Having babies: cut-off age??

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:06 am

What do you all think about older women having children? I ask because my good friend just got married a few weeks ago and she's already talking about maternity insurance. She will be 40 next month. I used to think older women having kids was okay but I seem to have changed my mind on this. When the kid's 25-30, my friend may be ready for a nursing home. Is 40 too old and is it too old to relate to a child?

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:44 am

I don't think so.

I have a friend who has had kids at 42 and mother and baby were fine.

my mum is in her 60's now and is a long way away from a nursing home!

Your body will tell you when it's not ok to have babies any more - it's called the menopause.

I think that woman who had a child by IVF once she had been through the menopause aged 60 is totally wrong!

Carl44 · Post by **Carl44** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:08 am

very good point super serious

my partner would like us to have a child we would imf no i mean ivf but i'm getting on a bit and that is the only reason i'd have to really think hard about it

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:13 am

My bf wants to have children quite quickly, as he's 36 now and wants them before he's 40. He says it's the male biological clock ticking and he wants to be able to kick a football round with them in their teens! (or play dress up :wah: )

I'm not so sure - I'd like to hang on!

Carl44 · Post by **Carl44** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:16 am

Supersilly@rse wrote: My bf wants to have children quite quickly, as he's 36 now and wants them before he's 40. He says it's the male biological clock ticking and he wants to be able to kick a football round with them in their teens! (or play dress up :wah: )

I'm not so sure - I'd like to hang on!

he is only a nipper

i'm 10 years older but i have a mental age of 12 :wah:

im sure you would make a great mother

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:19 am

jimbo wrote:

im sure you would make a great mother

Awwwww *blushes* fanks!

Not so sure though - I can be a bit selfish, which is why I want to hang on for a bit. I know that the luxuries will be difficult to maintain without my salary and a child to support.

I do want them though. Two - twins ideally!

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:40 am

RedGlitter wrote: Is 40 too old and is it too old to relate to a child?

No. My young boy came along when I was 41. If I had the chance, I'd

certainly try for another child. Assuming I live to the average age, he'll

get an inheritance at a good age, and I won't be incapable of helping

him during his childhood.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:46 am

Supersilly@rse wrote: My bf wants to have children quite quickly, as he's 36 now and wants them before he's 40.

Seems like a sound plan...

Supersilly@rse wrote: He says it's the male biological clock ticking

Eh? no such thing. If he lives 'till he's 90, he'll still be capable.

Supersilly@rse wrote: and he wants to be able to kick a football round with them in their teens! (or play dress up wah: )

Well, there is that... however, even if he had children at age 20, he would not

be able to kick a football around like a teenager! Being older, he will be able to

compensate in other ways (or take up Crown Green Bowling, fishing, shooting,

or other less strenuous pursuits). Personally, I don't mind playing with my boy

at all....

Supersilly@rse wrote: I'm not so sure - I'd like to hang on!

If you're settled with him, & you're going to have children, why wait?

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:28 am

If older women want to have children, why not? No one has the right to tell them no. They just have to know their responsibilities, and that they will be older when chasing toddlers around.

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:31 am

Bill Sikes wrote: Seems like a sound plan...

Eh? no such thing. If he lives 'till he's 90, he'll still be capable.

He means the footie thing - it's like an imposed biological clock. he can techically have children till he's 90, but he wants to actually be a dad to them!

Well, there is that... however, even if he had children at age 20, he would not

be able to kick a football around like a teenager! Being older, he will be able to

compensate in other ways (or take up Crown Green Bowling, fishing, shooting,

or other less strenuous pursuits). Personally, I don't mind playing with my boy

at all....

Nah, he can't do fishing or shooting. It's a belief thing.... I LOVE shooting however!

If you're settled with him, & you're going to have children, why wait?

Because I have a fantastic career at the moment, in an industry that won't really be able to support me part time. I believe that if you have a baby you should look after it!

cherandbuster · Post by **cherandbuster** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:32 am

Supersilly@rse wrote: I do want them though. Two - twins ideally!

