids are interested in what their parents did before them, were you not? How odd.

How old are you?

I had DD1 when I was 41 & DD2 when I was 42. I didn’t meet their Father until I was 39. My DDs are 17 & 16 and they wish that I’d had them when I was younger. They feel they’ll just have less time with me in their lives. I get that … but I always point out that if I was younger I’d have had to work all the time to support them & I didn’t give up my recreational partying ways until I was 36 😂 … I’ve been a SAHM since DD2 and I’ve always Home Educated. There’s pros and cons whatever our age…

👏👏

Me and my partner had our first child together at 41/44 and second at 42/45. It's been great and they are now 16 and 14. I am very grateful we had a lot of youthful fun together before kids and we were lucky enough to have them in our 40s.

We've travelled extensively with them, gone to many many music festivals dancing for hours on end and climbed several mountains with them. I don't think they've noticed any lack of energy in our parenting.

As long as your child is looked after then it's no ones business. I would understand them having an opinion if they thought the child would be neglected or if they thought you couldn't cope but this is not the case. I think they are just jealous. Honestly I'm happy I waited until my mid 30s for my children. I have spent my 20s doing things I wanted to do (met someone I'm happy with, travelled the world and went to university) and now in my 30s I can enjoy bringing up my children. 🤷

Go for it.
I had my first at 38, after having two miscarriages at 35 & 37.
I thought I was too old for another, and was told at 40 that I was peri-menopausal.
To my surprise, I became pregnant again and had my second child two months before I turned 43.
Both grown now and it’s been an absolute delight.
My sister-in-law had her second child at 44.
Older parents have many advantages: more contented, more financially secure, have lots of experience of life, more secure in their career and often are more mellow and happy (& able) to spend time with their children.

I'd stick with one

I was 42 when I found out I was 20 weeks pregnant, I had no symptoms and a very easy pregnancy, although it took a bit longer to recover due to existing health conditions. Dd was a very easy child and she's 23 now and doing very well in her career. It can be done, good luck

If the child is born and you love them and care for them, then they will love you back. There is nothing by wrong with loving your child. There is nothing wrong with your child loving you. There is something wrong with someone wanting someone to be denied the opportunity to love their child, or to have their child love them.

Some mad replies here. I live in London and know lots of people who had kids in their 40s. I don’t think it’s selfish, but I also think it’s not optimal. I say this as someone who had kids in my mid/late 30s. I wish I had started a few years earlier. But go for it!! Ignore the haters.

Your sister is nasty, judgemental (possibly jealous)

she has no right to voice such opinions

My mother had her last child aged 42.
When he was making his communion at 7 he asked if an older sister could take him to the church instead of mum. He had told his friends in school that his sister was his mother because all their mums were much younger.