Late motherhood as ‘big a problem’ as teenage mums

[iota]

anyone see this article in the ST?

I actually felt quite offended for about 10 minutes

Grrrr, based totally on a cost issue. This is no one's business. And, I suppose it's due to my age that ds was breech and required a section Most of the time I am pretty disgusted with the trend of healthcare in the US, but at least no one feels they have the right to tell me at what age I can give birth!!

so who else bought the ST just for the dvd then? First time I'd read it in years (around bout fake hitler diary fiasco). It is The Sun in words of 2 or more syllables. Can't expect anything better than that level of sloppy journalism. Good plan of theirs to encourage loads of families to buy it to get the dvd and then print articles designed to piss them off!

I think the Times and the Sunday Times are very good papers actually, I wouldn't wipe my arse on the Guardian.

I hate the attitude that you may have a baby between the age of 28 and 32, when you own your own house and have enough saved for school fees. Real life is not like that.

my mum said that if you wait for the right time to have a baby, you wouldn't have them as the right time never comes

exactly. There is no right time.

colditz that is me. DS born at age 27.11 and DD at age 31. But for the school fees bit, mind you. And TBH where I live the majority of the Mums in DS's class are (or look) a similar age. There are two that I know are older - one is with her second husband, the other was trying for several years before she fell pg - but then managed a sibling 16 months later. Just shows that real life doesn't work out how you plan. Unless you are me, of course.

Sweeping generalisations in that articleAs we can see from these posts many different reasons for having children later.I had my 1st at 21[she died]and it took me 9 years to have the courage to try again[emergeny section with ds]and now 7 years later,at the grand old age of 37 i find i am pregnant.
I would like teh doctor and the person that wrote the article to come on here for a question and answer session.I am

I do worry about the menopause and adolescence clashing...
I'm 35 and when I have this baby I'll be 36
And I swear too much and watch Big Brother so there is no way I'm middle class, even given a decent Boden habit

I think Iklboo's post of 2.30pm says all I need to add to this convo.

Has to be said the rent-a-quote from a think tank shot from the hip

Even if there are health risks in older motherhood, and I think they are being overstated, this is not a matter of public policy.

Health risks not a matter of public policy? erm can you run that by me again.

?It is no business of doctors to tell people when to have their children."

kind of right - it is no business of them to tell people when to have babies - but it is absolutely their business to point out risks. (in a considered, objective, factual etc etc way)

"Mea Culpa for having a uterus" surely quote of the week expat ......

So, only middle class women have children late and only feckless young slappers have children as teenagers. Right

We have a falling birthrate. When is someone going to applaud women of whatever age (provided it is legal) who do have children?

Personally, I would not have a child after 35. For me the risks are just too high - eg 1 in 50 chance of a downs syndrome baby - far far more likely to happen than a lottery win...

So as I am 35 next March and am not pregnant my family is complete.

I think people do have to understand the risks. So many people put off having families until later in life (and it is choice with many, I do understand that others have not met the right person etc etc) and it is absolutely right that they should understand the risks of putting things off.

But I guess most people take the view it won't happen to them. Unfortunately I just can't - I have one son who will be 4 in November and I just feel that there is someone up there saying "be grateful for what you have and the fact that you came through the last pregnancy unscathed" and that I will be punished in some way for being greedy.

helly, I respect your decision not to have children after 35 and I totally agree that we have to understand the risks of later pregnancy.

But risks are just that - numbers which could be totally divorced from your actual situation. I had dd before 35 and I was told she would 100% have a heart condition picked up during the scans. I am having ds when I am 38 and although the risk of downs is supposedly higher, the adjusted risk after the nuchal fold test, blood tests etc put me in the 1 in 3,000+ risk category, that of someone in her early twenties.

It is a lottery no matter what and every child, whenever you have it, is a gift.

I have a dd with Noonan Syndrome, I had just turned 32 when she was born.
She was my 2nd child ds is 12, dd is now nearly 4 I am 36 next month and am 9 weeks pregnant.
If you had asked me when I was trying to concieve dd, if I knew that I would have a child with NS, would I choose to be pregnant.
I would have said no
Ask me afterwards and she is the most blessed thing to ever happen to me.
We all understand risks and we all in our own way know what our own capabilities are as parents. I know I can cope with special needs, although obviously I'd prefer to have a child who did not face such struggles, the whole concept of parenting is one with a whole range of learning curves...
I have become a better person for having dd, it is not always a negative thing to have a special needs child

Actually, the chance of a baby with Down's Syndrome being conceived at age 35 is one in 370. At 42 it rises to between 1/60 and 1/85. If we are talking about understanding risks, I think the facts should be right.
Don't understand this idea of 'someone up there' who would inflict a severely disabled child on a family as a 'punishment' for wanting a child. What???

Also, if you don't want more children then that's obviously fine and great, but if you do, then I think it's really sad to let excessive fear get in your way. Aside from the risk of Downs syndrome, being pregnant older is not dangerous.

How about we write an article titled "ferocious cost of living in the UK to blame for the high costs of late parenthood"

Message withdrawn

I read this in the ST and thought well your damned if you do and your damned if you don't.

No role for men then in when a woman has a baby.

You would have thought this outdated view of women would have been rectified by now. I am 23 and had my ds at 21. Being the age I am and having been brought up to believe in equality between the sexes and to believe that that was the atmosphere we were living in this article shocked me.

I could cope with it down to the line:

'Nevertheless, the comparison with teenage mothers will still sting. The two groups could not be more different. One is made up largely of deprived and feckless girls while the other is dominated by highly educated and successful career women.'

The description of the two different groups of women in there are both highly derogeratry (sp?) and untrue in the vast majority of cases.

I'm just absolutely and completely shocked that in this 'enlightened' day and age that opinions like this are prevailing.

My naivety is being swept away as we speak.

I also think men's health does play a role. It could be that his health is the reason fertility treatment is required. And it is also more likely that he will suffer poor health and be unable to work and support this child before the child is old enough to support himself/herself.

Can we talk about the cost of living in this country? How many people delay having children because they can't pay the mortgage -- not necessarily high flying lucrative careers?

read the first couple of paragraphs and could read no more - what a load of old baloney. My health whilst pregnant is brilliant - blood pressure great, no gestational diabetes, no problems with me. So that article is very misleading. A young friend of mine - all sorts of issues including gestational diabetes etc. Age has nothing to do with it - would have thought it was more lifestyle and personal health. Another friend had dds when I had my dds - brilliant pregnancies, two home births - she wa 39 turning 40 when she had her first, had second at 41 turning 42.

hellywobs - although the risk of having a child with down syndrome is higher when you are over 35 - more children with down syndrome are in fact born to younger mothers. My daughter with down syndrome was born when I was 33. My next daughter born when I was 36 does not have down syndrome. As to chilren with sn being a punishment - not going to go there. sums that up.

I am now almost 38 and pregnant for a 3rd time and very aware of my chances etc - am able to read and discern for myself appropriate information vs shite.

How dare some git tell me I am a drain on the public with all my health risks etc and to say I am irrational because I choose to have my children later in life.