Hey Supersilly

I'm an identical twin --twins rock! :guitarist

Red, think about this: when a mother is older, she is most likely more responsible, less selfish, and much more settled within herself. She could make a *much* better mom at the critical time of actually raising the child through the younger years.

It's a tradeoff but it's definitely worth it for many parents. :-6

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:33 am

cherandbuster wrote: Hey Supersilly

I'm an identical twin --twins rock! :guitarist

Red, think about this: when a mother is older, she is most likely more responsible, less selfish, and much more settled within herself. She could make a *much* better mom at the critical time of actually raising the child through the younger years.

It's a tradeoff but it's definitely worth it for many parents. :-6

There's a very large number of twins on both sides of our families, so it's quite likely.

Get it over and done in one go - plus twins are smaller! :-2

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:37 am

Sikes: Why wait to have children?

Supersilly@rse wrote: COLOR="red"]Because I have a fantastic career at the moment, in an industry that won't really be able to support me part time. I believe that if you have a baby you should look after it!

Didn't some City bird have some children and still work (in the news a year

or so ago)? What if you *always* have a "fantastic career"? Will you ever

be able to have children? Hm. Things to ponder!

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:38 am

I would love another one , i'm 37 and hes 34 . we've been trying for about eight years . I have a 17 year old (her father died ) . Me thinks i may become a granny before i become a mummy again

cherandbuster · Post by **cherandbuster** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:40 am

Supersilly@rse wrote: Get it over and done in one go - plus twins are smaller! :-2

My parents already had one son and they wanted two children in total.

My mom found out she was having twins in her 8th month (remember, this was 45 years ago!). She was so scared and nervous!

We came two weeks early; I was over 6 pounds and my sister was only 4 pounds (I'm still eating all the food!). She had to be kept in an incubator for a month.

But as we grew up, my sis and mom and I became the best of friends. My mom always wanted a sister but never had one. She was so thankful that Sue and I had each other.

To this day we are extremely close. We are very similar in many ways but quite different in others.

It's been a great ride :-6

cherandbuster · Post by **cherandbuster** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:41 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com wrote: I would love another one , i'm 37 and hes 34 . we've been trying for about eight years . I have a 17 year old (her father died ) . Me thinks i may become a granny before i become a mummy again

Hiya Pants

I didn't know you were a widow -- how long until you met hubby #2? Does your 17-year-old consider this husband her Dad?

Good luck with the 'trying' -- would you consider IVF or adoption?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:46 am

Supersilly@rse wrote: Because I have a fantastic career at the moment, in an industry that won't really be able to support me part time. I believe that if you have a baby you should look after it!
*Stands, Loud applause and whistles*

:yh_clap :yh_clap :yh_clap :yh_clap

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:49 am

cherandbuster wrote: Hiya Pants

I didn't know you were a widow -- how long until you met hubby #2? Does your 17-year-old consider this husband her Dad?

Good luck with the 'trying' -- would you consider IVF or adoption?

My daughters father died when she was five but we had split before that when she was about two years old . There hadn't been much contact and to be truthful she doesn't remember her father . I met number two (we live in sin) when she was about three . He was a friend of a friend (there was no hint of any romance i thought he was a far to young for me at THREE years younger ) .We got together when she was eight and if you ask her she thinks of him as her father now .

cherandbuster · Post by **cherandbuster** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:51 am

pantsonfire321@aol.com wrote: My daughters father died when she was five but we had spilt before that when she was about two years old . There hadn't been much contact and to be truthful she doesn't remember her father . I met number two (we live in sin) when she was about three . He was a friend of a friend (there was no hint of any romance i thought he was a far to young for me at THREE years younger ) .We got together when she was eight and if you ask her she thinks of him as her father now .

That's awesome :-6

As far as living in sin, I think a good amount of sin in one's life is essential! :guitarist

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:57 am

Accountable wrote: *Stands, Loud applause and whistles*

:yh_clap :yh_clap

*takes a bow and blushes somewhat*

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:02 am

Bill Sikes wrote: Sikes: Why wait to have children?

Didn't some City bird have some children and still work (in the news a year

or so ago)? What if you *always* have a "fantastic career"? Will you ever

be able to have children? Hm. Things to ponder!

