Going on from the Late motherhood as ‘big a problem’ article.....How many late mothers on here did have major problems?.

[Ulysees]

Just wondering as it's seems to have hit a nerve?

Conceived very easily at 31, 39 and 39. 2nd pregnancy ended in miscarriage. But, otherwise, no problems - straightforward preganancies and deliveries. No disabilities in children.

I had mine at 40 and 42 - conceived naturally.

Had a d&c for missed misscarriage at 39 - but m/c is so common that I'm not sure if my age was of significance?

had 2 x c-section as both went overdue, so a few grand of NHS money went on that - possible age related, who knows?

also had carpel tunnel after ds2, but I doubt that it was age-related - and the only cost involved was a splint and 3 trips to the physio

Both boys are fit, healthy and have no medical complications so far - they are 7 and 4.

All in all, I don't think me or my family are a burden to the NHS or society in general because I'm an older mother

Not sure if this is relevant but here goes:
Age: 31, 34, 37
Easy conceptions
Three complicated labours/deliveries - emergency c-sections x 3
Gallstones/cholecystectomy after 2nd baby.
Obstetric cholestasis each pregnancy.
3rd baby - meconium/distressed - ventilated in itu.
Me - big post partum haemorrhage after final baby.

All well and healthy now.

jalopy, your experience sounds very similar to mine! Ob Cholestatis and post partum hem, but think we have spoken before.
Mog, I agree that there is more intervention for births these days, this can be a good thing as well. Who knows how this skews things
I don't think anyone can know if anything is age related or not, who knows how they might have experienced pregnancy if they had done it a decade earlier.
But really feel regardless women should feel free to choose when is right for them, without the medical profession muscling in, telling us how to live our lives

I had my 2nd at almost 39 (1st at 25).

She was conceived because we trusted the Rythym Method .... so have no gauge to measure how long conception would otherwise have been.

Horrendous acid reflux during pregnancy - but I also got that with my 1st. Also, very bad SPD, but again, got that with my 1st.

Had placenta praevia with both ..... both righted at the 11th hour. 1st labour - 4 hours, 2nd - 21 hours ....... but out of hospital much sooner than with 1st; 2 days instead of 6 (but this is probably due to changing attitudes in NHS). Filthy revolting hospitals both times - some things don't change.

Found breastfeeding easier 2nd time (established straight away instead of an anxious 1st week); gave up 15 months instead of 13.

So ...... no real noticeable difference at all, except shifting baby weight is much harder this time, and my first grey hairs appeared with a vengeance after I'd had my 2nd !

I had babies no8 and no9 at 40 and 43y9m. Straightforward pregnancies and deliveries and babies normal. I have had 4 m/c since turning 41 though and had 4 m/c between 28 and 40 so maybe m/c more likely for me after 40. However, all my pregnancies have threatened to m/c in 1st trimester.
Otherwise no problems.

eer iota...concieved naturally?? as opposed of???

Had mine at 35 and 39. Conceived straight away with both, hyperemesis with both (much worse with dd2) and extremely long labours with both. We were all fine health-wise after the births.
I didn't read the recent article and I didn't worry about health matters at the time.

I had mine at 35 and 37 and am pg at 39. Conceived straightaway first time, then in second month in next 2 pgs. 1st time I had the triple test done, last 2 pgs have had the nuchal scan, all were assessed as low risk of downs.

Straightforward pgs (with lots of little niggles that most people get anyway, regardless of age) and deliveries - short labours, even though first one was OP, but he wasnt too big (6lb 7) which probably helped him turn, as well as being active in labour, using birthing ball etc and no epidural - used TENS machine and gas and air. Both children and I are fine, all we need is a third healthy baby in Nov!

33 - dd1 down syndrome and congenital heart defect - nothing to do with age. Had to have an emergency c-section placenta was compromised - had basically packed it in to be honest. More to do with dates being out I suspect.

35 - 36 dd2 - straight forward pregnancy - managed to move house to the other side of the world and care for toddler with sn. ( laughed at midwife telling me in antenatal classes I should not be carrying my sn child - like she was supposed to levitate downstairs to the car etc ) Elective c-section - big baby, risk of scar rupturing - made life easier with dh due to start new job and organising care for dd1.

Had no problems post c-sections - healed really well and relatively quickly. Was up the next day with both. Back to caring for sn dd1 and newborn within 5 days - no family able to have time off to help.

Now 37 turning 38 - so far so good - no problems - but early days.

age no issue - what was the issue was the comment that somehow having a child with sn was a punishment and there is so much I could have said in reply but chose to rant elsewhere.

