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

Similar situation here. 20 year relationship before having a child at almost 42.DP 46. I now feel very guilty. However, I also feel guilty that he is an only child. Heightened risks for baby put me off using another frozen embryo. I just felt so blessed that DS was healthy.

I really don’t think that’s a significant factor when we are talking about someone having a child in their early 40s. It’s not going to be vastly different to someone having a child in their mid to late thirties. Based on average life expectancy they can hope the child would be well into middle age before they die. General health and lifestyle are probably more important considerations.

It’s not like we are talking about people having babies in their 50s/60s and beyond, where obviously it would be a serious issue.

Well, the women I know who had babies in their 20s are an engineer and a teacher. I’m in another traditional profession.

Sorry to piss on your very bitter cornflakes

This is a strange thread all round.

You've lived your life exactly as you wanted it would seem, but now you are dithering because family members say it's selfish to have another child at your age?! My sister just had her second and she is your age. Is it older than I would have done it? Sure. But not my business.

And I find the responses really odd. No one seems to call women who get accidentally pregnant with a shifty man when they can't afford it "selfish".

Go forth and have your baby.

It all sounds very intense.

Financial status can have more effect on health issues than the age of the mother. I don't think from what she says that she intends on spending 20 years having IVF.

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.

Well your mum's right. What sort of 'support' do you think she should be offering? Don't tell me you didn't know that a woman's fertility drops off a cliff after 35? Why you'd choose for no good reason that I can see, to wait another four years after having your first child, I simply do not understand.

You say you are struggling already, so now you've got to decide how long you give it before you commit to IVF, so that probably wastes another year. Then the time it takes to do 'a few rounds' of IVF, because the likelihood of it working first time is only about 25%. IVF is is stressful and can be downright mentally and physically traumatic, not to mention expensive. So that's probably another six to eight months gone, and it will put enormous pressure on your relationship.

Then, if it works, you'll be recommended to have an amniocentis due to your age. That carries a 1 in 100 chance of miscarriage of the baby you just spent so much time and money trying to conceive. And if you don't miscarry because of the amnio, you have a 1 in 100 chance of the baby having Down Syndrome, rising to 1 in 50 at 43 and 1 in 30 once you are 45. So then you'll be invited to have a termination for medical reasons, if you so choose.

And then what? Do you start the whole process again?

If the pregnancy goes ahead with no issues, then congratulations, you will have a baby with a 40-50% higher chance of being autistic because of you and your husband's age.

All so you could squeeze in a few more holidays and take your own sweet time, even though you found your man 18 years ago. Selfish? Maybe. Stupid? Definitely. I hope it was worth it.

It’s none of your sisters business.

Has she had any children herself?

I had my dc when I was a teenager. There’s no correct age to bring a good parent.

Agree with this - and I’d argue that out of that list, maternal age in the early 40s is one of the far lesser evils!

You’re no different judging by this comment, why does anyone have to be a bitter loser?

I’d say you aren’t too old at 40 no, but I would say that private IVF cost us nearly 20k for me to have one healthy baby. I was 32 when we started and it was mentally, physically, financially and emotionally costly. As you already have one child ivf on the NHS wouldn’t be possible so I’d carefully think about how much you’re willing to sink into it before you start and the hormones you’ll be pumped with take over. We’re probably not going to have a second due to weighing up the cost of another few attempts vs what that money could be used to enhance our existing child’s future.

I think there's a lot to be said for approaching life the way you have, and it is your choice not anyone else's.

However, as someone who became disabled at a young age and my oldest son's father recently died aged 46, it is worth making sure you have a really solid "village", the people in your life that you would want to be there for your children should anything happen to either yourself or your husband, which does sadly become more common with (but is not exclusive to) older parents.

Grandparents, aunts and uncles are also older and potentially less able to help you out than they might have been if you were 25, however this may or may not be relevant/important.

Also, IVF is not a treatment for age related infertility unless you either froze your eggs or embryos several years earlier, or intend to do donor egg IVF. This is just something to bear in mind because if the reason someone is finding it difficult to conceive is because they are are 42, those eggs are still 42 whether or not you spend 7K transferring them to a petri dish.

So if you are really keen on conceiving another child with your own eggs, then purely from a biological point of view it would be better to get on with it sooner rather than later.

I think the luckiest people are those who can truly say let's try to have a/another child but be OK if it doesn't happen. I personally became consumed by desperation to have another child and whilst I was successful in the end after multiple rounds of IVF, it really can destroy you and stop you fully enjoying what you already have.