I have already come to terms with the fact that I am going to have to sacrifice my work for a family - and I personally think that's a sacrifice worth making.

I have been incredibly lucky in my career to date, and have been given a string of fantastic opportunities that have lead me to where I am. If my OH earned less than I did, I would consider still working, if he was prepared to stay at home, but he earns twice what I do......

It's just not possible for me to work in the job I am in, AND raise a family. Some weeks I do 70 hours a week, and have European travel to contend with. It just wouldn't be fair to the child.

Sheryl · Post by **Sheryl** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:41 am

Honestly I don't think it's any of my business to say when a woman should or should not have a child.

Katy1 · Post by **Katy1** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:05 am

jimbo wrote: i'd have to really think hard about it

Yeah and at your age that might not even do it....

DesignerGal · Post by **DesignerGal** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:02 am

If this woman has a child a 40, she will be 58 when that child graduates, I dont know about you people but I dont know many 58 year olds ready for nursing homes. Most of the 58 year olds I know work and play golf and tennis and have very full lives. My mother is 61 and still is as active as when she was 30.

Besides, Im almost 30 and Im not pregnant yet.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:06 am

I agree, D.G! It's a very personal decision and one I wouldn't make judgements about...although the idea of having a teenager when going through menopause seems like the epitome of BRIMSTONE BLAZING HELL! :wah:

Marie5656 · Post by **Marie5656** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:21 am

My parents were in thier 40's when they had me. Mom was 40 and dad was 42. For me, it was difficult because all my friends parents were alot younger...plus I was a late child. My two b rothers were 10 and 15 years older than me. So I really did not have much of a relationship with them till I was older. My oldest brother and I still are not close. We just never developed that kind of relationship. My middle brother was 43 when his daughter was born...but his was was 30 at the time.

I mean if the parents are in good physcal health, and have a good support system, then I guess it would be OK.

For myself, I would not have had kids that late in life. If I had had a child at 40, then he or she would be 12 now. And with my health issues, arthritus and all, I do not think I would be able to be as active a parent as the kid would need.

weber · Post by **weber** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:28 am

RedGlitter wrote: What do you all think about older women having children? I ask because my good friend just got married a few weeks ago and she's already talking about maternity insurance. She will be 40 next month. I used to think older women having kids was okay but I seem to have changed my mind on this. When the kid's 25-30, my friend may be ready for a nursing home. Is 40 too old and is it too old to relate to a child?

Depends on what age you consider ready for a nursing home Red.

People are only as old as they feel, as they act. My mother was 42 when I was born. She was worn out by then but she had a lot of kids. And I have seen women in their 70's an older far from ready for a nursing home.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:40 am

SuperSilly,

Sounds like with your career, travel, hours, if you wanted children you'd be a candidate for a Nanny.

Women are waiting for later in life for children - Some wait too long - I feel the children loose at times - and other times the women is calm and has the patients it takes to raise children. ??

Several of us here at FG - had a terrible experience - I really think our parents never had the patients - knowledge to raise children. 6 Kids in my family and my mother had no business having one. Individual choice & hope for the best, just like women always have.

Patsy

rachelg · Post by **rachelg** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:07 am

While I think having babies when you're older is fine; one of my friends just had her first at 46, one consideration you should ponder the most is whether or not you'll be able to. I haven't had that choice since I was 43, and while it might be nice to wait till your career can be on hold, you may be making a choice of not getting the option:(

Supersilly@rse · Post by **Supersilly@rse** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:30 am

Patsy Warnick wrote: SuperSilly,

Sounds like with your career, travel, hours, if you wanted children you'd be a candidate for a Nanny.

Patsy

I couldn't possibly have a baby then hand it over to someone else to look after.

I've always believed that if you have children, than you should have them. I had a collegue who has had a baby and was back at work after 6 weeks with her baby in a nursery from 8 till 6pm. I was appalled. Whilst I'm not casting judgement, and kept my feelings to myself, I kinda wondered why she bothered....

When I have kids - I expect to stay at home with them untill they are of nursery age, then go part time until they go to school.

