How old is 'too old' to have a baby?

[emily05]

I might have to wait a few years until I can have baby number 2, as I am very overweight, unfit and need to come off some strong prescribed painkillers.
So I will probably be coming up to mid 30's and ds will be abut 6.

I thought that this was ok, but MIL was horrified as mid 30's is too old? Ssomthing to do with health.

This isnt right is it? Will I be too old. Also she said that will an age gap like that I am being unfair to ds.

Any thoughts on this really appreciated as I am a bit upset about it this morning (had time to stew over it!)

Absolutely fqueenzebra,

Right up until the late 1960's it was commonplace for women to have babies well into their 40's.

tamula: 25 - 35, sorry but what rubbish.

I don't have an opinion on what is the 'best age' to have children - all depends upon the potential mother, her personality and her circumstances.

Ah good, did you like that little throwaway comment

How old are you actually? I'm guessing 31?

I don't think mid 30s has ever been considered too old to have a baby. I think this attitude is only confined to having a first baby at that age. Women in the past used to have more babies than is average these days and their youngest were often born when the mother was in her mid-to-late 30s.

I was 37 when I had DS1, 38 for DS2 and 41 for DS3. Nothing was ever said about my age (other than by friends and family in a teasing way), although I was offered more in the way of ante-natal testing as a result.

Bollocks, I had no1 at 31 am about to have no2 at 33 and will probably try for no3 in my mid thirties as damn sure I'm not having this close an age gap a third time around! Let your MIL think what she likes - I've got two friends who had their first children at 38 with no problems.

I was 38 (nearly 39) when ds was born.

It's nobody's business but yours (and the father of course) whether you have another baby.

Oh, I did think that Italian mother who was 60 was pushing it a bit.

I didn't start til 35
dss was 12
do what's right for you!

Emily nothing much to add except go for it with the fitness and weight loss and sod the mil - she's plain wrong. If you are overweight and unhealthy, your "real" physical age is probably much older than your chronological age - so by getting fit, you will actually be getting younger. She should be congratulating you on your good sense and wish to be a fit, energetic mum - for your current child as well as any future ones. Good luck.

Emily, MIL's always think you should do what they did IME!

My MIL thinks we are far too young to have babies (I am 28, dh is 31. Ds 1 born 2004, ds 2 overdue right now!). And has not hidden the fact she thinks we are still kids ourselves and therefore cannot make proper parenting choices!!

She had my dh at 35 and his brother at 37. She knows that back then that was old but thinks that it is much better at an older age! (dh thinks they are both OLD parents....that's not just physical age btw but mental as they act 20 yrs older than they are.....)

The risks are higher with age, of course, and this is why I chose to do it now...that and i got broody (however having done it early I can see us having more in my 30's)!! Ignore your MIL, don't let her get to you.

As for the age gap- there are pros and cons both ways.....potentially your MIL can't see this as she would probably like another grandchild whilst she is relatively young...or younger. My mum often said in Jest not to leave it too long as she wnats to be a young fit and active Grandma...but she only says it in jest.

Hope you are feeling better now- do what is best for you...and don't consult the MIL...only inform her at the time....i.e. when pregnant!!

For me, I would think 35 is my personal cut-off point at this stage in my life. Mainly because my DH is 14 years older than me and I know that he would prefer not to be an 'old dad', in his eyes 50+.

Too bloody old I do worry that too much emphasis is put on age. My dh whinges about age and he is slim and gorgeous (my friends tell me). His whinging makes me feel old but i try and ignore it and go with how i feel. Had ds at 40, i am 44 this year and have three frosties (embryos) from ivf awaiting a pregnancy test for a hopeful positive and even better if twins (being very optomistic)

Eat well, keep well and live longer.

That killed all conversation tee hee

Good for you littlestarsweeper - you aged old crone you!

Message withdrawn

I agree with earlier posters - menopause tells women when their bodies are too old to cope with pregnancy. Anything up to that is fine in my book! I chose to start my family quite young, but I was in a position to do that - I met a lovely man who is now my dh when I was 22. If you don't meet the right person to have children with until you are in your late thirties, there's not a whole lot you can do about it and you just have to go with the circumstances. I was 24 when dd1 was born, 26 with dd2 and will be just shy of 31 when the bump lands (all things being well). I find each successive pregnancy takes a greater toll on my body and energy, but think that this would probably happen regardless of age. You just don't have the same reserves of energy (and opportunities to relax and recharge) after your first child. I wouldn't choose now to have a child in my forties but purely because I don't think I could cope with three teenagers and a baby.

I was 43 when I had DS, had an extremely healthy prgnancy, no significant birth complications, and am, afaik, no worse a mother than anyone else.

I was biologically capable of conceiving and giving birth, have the right circumstances to give Ds a secure happy background, enough money to make sure he has food, warmth and shelter - what on earth could be 'wrong' with that?

My MIL was 41 when she had her youngest, so she thinks older is better
You are doing what you think is best for yourself and your family. In your situation I would just politely ignore the MIL.

I knew someone who had twins at 52. I thought that was pushing it a bit, but everyone is fine and happy. I do think 60 is really pushing it. As long as we are naturally biologically able, what's wrong with it? So, everyone is different, and for some mid-upper 40s is perfectly fine and acceptable.

Men can be parents at up to 70, so if it's physically possible I don't see why woman have an age bar!

Sodding MILs - my DP's mother thinks I'm amazingly brave to have defied all obstetric odds and reproduced at the geriatric age of 37 and 40. Mid 30s? Pah!