Is 35 too old to have a baby?

[Poodlezzz]

Thinking energy wise, health issues, not having a huge multi generational age gap as they grow, being an old grandparent, and other practicalities….

I still don't understand what is wrong with not having a degree and not being middle class is to be honest.

I was 21. No degree. 14 years later I am a manager, done qualifications to boost myself in my role.

Not going to uni really isnt the failure that people make it out on here.

Surely 35 is a normal age to have a baby?

Our DS was born 3 weeks before I turned 35. He’s 11 now, my energy levels aren’t what they were but perfectly fine to parent him.

I got pregnant quickly once we decided. I don’t think I wanted to become a mother after 37.

I’m about I have a baby any day now at 37. I had my first at 26. I know lots of people who have had babies in their mid-late 30’s. I do find pregnancy harder now in older but I dunno how much of that is to do with the fact I have other children, so you get less of a break and time to rest.

Two wrongs don’t make a right

Hope not, I’m 42 and pregnant

It is! The average age of a first time mum is early 30s now, so most people are having their first or second at 35!

It's mainly only the mums who had babies in their 20s that feel the need to be bitter about it, just because they chose to do different. You won't get any later mums saying they had regrets leaving it too late. Children keep you energised, and let's face it... we aren't too tired in our 30s and 40s, unless we're unhealthy and unfit!

You can't have seen many threads on the subject. Younger mums are constantly looked down on on here.

And on this thread alone there have been a couple of posters saying they wish they'd had DC younger.

There is no right way to do it as long as all concerned are happy with their decision.

@K0OLA1D I haven't said that younger mums aren't ever looked down upon though, yes, we see that a lot too - the current topic is mums 35+, so that's what I was posting about. I agree, there is no right or wrong, and pros and cons to both. Raising children will always have difficult times, aswell as being the most rewarding thing we will ever do, no matter the age of the mother (and father for that matter).

35 is perfect I'd say.
I'm 67 and my DC are 29 and 27 born when I was 37 and 39.
In hindsight I might have started a year or two sooner but no more.

I think there are pros and cons. In my experience the first generation to do it isn't a problem. The second generation is when you are much more likely to get hit by older parents at the same time as young children and it can be a nightmare. I doubt it was so bad a long time ago when you'd have a big family over years who can share the load but I wouldn't want to risk being the only child of an older parent having children older myself.

I had mine at 32 and 35, I'm 47 now and can't say I've noticed any energy loss. I definitely don't feel anywhere near old. I don't like that I'll be 53 when I finally finish the school run though 😂(unless I can somehow earn enough to pay the £1000 a year bus pass price and I can get on with work)

@Newnamesagain I suppose the thing is too, you never know when your 'old parent' is actually going to need a lot of help (so I wouldn't put too much thought into it). For me, my dad was ailing in his early 60s, because he had cancer.. and then we lost him at the young age of 64 (before i'd even thought about having kids). My mum on the other hand.. she's a young and sprightly 70 year old, and she's the one looking after her ailing parent (and also helping to look after 5 grandchildren!). She had me at 35, so I don't view that as old to have kids at all! Her kids have been adults for years. I'm nearly 35 myself now and I'm her youngest.

I think it's individual. Mine was 35. But that is because I had found a partner, if I hadn't then it would have been older.
But I am about to turn 40 and don't have all this amazing energy that everyone else here seems to, what on earth am I doing wrong??? Two kids, work part-time and still don't have a lot of energy

No.

But pay extra attention to things puke
pelvic floor and core exercises and flexibility. You’re not quite as springy as 23 yr olds.

I fell pregnant 2 months before my 40th with my first, and my husband is 46 (his second). I am currently 16 weeks pregnant so it’s a Jan 2026 baby
I really thought are we doing the ‘right’ thing and there are pros and cons so to speak about having a child at my age.
Yes grandparents are older but I wouldn’t have pushed childcare on them so they get to be as involved as they want (which works best for everyone). Our health was a concern but in fairness I feel like I’m being healthier not smoking/drinking and I’ve got a much healthier diet, my husband has also followed suit. We are both exercising more just because!
We are in a stable position financially and work wise with life in general. We do get concerned that when we will be doing the school runs we will be old enough to be some of the other parents parents 😳
so we are embracing this happy little surprise

@Baby26 I know but it is a lot more likely for at least one parent to need your help at 80 than 60. With 2 generations having kids in their late 30s that's the age we're talking about juggling with toddlers, not 70.

@Newnamesagain I'm mid 30s currently having toddlers and my mum was mid 30s having toddlers too, so that was kinda my point (late 30s is only next year for me!). She is the one helping her ailing parent now, not 35 years ago when she had me! We literally are the age group that you have stated.

I had children in my mid 30s and so did my mum and my dads parents were in their late 30s and it was fine.

People put so much emphasis on the 'right age' to have children and trying to engineer the perfect set of circumstances that it's a wonder people have kids at all. You could do everything right and have them at this perfect age and still find yourself caring for parents at a young age or being an older grandparent yourself. Life isn't perfect or ideal and no one has a crystal ball to predict how these things turn out.

I've worked in elderly care and there really is no right age to be a carer. You could have them young and then your children end up being carers in their late 60s and 70s and completey exhausted.

No I was 40 with my seconds child although it is hardly as you get older and they do

Exactly @Anabla my mum is 70 and looks after her mother, who is in her 90s! So we could say it wasn't ideal for my nan to have had her daughter so young, at 20, as now my mum is elderly herself, yet has to look after her elderly mother too! There is never a right age to have children.

I’m in this situation as my mum had me at 39 and I have a newborn at 38. Luckily my parents are both ok at the moment . I don’t rely on them for childcare at all. You just get on with it. I don’t begrudge my parents for having me a bit older at all.

I completely agree with you.

Life skills and wisdom are often better acquired from those without academic qualifications.

To be entirely honest - it's really not. Mumsnetters just tell other Mumsnetters this to all make themselves feel better

Biologically our bodies are fittest for having babies between teens and mid twenties. Ok, not practical for teens in many cases. But 20s is the decade of optimal childrearing. Modern society and pushing both parents into careers like it's the only way to live is what is selling this lie of 35+ being a "normal" age to start a family. Biologically, it's old .

I think these threads are just there to shame older mums who are having their first at 39/40/40+ because - personal heath issues aside - it makes no sense at all to ask this question when this is not far from average age for a first in London and around average age for a second or third across the UK.