posted
Well, as we have done the older woman marrying the younger man to death this week. I got to wonder as women seem to be having children at a much older age ...when is it too old to be a Mum.
This is very much on my mind having just had to abandon my form of contaception today for health reasons and my doctor told me I could still get pregnant. Big shock!! and as a certain man seems to be lining himself up for a challenge well, I can't help thinking ..... could I? should I!!!
Nice dream but what would the realities of a child in your late 40's actually be?
Posts: 3809 | From: Paradise | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe you're too old to be a mum when it becomes dangerous for you and the unborn baby. Some women can do pregnancy well into their 40s, some can't...safely. I guess it depends on the woman. Personally, I don't want to be having babies past 40 even if I can do it safely. That's just a personal thing for me.
Posts: 2735 | From: my desk | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess if you believe in God and he gave the woman a certain amount of eggs and when they run out that will be the day he choses it's too late to have children.
That's if you believe God knows all.
Same as men can father children way after 35.
think about it.
We are living totally different lifestyles to what we did centuries ago.
Maybe the pope is right? no contraception, no abortion...
But that's NOT really what you want to hear here is it.
Posts: 586 | From: Styx | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I dont know penny, from a medical standpoint, it becomes much more dangerous. I used to do high tech peds cases, I took care of a little boy whose mother had him when she was 43. He was born with multiple birth defects, was on a ventilator, feeding tube, and was deaf. It was very sad case, more so because my youngest daughter was the same age and it bothered me so much that I stopped doing peds nursing because of it. She had gotten pregnant after going off the pill because she had a blood clot in her leg.Even with advances in medicine, it still is much more risky. From the standpoint of being a mom, I couldnt imagine having another baby at my age, and Im only 38,lol. My youngest is 12 and she wears me right out so I couldnt imagine waking up again for feedings, colic, and so on.....This is only my opinion, it doesnt mean I am saying dont do it, just look into it. There are many sights that can give you info on the risks.....
Posts: 1121 | From: Too crazy to look at a freakin map to find out.. | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well there are different aspects to this physical and emotional.
Obviously you ought to be reasonably fit and healthy. I actually gave up on child bearing when I was 39 because of diabetes and the complications of pregnancy evidenced in the previous pregnancy. But some people are physically fit in their late 40;s even 50's
Also fresher eggs produce healthier babies. Ladies eggs are created and with them from birth. Sperm on the other hand are a constant production line.
There is emotional and what I mean by that is you can be to old mentally to be a parent. You can't cope with dirt, messy play, food on the carpet. You have got beyond that and want a more controlled environment.
There is the effect on the child, will having an older parent stigmatise them, is that your mum or your granny.
All the above are subjective and i don't believe there is an age but certainly I disagree with IVF for post menopausal women. I think the menopause is there so women don't go on having kids past their sell by date.
I actually had the memnopause 7 years earlier than my mother and with practically no problems. FREEDOM!!!!!!
-------------------- Jane Akshar UK Co-owner of www.flatsinluxor.co.uk Appartments and Tours in Luxor Posts: 2791 | From: www.flatsinluxor.co.uk, Luxor, Egypt | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"You are too old to be a mum when you say you are" - that is one way of looking at it. One should be very very careful when they start talking about what is right for other people. This question can get into eugenics. There are tons of other risk factors for pregnancy, and too many birth defects and other fetal problems that can happen to people who are younger and unhealthy. So a very healthy 46 year old can have a much "bettter" child, and a better gestational outcome, than a young fat woman with diabetes. Should diabetics have babies? How about $$? A child born to a wealthy family is always going to have a better life than a poor one, in terms of medical options, opportunity, education, etc etc. And they won't be a drain on society if something goes wrong, as a poor woman's child of any age will be. Should poor people have children? Posts: 1161 | From: wo xiang xiao bian ji si le | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Penny: Well, as we have done the older woman marrying the younger man to death this week. I got to wonder as women seem to be having children at a much older age ...when is it too old to be a Mum.
This is very much on my mind having just had to abandon my form of contaception today for health reasons and my doctor told me I could still get pregnant. Big shock!! and as a certain man seems to be lining himself up for a challenge well, I can't help thinking ..... could I? should I!!!
Nice dream but what would the realities of a child in your late 40's actually be?
From the medical point of view there should be no problem for the woman in her 40-ties to have a baby, unless she has certain health problems that would affect the pregnancy. I think the cases differ so much it is too hard to generalize. A fit 40 years old, settled in life and knowing herself quite well can be in my humble opinion much more fitted mom than an 20 years old still wanting to party and searching for her goals in life. People differ so much: there are 20 years old completely responsible and in control with their life and there are 40 and 50 years old completely out of sync... Personally, I think I would be much better mother now at 40 when I was at 20, no doubt about that. I feel like my life is starting, not ending: I stay up late at night and work all day already, I do not mind mess (I have a husband after all ) and appreciate life more than ever. I also know myself so much better...
