57, is that to old to be a parent?

[smileygirl1995]

So I'm curious is 57 to old to be able to father a child....?
might any child have health risks....or as the male is otherwise fit and healthy and has a good sperm rate etc any child would be absolutely fine....? Have tried to google some answers but didn't come up with much info so thought it was worth an ask on here :)

Increased risk of autism with increased paternal age.

Increased risk of growing up without a Dad and suffering bereavement at a young age.

From a personal experience, having an older Dad is difficult.
My Dad passed away at 75 when I was only 20.
He was fit and healthy when I was born. Obviously it's not always the case but from personal experience, I feel sometimes it can be a bit selfish to have a child so late.

You can certainly try to be a parent if you want to. Good luck!

Very possible to father children later in life.
Unfortunately yes there are increased risks of some problems in children related to paternal age not just maternal. Saying that there are risks at any age so if you think you are physically and mentally able to handle becoming a parent at that age, there's no reason you shouldn't.

My dad had my half siblings when he was in his 60s, he’s a great dad and they’re both healthy, happy children. My only worry is that they won’t get him for as long as I have and by the time they’re in their 20s, he’ll be quite ageing.

I think there is a risk of autism with older fathers. My youngest was born with infant epilepsy and part of me thinks that may be because her father was 48 when we conceived her. The second youngest is on the autistic spectrum and my DH was 45 when we conceived him.

We did debate another but we felt the chances of future children being born with additional needs / autism wasn’t worth it. We had always said 50 was the upper limit. As it is DH will retire when youngest finishes school. He could not imagine working beyond 67! Nor would I want him to.

yes

My DDads not much older than this and my toddler DC really wears him out after a few days. I think a man this age would struggle to parent a small child.

I'd say yes it is.

DH and I are a bit younger than that but there's no way we have enough energy to start with young children now. It was exhausting enough in our late 30s!

Its physically possible, but is it right for the child?

Higher risk of special needs.
Inevitable early loss of a parent.
Less energy.
Having a parent the same age as your friend's grandparents.

Wikipedia has a lot of information

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternal_age_effect

There’s a whole host of genetic risks with doing this, not just autism, but cancer, cognitive disorders, higher risk of premature birth, still birth, cleft palete and congenital heart disease.

Sperm by that age would work yes, because men’s sperm always have that ability- but they’d be damaged. Which can cause a whole host of genetic mutations.

ivf with genetic screening might be an idea.

If you're in the Rolling Stones it's a good idea to keep having children in your 70's (Mick Jagger) and 60's (Ronnie Wood had twins at 68).

Coming from someone with older parents who both died by the time I was 22, I wouldn't be an older parent. Its fucked my life up royally.

No, of course it’s not too old to physically be able to. I’d say it’s morally questionable however and an ultimately selfish decision on the part of the parent(s).

Similar questions have been posed on here before about whether women of comparable age should use artificial means to become mothers. It’s always a resounding ‘no’ with plenty of scorn and nastiness added in for good measure.

I’m not seeing such rabid condemnation of men for doing the same thing, so far.

I would say yes. My dad was 52. There are issues growing ul with older parents ans they were both dead and / or demented before I had kids / got married and I was in the position of arranging care at a young age and well before my peers

Higher chance of the child losing a parent while young or having to care for them while young; and the inevitable trauma around that

My dad was 53 when I was born. He was just the best dad ever. Looked after me after night shifts when mum worked. Played rugby with my step brothers (11/14y older than me) took me to the beach almost every sunny night after school (after a day at work) and had the biggest lust for life. we had loads of trips into my teens/20s to the theatre/live sports and holidays. My children loved him dearly and he was a fun papa.
He passed when I was 31 but was honestly the life and soul til that day (I literally saw him that day. It was very sudden).
I'd say it very much depends on how YOU feel. Are you an active person? Or have underlying health conditions? I'd say the age alone isn't enough to decide.
But from experience: I'm ever grateful for my older dad. Xx

My Dad was 56 when I had my eldest child. He was a pretty hands-on Grandad as my mum died when I was pregnant and my then DP worked long hours. He used to come and stay two days per week as he lives quite a way away. He would be absolutely exhausted after two days with a small child. Pre-Corona he always came and stayed once a week and DD is now 17 and I have two other children.

Dad started slowing down a lot ten years ago or so, in terms of being able to keep up with the kids. And I've found now they're teens he's often totally out of touch with their lives - much more so than DH and I. So he's an absolutely amazing Grandad, but parenting is very much more 24/7.

It really depends on the individual. My dh dad was 59 when dh was born. It was hard for dh as his dad was disabled. He died when dh was 20, but dh has only good memories of him. He had retired so was the main carer for him.

My son's df was 56.

Our experience was it was fine although the df needs to be young at heart, fit, enthusiastic and involved. But then that's true of any dad.

Personally for me over 45 is too old for either parent - whilst you do get parents who pass away young the "odds" are that won't happen and the majority of people will have a normal life expectancy which if you aren't having children until you are late 40s and early 50s means unlikely you will see your child into adulthood and certainly won't be around to play a meaningful role as a grandparent? (Women can do donor egg cycles U.K. to age 52 apparently!!!)

But that's just my opinion and I appreciate there are lots of young at heart older parents around it's just not something I personally would do

I agree with those who say it depends. If you’re active and in good health then it could work. There are advantages to being older. Generally you’ll have more stability and more money. Although again it depends on the individual. Also in the past when life expectancy was much lower it was unusual to be around when your children came into middle age so having parents for such a long time is quite new.

My fit and healthy dad is 4 years older than that and my 2 kids (5 and 3) exhaust him! So while it’s physically possible it might not be enjoyable for the parent/the ideal parental input for the child.