How old is too old for a baby?

[Wordsoup]

just that, how old is too old?

inspired by a thread I read a while ago about a woman debating a 3rd child and she said she’d be 36 and the overall tone of the thread was ‘advanced maternal age’ and ‘increased risk twins/ genetic conditions’ etc but 36 is hardly old. Also by a ticktock video thing DH showed me yesterday of a man who was 65 when he met his wife 18 and had a baby shortly after.

i know they say womens fertility declines after 35 but that’s based on some pretty shoddy and outstanding research.

But how old is too old do we think? In terms of conceiving, risks associated with age, pregnancy itself, newborn day, and then as the child grows up? i had my first child at 29 and second at 32 and omgosh did I feel physically worse, makes me wonder if that was in part age related- I digress here.

this is a no judgement post (except maybe for the 65 year old who met and married an 18 year old, not sure how I feel about that) I’m just curious to hear other peoples opinions

It's all down to personal choice. Years ago women had babies generally by the age of 25/30...nowadays it's much older as careers etc take priority. Many want to own their own homes and it takes much longer to get on the property ladder etc. Whatever the circumstances they are unique to each person.

I have just had my 1st baby at 34 as I wanted to travel and have a career and own my own home before starting a family. I have friends who have had babies in their early 20s and now have teenagers and some friends who are early 40s and are just starting their motherhood journey! All that matters is what you want for yourself.

In terms of advanced maternal age, yes there is an increased risk of chromosomal conditions, complications etc. but honestly it can happen at any age and doesn't necessarily mean just because a woman may be older that she will have a baby with any of those conditions, it's just the calculated risk factor scores slightly higher.

@Wordsoup

You seem to have missed the word 'especially'

Fertility gradually declines through the 30's especially after 35

Do you not understand the word 'especially'?

35 is when egg quality becomes a bigger issue than just being able to conceive as well.

I had my first child at 32 and my second at 37. There is almost exactly four and a half years between them. I conceived easily the first time (within a couple of months) then had two miscarriages (at 9 weeks and 11 weeks respectively) before successfully carrying my second child to term. I was told that miscarriages are more common with older women trying to conceive.
I was older because I had a very successful and stressful career in the City (as did my partner) and we knew that I would give up work at least temporarily as otherwise neither of us would be at home. This was over 20 years ago and my workplace was rigidly inflexible when it came to working mothers. I wanted to achieve a lot before I stopped or slowed down.

I get it’s Sunday and Monday is looming and that makes everyone feel a bit irritable but you’re being so rude to everyone who’s said they don’t particularly agree with you, there are studies that say women’s fertility doesn’t ‘fall off a cliff at 35’ (like you said… I’ve attached an article that discusses it) that’s it.

in the OP I said no judgment thread, just peoples experience and opinions. You’re being rude and judgy.

yes egg quality declines with time but I’m specifically talking about the obsession with the number 35, it is outdated

The risks for older women, whilst not insignificant, remain fairly small. I have seen plenty of women in their 40s and even some in their 50s have easy, healthy pregnancies (midwife). And many younger women have an awful time. Age is only one factor in the overall picture - genetics, mental and physical health, general fitness, attitude, support network, finances, education etc. will all play a part in how pregnancy and motherhood affect you.

Personally as someone who is struggling after four years of disturbed nights (DC2 is a terrible sleeper and DC1 wasn’t great) at just 30, I can’t think of anything worse than having a baby in my 40s and going through all of this as an older mum! It’s not so much the pregnancy that would worry me, but the actual baby/child at the end of it!

I had my first at 28 and was about 4-8 years ahead of all my university friends.

Where I live having babies in your 30s seems very normal with a few in their 40s.

My daughter's friend's mum is about 10 years younger than me (must have had baby aged 18-20) and struggled with mum friendships because she was so much younger than most mums at school.

I think for me, it's less about how old I am now, and more about how old I want to be when my child is an adult? I had my youngest in my early 30's (3 kids), and that was late enough for me. A pp mentioned being 50 and looking after her parents and her kids now, whereas for me that was how I spent my early 30's, my mum died in her mid 60's a few years ago. So for me, I would far rather have had my children earlier, than be considering starting a family now in my late 30's. If my mum had been an older mum and not had me till she was in her 40's, I would have been looking after a terminally ill parent and ultimately losing her in my late teens/ early 20's. The way things have worked out, she met and had a relationship with all her grandchildren, my sibling and I had more time with her ourselves, and I am thankful for that.

I guess what I am saying is that we don't know how long we have as a lifespan, and while we can all hope to live to our 80's and 90's and be surrounded by our offsprings offspring, we can't guarantee that and so for me, any time from late 30's onwards would feel 'late'. I am fortunate to have met my DH in my early 20's though, and to have been able to start a family when we did- if we hadn't then I would still hope to TTC late 30's onwards because to me, having children later would be better than not having them at all.

@Wordsoup

Calling out BS isn't being rude

Maybe you can understand your limited study linked from the US doesn't change much, included less than 1000 women!!

Even when looking at IVF success rates the drop is seen

% of live births by age in 2019 in the U.K. -

36% for women under 30
32% for women under 35
25% for women aged 35 to 37
19% for women aged 38 to 39
11% for women aged 40 to 42
5% for women aged 43 to 44
4% for women aged over 44

See how the rates for women under 30 and those under 35 are similar, but omg what's that, 35-37 is a sharp decline. Only seen replicated when looking at the difference between 040-42 and 43-44

Yes you are rude and judgy.

You can’t compare natural conception to Ivf, you get they are different right?