Wish you wisdom and good luck in whatever you decide, Penny!
Posts: 2238 | From: Mother Earth | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My mum and dad had 8 kids - my oldest brother was born the year after they married, when my mum was 21, and my youngest sister was born when she was 44. I know she had a much tougher time while expecting my sister - she was much more tired and had far less energy than with her earlier children. The birth was also the most difficult, but my sister was absolutely perfect and healthy when she was born and still is a little ray of sunshine today (well, as near to as possible for someone on the brink of their teenage years ).
Because we're a large family, we all pitched in and helped with looking after the younger ones, but my mum will be the first to admit that life was far easier when looking after her first four children than with the later ones - although I don't know whether this was entirely due to the age factor, or because of having a house full of growing children to deal with. My father died when my sister was 10, and the one thing that we all regret that she never had as many precious years with him as the rest of us did. This has also instilled in my sister the realities of having older parents and now she is constantly aware of the fact that my mum might not live forever... Posts: 463 | From: Other side of nowhere | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
ok, you've all answred for me, not much more i can add to such a sensible discussion...My view is the same as most her, that its individual but i would have to say i think 50 is the max age.
Posts: 1017 | From: uk | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
I really can't beleive I am even thinking about this. I think Karah you put into words exactly how I feel, mess doesn't bother me anymore and I have so much more patience these days. I know if I had the chance again I would be so much more laid back and do so many things differently, I do think older mum's have a great deal to offer children unless of course they have climbed the career ladder so high that they don't know how to get off.
Well I think this one is in god's hands and nature can take it's course one way or the other. Why does it take so long in life to learn you can't control everything Posts: 3809 | From: Paradise | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you feel you're healthy enough and have enough patience to be a new mommy again, then go for it!
Posts: 2735 | From: my desk | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
How old is too old to have a baby? Recently, a New Jersey woman delivered twin boys at the age of sixty! I must confess, as a health care professional who has worked in the obstetrical field for over 10 years, I could hardly believe my ears the first time I heard it. Who would think of helping to make this happen? Apparently, no one in this country, as the mother of three traveled to South Africa where she received in-vitro fertilization at a clinic. Sure, we have all heard of the fifty-year old woman who does it for extraordinary reasons. These women confess having done it to save their living adult child's life who required the cord blood of a sibling newborn to prevent inevitable death. They have done it for other selfless reasons such as to serve as a surrogate mother for the daughter who will never be able to give birth to a child of her own. Yet, in recent months we have been faced with a different kind of mother desiring to have children at the age of sixty.
This is a worthy discussion that really strikes a chord in many. First, the risks that accompany a pregnancy for a woman at the age of sixty makes pregnancy a dangerous effort for both mother and child. Many women at this age are faced with their own health complications such as diabetes, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, heart disease, etc... some with co-morbidities that could ultimately impact the development of the fetus or have long-term effects on the child's life. In addition, there is a far greater risk for chromosomal or genetic defects for women who become pregnant after the age of thirty-five.
Next, there is the argument that these children of the aging baby boomer generation are at risk of growing up without one or both parents. Currently, the life expectancy age is 75. This means that the twins delivered this week could possibly only have parents until the age of 15.
Finally, there is a strong concern as it relates to how effective an aging parent will be in disciplining their children. Even members of the 60-70 year old age group frequently describe themselves as being tired. They are at a time in their life in which they are winding down and ready to enjoy the years they have left. As a result, critics simply state that these children might not be as well disciplined as those who are raised by younger parents who have the energy. Yet, we know that many children are being raised by their grandparents just as effectively and do grow up to be capable, functional adults just like those who grow up in the "traditional" family.
Obviously, there is a double-standard that needs to be addressed as well. Men father babies quite frequently on in to their seventies, yet it seems that the public is rarely as enraged. It seems to be an accepted act. However, shouldn't men be held to the same criticisms as that of a woman who gives birth at the age of 60?
In conclusion, this is definitely a morality issue that should be investigated and studied over the next twenty years. It will be quite interesting to learn what the outcome is for those children who grow up in senior citizen households.
posted
In my opinion any couple has to think before they start: we`ve to focous more on the child itselve, can I reasonable expect that we shall be good parents? Are we ready for a child, can we handle this? Just the personal situation...we are all different, mentally and fysically...
-------------------- “Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there.” Posts: 7202 | From: EU | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think its ok as long as the body allows. I dont agree with IVF well after menopause.
