Would you become pregnant at 47 if....

[Noangelbuthavingfun]

You desperately know you've always wanted a 2nd child and it never went away ... tried but failed many times.... would you go for donor eggs and partner sperm and just do it ? Many celebrities do it late into 40s.... its now or never. I'm just thinking you regret the things you never did...

Oh, and don't pay any attention to what celebrities do or say they do. Generally speaking and definitely not regarding this sort of thing!

No, too old. Remember this? https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2005/jan/17/health.medicineandhealth1

Research actually shows that most people born from donor eggs or sperm grow up to be pretty well rounded and content. The issue arises when they're not told about how they're conceived until adulthood. But I would worry about doing it when they had a sibling that was biologically related to mum. It creates a but of imbalance doesn't it.

"I want a baby" is the reason anybody chooses to have a child at any age.

Quite. But then you do some additional thinking as well.

Celebrities do it with nannies, private chefs, housekeepers, personal trainers and a practically unlimited supply of money and career flexibility.

So if you have people to look after the baby 24/7 and do all your housework so you can rest as much as you need and people to help you get back to full health and no need to even think about work unless you want to, then you aren’t in the same boat as a 47 yo celebrity mum.

@destiEos As someone who wanted to donate my eggs but couldn't, I'm really glad to hear this. - And if anyone points out about a child contacting me at age 18 - I'd have welcomed them with complete happiness, and explained I gave my eggs to someone who really wanted you. A double wanted baby!

And@Terracata when I researched about this, it also showed positive results. Some higher rates of complications during pregnancy but I don't know why.

Involuntary childlessness is about to become a huge international problem and no-one is taking it seriously.

1. "Have a child only with the right man"

2."Have a child only if you earn enough"

"Oh did you reach perimenopause without a child? That's a shame.
Socially we need to sort out 1 and 2.

No, too old.

No I wouldn't. There's a big difference between being 37 and 47. I think late thirties is the cut-off point for pregnancy.

No. I think 47 is too old, but I also think having a second using donor eggs could create issues later in life. The two children would have a different genetic make up. The younger might want to find their biological/ genetic mother.

I think that the less socially acceptable answer is that a lot of people also regret the things that they did do, especially when it comes to having children. You're just not allowed to admit it.

I think if I already had older children and there'd be a substantial age gap between them and the newborn I was having at 47 then, no, I personally wouldn't be looking to 'start again'. I'd devote my time to my older children and would hopefully be looking forward to being a relatively young grandparent.

If I was childless and this was my last chance to have a child or i'd only just started having a family in my 40's then I'd probably feel very different about it.

There isn't a 'one size fits all' and I think it's wrong for anyone to give such a sweeping statement like it's 'unfair on the child' - I know people who lost parents at a very early age or who have parents battling long illnesses in their 40's and 50's. I also know men and women in their 60's and 70's who take great care of themselves, stay fit and healthy and have bags of energy.

Just because you wouldn't want to be an older parent doesn't mean it's wrong for anyone considering it!

My granny had her last at 48, naturally. I had a baby at 42 and it is tiring, but it was at 35 as well. Only you know of you are fit enough.

What? 35 and 48 are insanely different

Geez are you serious 😳 no, no, no. Do you know the risks?! Could you raise a child with disabilities? There’s a 1 in 19 chance of Down’s syndrome alone, which not only involves intellectual disabilities but often comes with heart problems too. There’s all sorts of other congenital abnormalities risk increases at that age too. Don’t do it unless you are prepared to be a carer for a dependant child for the rest of your life.

Out of interest though are those risks still raised if using donor eggs?

Yes, there are increased risks which come with age which the OP would have to weigh up but having a child with DS or any disability, heart defect etc etc can happen to anyone at any age.

I know 2 lovely women with DS and both were born to women in their 20's.

I'm currently pregnant with my second and will be 42 when she is born (DD1 is 4). NT at 13 weeks was 1.1, I had a private NIPT anyway which came back low risk for the 70 genetic and chromosomal anomalies that they test for. All looking great so far.

Yes, I'll be an 'older mum' but there isn't a cats chance in hell I would've wanted to have kids in my 20's! I'm a much better, calmer, healthier, more patient parent now than I ever would have been 15/20 years ago.

Edit - sorry that was meant to be a response to the original post by @Mayflower282

I wouldn’t because my kids are much older but yes in theory I would. I’m 50 and genuinely don’t think I would struggle if i had had a baby at 47. I feel as fit as i did in my 20’s and would love it. It isn’t ideal to still have kids at retirement but I know lots of people who had kids up to about 44. I had my last at 36, wasn’t any harder than having my first in my 20’s.

I'm 50 with a 14 year old (youngest of three). I'm fairly healthy (touch wood) but my body is still menopausal. I recognise that I feel older. I'm at a different stage or maybe beginning a different stage of life.

Following on from my previous post, I am sympathetic to women who become mothers in their forties, particularly first time mothers. I don't want to sound insensitive. And it's every woman's individual choice of course. But to become pregnant naturally or via donor eggs beyond the age of 45 would be something I consider challenging and difficult for a number of reasons.

No, I wouldn't. I conceived at 44 and had ds at 45.
I am supremely lucky in that ds is happy, healthy, and I had a unassisted, straightforward pregnancy, natural birth and am fit and well.

I am now 61, ds is in the 6th form. We have a good relationship, I'm able to provide him with a good quality of life. I wouldn't want to push my luck any further.

It will be hard, but you know that. I had my first at 38 and my second at 41 and it was knackering. I didn't want any more, but if I was desperate to have a second I think I would give it a go. I know someone who had her only child at 46 and it's hard but doable. How old is your other child? Are they old enough to help out a bit? Do they like the idea of a sibling? And what does your partner think? It's not just about you and your age, so many other things to think about.

I think it's wrong for anyone to give such a sweeping statement like it's 'unfair on the child' - I know people who lost parents at a very early age or who have parents battling long illnesses in their 40's and 50's

Of course - there are no guarantees in life! However, A child born to a mother in her late 40's will be dealing with an elderly parent while he or she is still a young adult. It was very difficult trying to help my widowed mother while navigating my own life as a newlywed and starting my own family. This is the reality of having significantly older parents. You lose the luxury of having the safety net of supportive grandparents for your own child while simultaneously taking on elder care responsibilities.

I actually think it would be easier to have elderly parents at the age I am now (40). My mum is 61 and she'll be very elderly when I'm quite old myself so it will be harder energy wise. Obviously much nicer that she'll be around for longer hopefully though but there are good/bad points to both

When she is 85 you'll be 64, so not all that old. Presumably at that point your own kids (if you have any) will be self sufficient and you may even be retired (or at a point where you'll have flexibility career-wise).

It's a huge strain juggling young children with elder care responsibilities.

I guess you could make a "both sides" argument, but having lived it myself I'd prefer to assume elder care responsibilities when my own children were much older.

It's really only a decision you can make, and should be based on your health and lifestyle and your wants.
I guess the thing I worry about (when my second is born I'll be 40) is that I'll die when my kids are young. But my parents had me young and they then unfortunately died young too - so anything can happen at any time.
That cringe "you only live once" expression springs to mind, so if you want it, go for it I reckon. There's nothing better in the whole world than being a mum, loving your kids and have them loving you x