Too old for a baby?

[Lacatrina]

What age is too old to have a baby?

I don’t think there’s a specific age. Depends on your health/energy levels, finances, willingness to deal with parenting into later years. There’s also the increased risk of children with disabilities. Which is obviously still a risk at any age, but they’ll be a lot more stress of what will happen to them when you’re too elderly to care for them.

It depends when you have your first. First at 40? Fine. One each at 20, 25, 35, 40? Not for me!

Well ‘advanced maternal age’ is over 35 (NHS)… but imo, I would answer your question as ‘over 40’

How awful you think you can be so judgemental of women who have babies over 40.

I'm 35 and really shocked at these comments

It seems like most think we're all fit for the scrap heap when we turn 40!

I can't imaging feeling very different or "old" or "tired "in 5 years time. I feel the same now as I did at 20 tbh.

People do realise that the chance of a successful natural pregnancy over the age of 45 is really small, right?

I’m currently pregnant with my third child and will be 42 when it is born. I had my first two at 30 and 32 and we’d have loved a third then, but didn’t have the time, money or energy to properly devote to three children at that stage - it would have been selfish (for us) to do so. We’re now in a position where we can have a third - I got pregnant within three months, baby and I are both healthy. I’m very lucky, but not because of my age - I know lots of people who weren’t able to conceive or who had huge health issues in their 20s and 30s. While age can be a factor it is not the only factor, and so “too old” will vary from person to person.

40 +
just being honest here. However, I know someone who had a baby at 45.

It is my opinion that 40 and over is too old. You don't share it.

I'm allowed to state it and you're allowed to disagree. That's what happens with opinions.

As @Pinkelephant66 said:

‘advanced maternal age’ is over 35 (NHS)…

Congratulations! I had my first baby at 29 and my second at 41. The only difference was that I sometimes got tired more quickly with number 2.

I had my first at 36, expecting my second now at 39. Both pregnancies happened luckily on the first month of trying. My first was low risk and natural birth and this pregnancy so far is low risk and hopefully stays that way. I wouldn’t rule out a third baby at maybe 41 if all goes well. I think as long as you’re fit and healthy and have the energy for children, 40s is fine.

@Slightyamusedandsilly No you stated that bodies aren’t made to reproduce at an older age. Are the women who get pregnant easily at 40 not “made “ to reproduce? What about men ? What do you think used to happen before contraception was available?

also I didn’t say anywhere that you weren’t allowed share your opinion did I ? But blanket statements about people being “made” to do or not do something at certain ages isn’t an opinion.

My friend started at 42 and had a second three years later. Everything was fine, a boy then a girl. She now has five grandchildren.

40 I think would be my cut off.

Urgh, I am so bored of these threads. OP, care to share your views since you went to the trouble of starting a thread on a topic that already has about a million other threads?

So?

Erm, if someone gets pregnant naturally how can we be "pushing biology beyond its limits" and how can there be "questions of bioethics" around people getting pregnant naturally beyond 40, which many do?

(Not saying it's wrong for people to get pregnant with assistance beyond that age either.)

Depends on your health and finances.

Indeed this is true, the head of fertility at our local hospital paid us a visit while I was on the labour ward at 47, having our completely naturally conceived daughter. He couldn’t believe that was the case and wanted to personally check! The ‘1% ers’ he called us.

daughter is a healthy and bright seven yr old now 🥰

My personal cut off probably 47.

Because most people over 40 getting pregnant are having some kind of help. Of course I'm aware some over 40 pregnancies are natural, but given that fertility takes a massive nose dive after 40, statistically, most over 40s have had medical intervention.

I'm not coming down either side of the bioethic debate. IVF, IUI, medication, surrogacy etc however all come with ethical debate. When is it OK to use them? How much is too much? Who should get the assistance? Is it OK to buy this assistance? Is it wrong to use other women (the issue of women from developing countries acting as surrogates)? Is it ethical to have IVF in countries where regulation is lax?

The debate is about how old is too old. The NHS is saying over 35 is old.

No it isn’t saying it’s too old it says ‘The NHS doesn't have a specific "too old" age for pregnancy’.

Wither your bias is showing or you are using outdated information.

The 'too old' is MY opinion.

The NHS literally says '‘advanced maternal age’ is pregnancy over the age of 35… Advanced age means old. (Dictionary definition: far along in time:
the advanced age of most senators.)

The NHS used to call pregnant women over 35 'geriatric mothers' (dictionary definition: an aged or old person). Now they call it 'advanced maternal age'. Same meaning, more polite phrasing.

Not sure what you mean by 'wither'.