But just a thought this could be one of those times when a younger husband could come in very handy for you and any children. If you get to tired he can occupy them!! Posts: 142 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just had my one and only child at age 39. The pregnancy was a bitch and very dangerous for my health, even though I was very healthy going into the pregnancy.
The advantages: more money, school done, career established, some wisdom (I would like to think).
The disadvantages: not as much energy, and my older parents that I am beginning to take care of as their health declines. In the U.S., they call us the *sandwich generation.* Taking care of parents and children at the same time.
My aunt had her kids at 39 and 43, and it has kept her very young. Those kids are 21 and 25 now, and my aunt doesn't look a day over 50 (she's 64).
But in general, age isn't as big a factor as all the other things that go into considering having a child: do I have a strong marriage/relationship? If I want to be a single parent, can I still present good, healthy relationship models? Am I financially secure? Can I raise the child in a safe enviroment? Pay for college? Proper health care? Proper education? Am I happy enough with myself to be a happy and loving parent?
In my case, most of those questions were more easily answered at an older age. Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
Next, there is the argument that these children of the aging baby boomer generation are at risk of growing up without one or both parents. Currently, the life expectancy age is 75. This means that the twins delivered this week could possibly only have parents until the age of 15.
I don't think this is a very strong argument against older people having babies. Sadly, even a 21-year-old mother could get hit by a bus and be killed. Nobody knows his/her life expectancy.
Instead, can we as parents do our best to provide care if, God forbid, something happens to us? How many people (U.S., don't know its applicability in Egypt) have a will? Who will be the guardian of your child(ren)? (*That* in my opinion, is a hard thing to decide.)
Every single person in the U.S. with minor children should have a will, a trust, and some serious conversations with whomever you choose to be a guardian of your children.
And for those of you with intercontinental marriages, what happens to the kids if one of you dies? In my case, God forbid something happens to me, my husband would take our son back to Egypt. This would in effect cut off all contact between my extended family and my son. So I've asked him to send the boy back for summers or something similar, to stay with my family.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My mum didn't marry till she was 42, Had me when she was 44, this was in the 60 s, She had a c section I know, I know at that time she would be considered old, but she got on with it and I arrived with no problems. It must be a bit of a worry because so much more is known these days than was known then.
Posts: 4476 | From: Scotland | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Only one generation back, catholic church predicted to get baby`s as much as God wanted, and didn`t allow birth-control.(Theoretical they still do) The results were big ( and poor) families, often ended with a handicapped child. Because when women get older, the risk to get a baby with birthdefects, is much bigger. Only in that case, priests allowed a kind of measure, to prevent new pregnancies. There is an old expression about this, the priest is talking to a civil servant: You keep them poor, I`ll keep them stupid. So, there were many poor big families, who couldn`t effort education. Situations changed in the early 60`s, by birthcontrol, by women`s rights,by education. Women are able to think before getting a child, and most children are born out of romantic reasons, not because of a priest who tells them to do so. However, I know older women who indeed got a baby out of an 2nd or 3rd relationship, who`s relationship failed by numbers of reasons, and they regret their decesions. A child limits your possibilities, and a carreer. They are stuck to a social allowance and are living on minimum rate, just because of that child. Also a reason to consider: How sure is this relationship? What if it failes? What will happen if I get sick, or worser?
-------------------- “Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there.” Posts: 7202 | From: EU | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just want to say there are links to older *fathers* now, too, and birth defects. Down Syndrome, schizophrenia, and autism to name a few.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you think that thing's like Down's etc were more uncommon centuries ago?
Many defects are caused by x rays, drug taking, smoking, pesticides, pollutants etc etc etc.
So maybe in those days people lived healthier and had healthier births?? Also the men possibly went to hunt, war, expeditions etc, so were not there a lot of the time. So maybe families were not as big as you think. Just a thought
Posts: 586 | From: Styx | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, how do you feel about 2 a.m feedings and diaper changes? How about someone saying to you what a cute grandchild you have? My aunt endured all of the late mom syndrome and raised an absolutely delightful child. She was 45 when get discovered the pregnancy. My older cousins were delighted and teased my aunt much to her anxious dismay.
Attitude makes all the difference and possibly some money to hire a nanny if it gets too bad.
Posts: 156 | From: USA | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Récif corallien: Do you think that thing's like Down's etc were more uncommon centuries ago?
Many defects are caused by x rays, drug taking, smoking, pesticides, pollutants etc etc etc.
So maybe in those days people lived healthier and had healthier births?? Also the men possibly went to hunt, war, expeditions etc, so were not there a lot of the time. So maybe families were not as big as you think. Just a thought
No. The strong survived, and a lot of them who are staying alife because of modern healthcare shouldn`t even exist in these days. When I should live 200 yrs ago, I also would have died a long time agoi, just like many of us...
Posts: 7202 | From: EU | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic