My friend has basically said I won’t have a family

[SadSaltye]

I’m 36 and recently single. I said I had started online dating again as I really want to try again and find someone I can build a life with.

My friend literally said well you’ll need to forget the kids part now, ‘only an insane man would have kids with someone in less than a long term relationship and you’ll be past it by the time anything becomes long term.’

I haven’t spoken to her since but actually I am starting to think she’s right. I need to do it within a year or so really. Nobody sane would do that with me. I feel so low. It’s all over isn’t it, that life I wanted.

It could be hood to do a fertility check (which is not foolproof) in the meantime.

@TurnUpTurnip

There’s literally a thread on here atm where a 35 year old is being told if she doesn’t crack on and have kids now then she won’t have any at all , yet this threads is saying the opposite 🤦🏻

I think in that thread it's because she's with a man who doesn't seem in any rush to have them. So posters are telling her to have the conversation with him now so she hasn't wasted the rest of her 30s. Very different for OP who doesn't have anyone so of course she could meet someone tomorrow or a year later and still have a family if he wants it too - because she is in control and has hope. That other OP has zero hope because her partner doesn't want them soon.

As for the bloke being insane; not quite sure why a bloke would be insane to have kids with someone within 3 years; happens all the time (and often withon a lot less time) with couples of all ages

Not different at all, the op in the other thread actually has a partner so has a head start rather than being single, very unlikely this op will meet someone and have kids tomorrow or even in a year since most people will want to be together for a while before planning kids

@SleepingBunnies21

As for the bloke being insane; not quite sure why a bloke would be insane to have kids with someone within 3 years; happens all the time (and often withon a lot less time) with couples of all ages

True. And surely it would mean OP is insane too

Your friend is horrible, OP. Also, just anecdotally I've noticed that friends of mine who started relationships in their late 30s/ early 40s basically cracked on with things pretty quickly in terms of marriage and kids. I don't think it's only women who have a sense of the clock ticking, despite what we're told. You've got loads of time if that's what you want (plus you're still young!)

My parents met and had my brother within a year and a half
My mum had me when she was 38 with no complications

I met my husband the month before I turned 37. Online. We moved in together the following year, got engaged the year after that and then married the year after that.

We have two children: a boy and a girl. I had the first aged 41 and the second just after I turned 43. Both perfectly healthy in every way.

So your friend is wrong.

I would say that if you're serious about starting a family, then prioritize dating. Go on loads of dates. Be ruthless. Don't be afraid to move on quickly if it's not right.

Good luck to you!

@TurnUpTurnip

Not different at all, the op in the other thread actually has a partner so has a head start rather than being single, very unlikely this op will meet someone and have kids tomorrow or even in a year since most people will want to be together for a while before planning kids

Erm no, other OP has a partner who wants to wait 4 years. This OP could meet someone who wants them in a year or 2. Like Serena William's husband did, Prince Harry did or Greg James did. Even Zoe Hardman had her kids very soon after meeting her husband as she was peri menopausal at 35 and couldn't wait. If these successful men and women in the public eye who are well aware of the challenges of divorce can do it, anyone can.

Plenty of men are smart and savvy enough to figure their shit out pretty quickly. And marriages/kids that happen in a year or 2 have as much chance of success as those that take 5 or 10. Just like some people figure out careers and self belief in their early 20s, others only in their 30s. Everyone goes at their own speed.

OP, I met my partner at 34 and he was more than happy to discuss having kids at 36 - 37 (a month in) if we were settled and happy. And we are still on track for this. Not every man is a commitment phobe who doesn't know his arse from his elbow.

Check out matrimonial apps as well in addition to dating apps

@SadSaltye

I feel so sad. I was trying to be positive and proactive but I just feel stressed and sad now. Like it’s out of reach. Who meets someone and then has kids soon? I won’t have had a long relationship will I. No ten year marriage behind me or anything

I know a lot of people who've had children within less than eg 3 years of meeting.

The right person will understand that the timescale is sooner rather than later. couples have conversations like that and act accordingly.

@SleepingBunnies21

45 and over. At 45, a woman's likelihood of getting pregnant is no more than 3 or 4 percent

As per the actual data (as opposed to one person's experience) that I also posted, fewer than 4 per cent of women will be able to have a baby at 45.

Isn't it a 4% chance per cycle, not 4% of women?

No. Here's another source:

“The rate of decline accelerates around the age of 35 and the vast majority of women are essentially infertile by the time they reach 45,” says Wells.

It's not just about getting pregnant, either.

