How old is too old to have a baby??

LouBlue

Rachie_B wrote: »

:rotfl: tempering i am really not going there :eek: sounds far too much like :eek: hard work :rotfl:

i did want to quote you ,you numpty, but was also commenting on starbumps reply too

god you are hard work :rolleyes: Miss G :rotfl:

You know I don't temper, I wing it.

Sorry OP, we'll go back to the chocolate thread.

buxtonrabbitgreen

My dad was 18 years older than my mum so he was 58 when my youngest sister was born. My parents were always very lively and I remember a childhood with lots of picnics and games of cricket on the downs. the only thing I would say, is that my youngest sister used to get quite upset that teachers and friends thought he was her grandad. I don't remember my mum being accused of being her granny though, even though she was 40 when she had her.
I had my first at 19 and my 5th and last at 40. Although my teenagers like to harp on about how old I am compared to their friends parents, it doesn't bother me (well not much)
I know I am still fit and active and up to the job. Though I can take a back seat now as they only want me for a cash machine, taxi service. And any age is good enough for that.
I believe that the optimum age for a first child is mid twenties.
When I had my first couple of kids it was like playing with dolls and I was very relaxed about it.
When you are older, or perhaps it is the present climate, of what is acceptable. One seems to worry more aobut it all, and whether you are doing the right / best for them. As a teenage mum I just got on with it and didn't worry about what other people would think.
It is difficult for you op. Luck you having a toyboy! .

basilcat7

LouBlue wrote: »

You know I don't temper, I wing it.

Sorry OP, we'll go back to the chocolate thread.

what ?? where is this chocolate... send some over this way lou !!! x

basilcat7

cootebird wrote: »

My parents were late 30's when I was born, and are thankfully still here and able to look out for me where needed! I love them dearly and they really have done the most amazing job of making me the woman I am today.
My grandparents died before I reached 4 years old, so I have no recollection. When at primary school I remember friends talking about grandparents and wondered why I hadn't any.
I spoke with my mum, and she explained I didn't have any, and simply, my parents would act as my grandparents too.
I have never felt like I missed anything.

The right time is when you can provide love and support for your children. As many posters have said, being wanted by your parents and having that strong union beside you through at the troubles and woes of growing up.

I have not had children yet due to a long previous relationship which was going nowhere. I knew that was the wrong time. I have been ill for a couple of years which my attention was focused on.
So here I am now, married, settled, good health, and getting a bit of travelling out of my system. This year I know, is the only time so far in my life I could ever be happy with the decision.

I would not let age trouble me, as long as you aren't living your life to have children. As said already, as time ticks by, so do your chances.

what a lovely post. Thank you so much for that, and all the best for you and your choices ! sounds like now is the perfect time for you !! x

thatgirlsam

i work in a maternity unit and would say it is fairly unusual for a woman over 40 to be having her first baby... there are advantages and disadvantages to having a baby later (over 40) .... i would say don't let the generation gap get toooooo big.... it may be quite difficult for a 15 year old to relate to a 55+ and vice versa
good luck xx

Strapped

I'm amazed by how many people on this thread think that 35 is so ancient :eek:

Erm....that's all I have to say really

LouBlue

thatgirlsam wrote: »

i work in a maternity unit and would say it is fairly unusual for a woman over 40 to be having her first baby.

Perhaps that is dependent upon area? My younger sis had her first at 40, last year, and the doctor and midwife told her that they see a lot more 40+ first time mums to be than they used to.

Rachie_B

Strapped wrote: »

I'm amazed by how many people on this thread think that 35 is so ancient :eek:

Erm....that's all I have to say really

That age is classed as "elderly" on mat notes i think?! :eek:

Jo_R_2

Haven't read though all the posts but the one thing that strikes me about 'older' (35+) mums is that the risk for birth defects goes up dramatically. Of course, many women have babies past this age that are perfectly healthy.

For me, I had always envisioned having babies after the age of 30. I wanted to be secure financially and in a good stable job and married.

So... Had my first baby at the age of 26, still working my job that got me through uni, partner a full-time student but not married! In retrospect I am pleased it worked out this way because knowing how knackering it is looking after my two now (I'm 30 and DD1 is 4 and DD2 is 1.5), I'd hate to be doing it from the start another ten years down the line. But that's just me - plenty as have said have children in their mid to late thirties and beyond and like how it worked out that way...

I think there's plus points for having kids in your twenties and waiting a bit longer after that. One thing I am really pleased about is that my parents have a big part in my kids' lives and I realise that had I waited until later they probably wouldn't be so active, looking after them as much as they do, taking them out and having them to stay.

whitewing

I was 23 when pregnant with my DS. I was the oldest person in my antenatal classes in the Midlands. I moved to the South West towards the end of my pregnancy to have DS nearer to family. I was the youngest person in antenatal classes there.

This week, we have started trying for another baby. I am an eldery person of 35. Luckily, my hearing and eyesight is starting to go so I can't hear/read any negative remarks!

Now, does anyone know where I left my zimmerframe?