How old is "too old" for a guy to become a dad?

[tryingforbaba]

In your opinion...

45

@CorsicaDreaming
We never know what life has in store, my youngest was 15 when my DH died at 55.
Though, I don't agree with choosing to have kids in your 50s as you're lowering the odds of living until
they're 30/40

40 -45.
A distant relative, on his 3rd marriage with a woman similar age to his eldest set of kids had a baby in his late 60’s. He was dead before the child got to double figures. He was charming and good fun, and everyone says how sad, poor child left without his dad, but i think he was a selfish git. It’s a big deal to lose your parents as a child, and we shouldn’t normalise having babies so late in life.

There are many studies showing increased risk to the child with an increase of paternal and maternal age. The problem with any sort of question like this up for general discussion is people write their own anecdotes. If you are genuinely interested in outcomes of research look at articles, though it will likely be the synopsis only in articles in journals such as the BMJ.

Honestly 40 is the upper limit. As much as people do not want to hear it between 50 and 60 is when many people start to get health complications. Again not everyone but there is a reason that decade is known as sniper alley in the medical profession.

40. My dad was 40 when I was born, I wish he'd been younger. Ideally under 35 but I don't think that's realistic anymore

Past about 45.
A 50 year old dad would be 70 when his child is 20, 80 at 30. They're likely to become a burden at the stage where the child is still navigating early adulthood and parenting.

Late 40s.

45

50. I know someone who had their first kid at 50 and their kids are 12+15 now. He's a great father to them. I do think the older dads need to work harder to stay fit and healthy.

My dad was one week short of 60 when I was born. I was 6 when he died. It should have been later though, 66 is not a typical age to die.

My dad was 54 when I was born and I had a fantastic childhood and he was the best, he died at 78 when I was 24.

I'd say 45. There will always be someone who says their Dad was amazing as an older Dad, but the ones I've personally seen aged 45-50 seem tired, angry at being at this stage of life, uninvolved and for at least a third of them, having an affair for a "bit of fun" on the side while the wife picks up all the parenting slack.

Bleurgh.

I think a lot of it depends on finances and availability of family support. No upper limit if you've got lots of money, and have a big family to help out if something went wrong with your health or the health of the baby (which is more likely as you get older).

Might be quite a good set-up if partner was 55, retired with a good pension and stay at home dad!

Ideally no older than 45, because you have to think of the age at which they will still be financially supporting the DC. If they are very wealthy, then some of that worry goes away and is less relevant, but most people aren't.

If DC goes to uni then you'll be potentially supporting them to age 21-22 and possibly beyond, since many young people struggle to support themselves initially. Someone of 45 will be 70 when that DC is 25. It's important to do the maths.

My neighbour was 64 when he became a dad. His gf was 40. Little girl is currently 12. Dad's still perfectly capable of running around after her . I think it depends on the individual
Some people say that's too old however in my opinion and experience, nothing is guaranteed no matter what age you are. My best friend had a baby with her partner he was 25. He died at 27.

40 for both

My Dad had a child at 60 and died when my half brother was ten. There was forty years between his eldest and youngest child.

The older the parents the more likely the children are to have additional needs and need more input from the parents.

Not enough is made of that fact that fertility issues and pregnancy loss are 50% due to sperm quality. So I'd say whatever you deem 'too old' for a woman is 'too old' for a man.

Not a first time dad but my DH is 47 and I'm pregnant with our 4th (and definitely last) baby, but he's fit, healthy and active. I wouldn't want to have any more if he was older.

My answer is the same answer I would give for women - 41 or 42 is the cut-off point in my head.

Mid 40s is too old.

If you are older you increase the chance of having child with a disability or special needs. This added with older parents who may have their own health problems to contend with is not a good mix.

hubby was 42 when we had our youngest. he looks about 30 though where as i look 50 after having a baby at 38

My exDH was 47 when we had our DS. I wouldn't go there again. 10 years on he's aging, health declining, grumpy more often than not... I may need to be his carer one fine day... I'd take 10 years off his age as a priority if I could. Yeah, life can turn in unexpected ways but I'd rather not think about all those things. Not yet.

40 would be my absolute limit for a man and I wouldn't want to be having kids over 35 as a woman. Otherwise you're going to have a teenager with a 60 year old father and I would have absolutely hated that, people would think they're your grandparent.