It’s up to you. You might be able to have a healthy child, you might not. It really isn’t anyone else’s business. I would say 45+ starts to become pretty selfish but that’s just my opinion and others will probably come along and disagree. I just can’t imagine having the energy and motivation for the relentlessness of a baby, toddler etc at that age….and then parenting a teenager into your 60s.

I wouldn’t be caring what anyone else thought

also 40 is a pretty normal age that heaps of people have kids 🤷‍♀️ it’s not that unusual

There's a reason why fertility goes down rapidly from age 35 on - it takes 20+ years to raise a child and it's exhausting.
Best to have them when you're young and fit in late twenties and still healthy enough to do what you want at fifty when they've grown up.

Best of luck whatever you do but please don't use a surrogate.

I would absolutely tell your family to mind their own business personally.
What you are planning on doing is exactly the same as my journey, give or take.

We were married for 9 years before our first child came along. We travelled and saw the world child free at our leisure while securing stable jobs for our future. Most of the holidays we have done we couldnt have done with a child in tow. I dont think thats selfish personally.

When we did decide to try for a baby, it didnt happen easily. We had unexplained infertility and struggled for 3 years whilst awaiting a fertility referral. Somehow, I fell pregnant naturally and we had a beautiful daughter who is now 4. Shes fantastic!
But being an only child myself, I didnt want her to go through the trauma I have with family decisions. I wanted there to be someone she can turn to, knowing that some siblings never get on, but I know how difficult the mental load has been for myself over my parents health over the years.
We decided to try for baby 2 when I was 40. I said we would try until I was 41 and then stop and be content with our family of 3 if it didnt happen, and given our history, i didnt expect it to.

I fell pregnant and our son was born when I turned 41.
It was a crap pregnancy, but being a mum again at 41 is fab. Im more relaxed about it all and feel happier this time around.

I wouldnt have wanted to try IVF at 41 though because the physical and mental load that brings is alot, especially with another young child to care for.

Go for it, you wont regret your decision.

Tell your sister to mind her own business! Your child will love a sibling , if you are stable and you want a child have it !! Lots of people have kids over 40

I should I add I had a kid at 20 one at 34 one at 40 and one on the way at 44 !
Every single age had benefits , if I was to suggest people when to have kids then it would be late 30s when we are assertive and know what we want . Please don’t let all the haters here or your sister put you off .

I think it's fine to try now and hopefully you could get pregnant naturally in a year or so. I'm a bit confused as you've said you've 'just' starting trying to conceive but also struggling, so perhaps it's too soon to be worried? How quickly would you be hoping to get pregnant before trying IVF?

Personally I wouldn't do IVF. What would concern me is the success rates in women over 40 are too low considering it can be a difficult and potentially traumatic process. It might also affect what sounds like a lovely life you have with your son.

Right ? Are people for real

Just to offer some balance -

If OP signed up to IVF straight away, she could potentially have embryos available within a couple of months. The chance of success for each embryo transfer is as you say, but all being well there will be several embryos on ice from that first round and they don’t age - ie OP will still be using 39/40 year old egg embryos even if it takes her a while to get through them.

Personally I didn’t find IVF a strain on my relationship, or my body.

Amniocentesis won’t be automatically recommended just because of her age, not in the UK.

A 1/100 risk of Downs syndrome is still low and acceptable to many parents, and not everyone would automatically terminate.

Making out the 40-50% increase in risk of ASD is a classic in obscuring medical stats, but 50% of a low risk is still a low risk. The absolute risk rises from 1/100 to less than 2/100.

In other words, the vast majority of babies conceived at maternal age 40 and carried to term will be born healthy.

Well the OP certainly gives a great welcome to herself alright

OP - do what’s best for you and what you and your DH want to do. I think older parents often make better and more patient parents (I say this as someone who had children relatively young). As you point out, you’ve lived your life and are much better off financially than you would have been 20 years ago. Ignore the naysayers and go with your gut. Good luck. 😊

What an unnecessarily negative and mean spirited post.

You do know the risk of miscarriage is 1/4 pregnancies? So 1/100 for amnio is not high. Risk of complications a bit higher but still very unlikely.

People have babies in far far worse situations than a doting set of parents with plenty of financial means and life experience.

Poverty, insecure housing, mental health issues, domestic abuse, overcrowding, chaotic, toxic relationships.

Is anyone’s situation ideal? Very few I would think.

I'm not sure how the reasonable/unreasonable vote is meant to work in your post, but I'd say you're unreasonable to think that 40 is too late for a second and to worry about what others think.

40 is absolutely FINE!

I'd forget about other people and focus on how you're going to conceive. If you've been having well-timed sex for six months with no result, I would see a doctor without delay.

Best of luck!!!