Mothers don’t just need to contend with their fertility as they get older, but also greater risks during pregnancy, labour and delivery. The First and Second Trimester Evaluation of Risk (Faster) trial, a US study funded by the US National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), looked at the health records of over 36,000 women. They found mothers over 40 were two to three times more likely to experience health problems during pregnancy including diabetes and high blood pressure. They were twice as likely to experience bleeding from their placentas, have a caesarean delivery and to lose their baby later on in pregnancy.

The children of older first-time mothers who are 40 years and above also have an increased risk of health problems at birth, such as low birth weight and congenital abnormalities. They also have a 50% increased risk of being born preterm and, perhaps consequently, are at increased risk of requiring neonatal intensive care after birth.

www.bbc.com/future/article/20200828-how-fertility-changes-with-age-in-women

This is not massively relevant to the op at 35 years old, but it's in response to the chirpy anecdotes about people who had their 1st babies at 45.

It is vanishingly unlikely, and fraught with risks. There are worse things than not having a baby.

I met DP at 36, had DS1 at 40 and DS2 at nearly 44 so you do have time. If you're hoping for a big white wedding that takes at least a year to plan, I'd put that aside, have the baby first before your biological clock runs out and get married later.

Wow what an insensitive friend!

I had my first baby at 42, second at 43 and a shock third at 45.

You’re only 36! You could meet someone in the next year or two who also wants to move the relationship along quickly and is keen to have children.

Oh OP, I am so sorry you are feeling down. I don't think your friend is very kind and perhaps you should keep your distance from her as she seems very negative and you don't want that kind of negativity in your life . Of course you can still find someone and have a family, it's not too late. You are only 36. Plenty people meet and get married within a few years and have a family. You need to find someone who wants what you want so there's no time for time-wasters. Dont give up. I hope you find the happiness that you are looking for

No. Here's another source

None of the text you posted stated that it is not 4% risk/chance per cycle ..... but 3/4% of women.

I think you are referring to the % risk/chance per cycle, which is not the % of women who fall pregnant.

All the other info posted is about risks of problems etc

@SleepingBunnies21

No. Here's another source

None of the text you posted stated that it is not 4% risk/chance per cycle ..... but 3/4% of women.

I think you are referring to the % risk/chance per cycle, which is not the % of women who fall pregnant.

All the other info posted is about risks of problems etc

Wow, I was totally expecting the opposite, but you're actually right, it is per cycle:

Under normal circumstances, a 40-year-old woman has approximately a 4-5% chance of conceiving naturally each month. Unfortunately, these numbers continue to decline the further you go into your 40s. For comparison, a 30-year old woman has about a 20% chance of getting pregnant each month.

www.cnyfertility.com/getting-pregnant-after-40/

@SadSaltye

I feel so sad. I was trying to be positive and proactive but I just feel stressed and sad now. Like it’s out of reach. Who meets someone and then has kids soon? I won’t have had a long relationship will I. No ten year marriage behind me or anything

No sadly the 10 year marriage idea won't be a possibility but honestly not many people marry in their 20s or early 30s and wait 10 years to have children

At 36 the dream isn't over - I'd guess you have 2-3 years or so before really really starting to plan a different life to the one you imagined

Don't listen to your "friend"! Stay positive. Things can absolutely work out great for you!

a woman's likelihood of getting pregnant is no more than 3 or 4 percent

fewer than 4 per cent of women will be able to have a baby at 45.

I'm just pointing out that those are two different things that appear to be being conflated.
I agree that most women will not fall pregnant and stay pregnant at 45 or older (with their own eggs).

Though I do know 3 off the top of my head who did.

Awfully unkind of her to say it to you.
It must have hurt to hear too.

It's not like we don't know our biological clocks are ticking!

Wow, I was totally expecting the opposite, but you're actually right, it is per cycle:

There seems to be quite a lacking understanding... I've seen women on here say they, because they fell pregnant around 40, were "in the 4%" ...... but they weren't in the 4% of anything; they had a 4% chance per cycle. The odds are that chance; times the number of cycles that the couple had sex at the right time for conception.

She’s taking utter shit. I met my dh, we were engaged after a year, married after the next and started making babies straight away. Dd1 was born 2years and 4 months after me and dh met.

I definitely don’t agree with her and even if I did, I would never say that to a friend. It served no purpose other than to upset you and cause you worry. I had my third child at 41 and know many people who have had children in their early to mid 40s. In terms of meeting people, it would be different to meeting very young. I think people have a much more cut the crap kind of attitude when slightly older. They know certain people are a waste of time and assess you don’t have time to waste. Therefore, the people who I know who have met people in their 40s and 50s have had relationships become serious much sooner than a 20 year old with all the time in the world and they had been through quite a stringent vetting process just to get that far!

None of us can say if you will have children or not, because we can't predict the future.

What I can say for certain is that person is not your friend.