This is kind of off-topic for this thread, because I missed the original, but...

Women have been having babies late in life for 1000s of years - if you survived that long there was no alternative except celibacy in the days before contraception.

Btw, the obstetrician who wrote the article would be much better occupied dealing with the appalling care mothers receive in her own department. Where midwifery staffing levels are so low (one m/w to seven women in delivery the night I was there) it has a reputation for being 'lucky' because they haven't actually managed to kill anyone yet. I hold them responsible for my third degree tear because there was no midwife in the room to stop me pushing.

AND she could do with some work on her bedside manner. Frightened the life out of me with her cruel, inaccurate and unnecessary words when I saw her at 16 weeks. Maybe she's got a thing about women in their 30s (I was 34). Cow.

cowmad - what's not to understand about 'conceived naturally'? As opposed to IVF/Clomid/ICSI etc etc.

wow edam, that's a bit of worrying inside information.

I had my sons at age 36 and age 41 - problem free pregnancies both of them, natural birth, easier the second time round, just a bit of gas and air.

I was running a market stall at portobello market every saturday working a 14 hour day, loading and unloading a large estate car and helping to erect my stall framework etc, until 3 weeks before the birth of ds2. No problems at all, but I was careful to lift ligher loads - still the same quantitiy of stock, but just did it little at a time and more often.

Both babies were healthy but ds1 had a bone cyst on his forehead ( small bump removed when he was a toddler) and ds2 was born with a small cyst near his umbilical cord ( removed a week or so after birth).

I was soooooooooooo angry at the article-like all women over 35 are a bunch of unhealthy,fat,unfit lot

dd at 36 7 11oz
ds at 41 9 11oz[Ouch!)

No complications.

Both vaginal deliveries

I was 41 when I had dd. I'd had 2 mcs prior but who knows whether that was age-related or not. I had horrendous morning sickness throughout but so did my mum when she was pg in her early 20's. Other than that absolutely no problems for myself or dd. And I reckon I'm a better mum now than I would have been had I had her in my 20's (that's me personally - I'm not saying 20 year old don't make great mums, before I start a ruck .

DS born when I was 39,he was perfect. conceived in 10 days, Natural birth 2.5 hrs of active labour, partial uterine prolapse 5 weeks after birth but believe that was more to do with the heavy bag I lifted, fool!!! than being older,maybe, recovered after lots of kegal exercises.

whenever people say "concieved naturally" i cant help but flip it to "as opposed to what, un naturally?"
how about the phrase
"concieved with help"

i know it makes me sound a bit twee,trust me i aint twee!

I believe that "natural conception" is a commonly used medical term, as opposed to "assisted conception".

I guess I used the term "conceived naturally" as Jenkel had posted a few posts earlier:

By jenkel on Friday, 18 August, 2006 1:54:12 PM
1st 34 concevied through IVF, no complications with pregnancy, labour and a perfectly healthy little girl born.

2nd 36 conceived naturally, again no complications with anything and another perfectly healthy little girl

I don't really understand why you seem to want to make an issue if it, Cowmad?

DD conceived after 6 months of trying at 35, c section as never went into labour even after inducement. Pregnancy fine and boring I run a B&B so spent most of pregnancy cleaning rooms etc. Grandma had my aunt at 44 in fifties 7th child 6 living, aunt had last child at 44 but was DS but has 8 other children so we are going to keep on happily trying for next one and if nothing happens we have got fab DD and if we do get lucky then bring it on!

soory iota ,i didnt want to "make an issue "of it at all and it wasnt my intention!
although there are many terms and phrases that are now outmoded.
it was just an observation that the phrase "natural conception" does have an opposite "un-natural conception" and i guess i was just saying that the use of the word "natural" was maybe outmoded and could be replaced with"assisted" or maybe mns could suggest another! please dont get cross,i was on a horrible thread the other night and a few rounded up on me and it all ended with me being told to f..off and other name calling!!!i guess im not conveying well from a face to face conversation to one in words...soz an bear with me!!!

Not me but my paternal grandmother was widowed and lost her first child as a teenager.

She remarried at 30, and had 4 children between ages 31-40 w/no problems or complications at all. All delivered at home, all extraordinarily healthy.

She then had a 'surprise' son at 47. Again, born at home, no complications and he was the brightest of the lot! He's now a medical doctor and professor of anesthesiology in the US at a major medical school.

I had a ton of problems and probably cost the NHS a fortune. But they may well have been the same at 25.

30's and 40's aren't old. maybe 50's?