Actually 1000 in a study is a decent size, i can’t be bothered to engage with you in the over 35 shaming anymore. Enjoy your evening

I read on here and heard an interview on the radio about the former director at the serpentine gallery who became a mum via surrogate at 64. In my opinion that is too old, but in the thread about it, there was a mix of opinions.

My mum had me at 36 and my sister in her 20s. She said she was much more tired with me. I didn’t notice any difference having an ‘older’ mum. If anything I thought she was calmer and less ratty than my friend’s younger mums (I say this as someone who had a baby at 21!).

That said, there are benefits to having children younger or older. I don’t think one is better than the other. I have been unfairly judged for being a younger mum at times. When taking little one to baby groups when he was 3 months old I was repeatedly asked “are you still with the dad”. Not that it’s something to judge someone by, but I was annoyed by the assumption.

I had my first aged 39 and sailed through pregnancy and c section recovery. It wouldn't have been my choice to be this old having my first but we'd given up on babies after 8 years of nada and then a lovely surprise. I have nothing to compare it to but I have a poor sleeper so some mornings I do feel knackered but I'm not sure whether it's age, lack of sleep or both. My DH was 34 when she was born so he's not that old for a first time dad.

I'd like a sibling for her but I think 41 is my cut off so I'd need to get cracking and the timing isn't great right now.

My mum had me at 37 and she's fit as a fiddle aged 77. She does yoga and goes hill walking daily. She's always been very conscious of what she eats. My dad doesn't do much in the way of exercise beside the odd game of football with the grandkids but you'd think them 10 years younger.

I think it's all circumstantial when your cut off is. Had I not had fertility issues it prob would have been mid thirties for me. But you deal with the hand you're given.

I don't think you should listen to anyones opinions and leave it to fate. I'm 32 and had a termination for a medical reason a few days after turning 32. It was horrible. I hope when I can carry a baby healthily it will be safe for me and him/her. What matters is both you and baby are healthy. I think 40 would be a cut off point for me. But then again you never know your personal circumstances.

For me it wasn't so much the idea of being an old mum that made me have all my kids between the age of 24 and 31 but more the feeling of wanting to be young enough to keep up with them.

I don't think there is a too old an age to have kids but I do think that you need to consider if being an older mum will have an impact on your children as they grow.

I personally think 35 year olds aren’t old… but, biologically, women are old to be a pregnant mother after this age. Your fertility declines once you hit 30. It dramatically declines once you’re in your late 30s. There are health risks for mother and baby. I do think it’s odd when I meet a mum in her late 40s with a toddler. I think this is because they’re the same age as my mum and I’m in my mid 20s!

Of course plenty of older mothers fall pregnant with their own eggs. However there are risks of the child having a disability, miscarriage, pregnancy complications etc. It’s not just women though. This report looked at older dads too: www.spectrumnews.org/news/studies-diverge-on-role-of-mothers-age-in-autism-risk/

You are never too old until menopause. The problem is when you want to have one and you can't, this is heart breaking.

Ah, the magical fairytale idea that everyone gets to choose when they have children ... some people are fortunate and they do get to choose, while many others have choice taken away from them by circumstances such as fertility problems, health issues, and a myriad of other things that we have no control over.

I had my first last year at 34 and (all being well, still early days) I'll be 36 when my 2nd comes along next year. In my head I had a cut off of 39 - but only as I wanted them to be out of uni and have a few years working under their belts before I retire. But whether I'd stick to that in reality is another matter. Definitely done after 2 though!

I didn’t want to be an older parent. Life had other ideas, though. For various reasons (including years and years of health problems) I’ve only been able to start TTC in my 40s.

Not what I imagined when I was young but here we are. And my choices are to become an older parent or never be one at all. I know some people would think I should never be one because I’ve missed the boat, but honestly I have more energy in my 40s than I ever have before.

Lots of stick from school about his mum being his granny
Lots of stress and shouting and misery at home when his mum went through the menopause when he was a little boy
A childhood spent doing not much and not having much fun because his parents were "old and tired" (their words, to him, in explanation)
Teen years full of fear and panic as they were in and out of hospital for various things
Twenties til now spent having to manage their care
Grief of knowing our kids won't get to have a close relationship with them as they grow.

It was his deal-breaker when we met - kids before 30.

I was nearly 37 when I had my second and I definitely feel done now. No more nappies in my house and I couldn't be faffed with them again.

I had mine at 30 and 34. And actually felt better pregnant at 34. I think it is a personal decision and obviously depends on so many factors. Personally I am glad to have had mine before late 30s as the risks seem to slowly go up from then. However if I hadn't had children yet, then I would no doubt have kept trying until early 40s.

I think maybe if you were a planner you might look ahead and think "do I want to be standing at the school gates in my 50s? Do I want to be parenting a teenager in my 50s/60s? Can I retire in my 60s if my DC is at university and needs supporting financially?".

But then, life rarely runs to plan - especially where babies are concerned!

I had my first at 35, so I definitely don't think 36 is too old!
For me personally, 43+ is too old for a woman, and 50+ for a man.

That is what I planned! But then I've never done it before. If I was 30 and had already spent years waiting at school gates I can see how I might not still be wanting to 20 years later but as it is that is new and exciting for me.

These threads always make me feel a bit sad at how many women seem to think they're old at 40ish. I (and I'm aware this is partly due to having kids later) don't feel like I'd have been ready for kids or settling down any sooner than I did it. Had babies at 36 and 38. Now 41 and probably done but I could maybe be talked into a third if DH was bothered (he's 47 and defo not bothered!!)