So much of their development is done at a pre-school age, I really feel that I would be the best person to ensure that they progressed at a good rate. (my mother was a teacher, so lots of advice from that quarter)

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:39 am

SuperSilly

I totally agree with you - I couldn't hand my child over to a Nanny or day care.

It's a complete commitment. And it's the stages of growth that you can't replace.

Patsy

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:06 am

Pinky wrote: It's ok saying that you should have them when you're younger etc etc, but what about if it just doesn't happen until you're nearing forty?

As for 'why wait' - that's fine if you are in the position where one of you can put work on hold for a few years, or have relatives that are willing to babysit while you carry on with work.

See earlier in this thread - you have to reach a decision some time, if you don't

need to wait, then off you go! If you *do* need to wait, then you have to

balance the time which you need to wait with the possibility of not having

children. It's as simple as that. No criticism intended now, or earlier.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:14 am

Supersilly@rse wrote: I couldn't possibly have a baby then hand it over to someone else to look after.

(...) I had a collegue who has had a baby and was back at work after 6 weeks with her baby in a nursery from 8 till 6pm. I was appalled. Whilst I'm not casting judgement, and kept my feelings to myself, I kinda wondered why she bothered....

When I have kids - I expect to stay at home with them untill they are of nursery age, then go part time until they go to school.

So much of their development is done at a pre-school age, I really feel that I would be the best person to ensure that they progressed at a good rate. (my mother was a teacher, so lots of advice from that quarter)

Some people (I have no experience of doing it) have to let someone else

look after their child if they want to maintain their other life. If the care's

good, then perhaps the "quality" time actually spent with the baby will

compensate to a degree? Human nature is exceeding flexible. After all, in

the historical perspective, it was normal that fathers went out to work,

seeing their offspring when they could. Children still formed bonds with

their fathers, despite this restricted contact, as when nowadays the child

is looked after by others. That said, I tend to agree that it may be best in

general for the parents to look after the child - although I know that there

are exceptions! Anyway, so, your mum was a teacher? Very useful.

cherandbuster · Post by **cherandbuster** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:16 am

Bill Sikes wrote: If the care's good, then perhaps the "quality" time actually spent with the baby will compensate to a degree? Human nature is exceeding flexible.

I agree with Bill here.

There's a first for everything!

sunny104 · Post by **sunny104** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:23 am

I think age should not be an issue at all. It's a very big, but very personal choice for each women, regardless of her age.

no one knows at any age how their health is going to be or how long they have to live.

The 'being active with your kids' thing I don't get either...I mean what are you going to do...run a marathon with them everyday?? And once kids start school they're more into doing they're own thing anyway, they're not going to want to spend much time with their parents.

I'd support a woman of any age who chooses to have a child, it's a beautiful thing. :-6

Marie5656 · Post by **Marie5656** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:24 am

When I was in my late 20's I made the decision that I was not parent material, and did not want children. Lots of folks were surprized, and were sure I would change my mind. I went to my doctor, and wanted to get my tubes tied, and he said no, because I may change my mind.

When I was in my late 30's I dated a man of about 50 for a short while. HE already had two adult children..but "decided" he wanted one with me. I could not get through his head that I did not want them. All I could think was he was so much older than me..what if something happened to him while the child was young, or a teen. Then I would be left to raise a child I had not wanted..it it would not be fair at all to the child. I ended up going on the pill without telling him.

We did end up breaking up, but for other reasons. But it was almost an obsession with him!!

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:37 am

Marie

I also made the decision not to have children - I had my tubes tied when I was 25yrs old. Yes several were appauled etc.. I've never regreted that decision.

I didn't want a man to convince me - persuade me to have a child.

Having 6 kids in my family - I felt I had already raised a family. I've heard everything, selfish etc.. It had nothing to do with wanting material things - I didn't want to do the ABC's and I didn't want to hand out my car Key's..Just that simple.

Patsy

cherandbuster · Post by **cherandbuster** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:04 am

Patsy Warnick wrote: I've heard everything, selfish etc.. It had nothing to do with wanting material things - I didn't want to do the ABC's and I didn't want to hand out my car Key's..Just that simple.

Patsy

I hear you, Patsy.

I wish *more* people would take the time to get to know themselves BEFORE they make a life-altering decision like raising a child.

Sheryl · Post by **Sheryl** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:09 am

Supersilly@rse wrote: I couldn't possibly have a baby then hand it over to someone else to look after.

I've always believed that if you have children, than you should have them. I had a colleague who has had a baby and was back at work after 6 weeks with her baby in a nursery from 8 till 6pm. I was appalled. Whilst I'm not casting judgment, and kept my feelings to myself, I kinda wondered why she bothered....

When I have kids - I expect to stay at home with them until they are of nursery age, then go part time until they go to school.

So much of their development is done at a pre-school age, I really feel that I would be the best person to ensure that they progressed at a good rate. (my mother was a teacher, so lots of advice from that quarter)

But there are times when mothers do have to work to provide the basic necessities for their children. I dunno I guess I've always been a believer in the ol' saying "Don't judge a person till you've walked a mile in their shoes"

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:21 pm

We're all here because in th '50's there wasn't birth control.

With all the choices now - there is that flexability - control of deciding. It is a balancing act, risk - there is no right or wrong, and is a individual decision.

Patsy

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:48 pm

cherandbuster wrote: I agree with Bill here.

There's a first for everything!

Lots of people agree with me. I agree with lots of people. It's just the odd

disagreement that stands out, and makes people seem to diametrically

oppose each other, when, for the greatest proportion of time, they do

nothing of the sort.... Nothing IMO to get all steamed up about!

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:49 pm

sunny104 wrote: I think age should not be an issue at all. It's a very big, but very personal choice for each women(...) -6

Hm. It takes *two* to tango, you know.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:53 pm

Marie5656 wrote: B]SIZE="4"]COLOR="Blue"]When I was in my late 30's I dated a man of about 50 for a short while. HE already had two adult children..but "decided" he wanted one with me. I could not get through his head that I did not want them. All I could think was he was so much older than me..what if something happened to him while the child was young, or a teen. Then I would be left to raise a child I had not wanted..it it would not be fair at all to the child. I ended up going on the pill without telling him.

We did end up breaking up, but for other reasons. But it was almost an obsession with him!!

Seems like a bit of a non-story... not trying to be nasty, but if you really did not

want children, & he did, then there's only one logical outcome - which happened.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:54 pm

Patsy Warnick wrote: We're all here because in th '50's there wasn't birth control.

Erm, no, certainly not. That's not why I and my siblings are here, anyway.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:43 am

Thanks for your replies!

I have to admit I'm kind of amused by the turn this thread is taking. I wasn't actually questioning a woman's right to give birth. True, I was thinking of the large generation gap (didn't mean to offend anyone when I mentioned the nursing home!) but I also had in mind the baby's health. According to the ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) the chances of birth defects increase quite a bit when the mother is older.

They list the following numbers for Downs Syndrome:

Age 25: 1 in 1,250 chance

Age 30: 1 in 1,000 chance

Age 35: 1 in 400 chance

Age 45: 1 in 30 chance

I know defects can happen at any age of the mother but to me those numbers are scary. I don't think I'd want to risk it after age 30.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:33 am

I've worked with Downs kids. Most of the moms were older.

cherandbuster · Post by **cherandbuster** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:35 am

Bill Sikes wrote: Lots of people agree with me. I agree with lots of people. It's just the odd

disagreement that stands out, and makes people seem to diametrically

oppose each other, when, for the greatest proportion of time, they do

nothing of the sort.... Nothing IMO to get all steamed up about!

You're right, Bill

I agree with you again :guitarist

observer1 · Post by **observer1** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:46 am

My aunt had her first child at 31, her second at 34, & her last at 43. My youngest cousin told me, at my aunt's funeral 2 years ago, that my aunt was her best friend. Unfortunately, she lost her mom when she was only 18. But they loved each other very much. And the family is very close, despite the age difference between her & the other 2.

Also, my brother & his wife had their first when my brother was 40 & his wife was 30.

However, I took a different route, evidently. I was a GRANDMOTHER at 40! Now I'm 42 & have two adorable grandbabies! But I'm still young enough to enjoy them!! :-4