Is 40 too old for a baby?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just turned 39 and am thinking of trying for #4 .... I’m actually so surprised of the number of people who are on this thread that are so against babies for the +40 crowd. With three kids in school in DC it’s very apparent lots of people have babies into their 40s here because I am usually one of the youngest parents - had all my kids ages 30-34).

+1, I'm your twin! How are you going to decide about #4?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having babies in your early to mid 40s doesn’t seem bad. It’s dealing with school aged kids in your 50s and being close to/in your 60s when they graduate high school.

I'm super healthy, I realize this could change, but I don't feel that I'm missing out on retirement fun as I literally had 20 years of doing whatever the heck I wanted. I've travelled a ton...had my kids at 42 and 44...its fine. I'm tired...but I've been tired since 1996, just for different reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I'll say this. Being fifty-EIGHT when you become an empty nester (...optimistically.), not to mention raising teenagers in your mid to late 50s, is too old. Your peers will all be becoming grandparents by that point! You'll be exhausted and checked out, and it's not fair to your child either.

Whatever, I had nobody to take care of for my entire 20s and 30s...I really don't care if I'm "old" when I become an empty nester, I've travelled a ton, had a blast...its fine. Also, staying healthy goes a long way. My child will be fine, as will OP's if she has another one.

I don't understand the old mom vs. young mom drama. There are definite benefits to having kids younger, however, there are also many benefits to having kids older. It does not have to be a competition among moms. I did not marry until 36, had my first child at 40 and second at 41. I feel great, I love being a mom, I would not change a thing. I lived my life to the fullest when I was in my 20's and 30's, but I love this new era in my life. Don't allow anyone on an anonymous message board tell you that you are too old and give you "medical facts". Talk to your doctor, talk to your husband and make the best decision for your family.

+100000

Signed, mom at 39 and 41 to two healthy, lovely kids, and not feeling old at 46

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having a baby in your early 40s doesn't seem bad, but I can't imagine dealing with teenagers well into your 50s.

Maybe I am incredibly naive, but could someone explain why this would be so terrible? I was a teenager, and all I remember doing was reading and brooding, and dreaming about one day leaving home and going to college. Then again, I was a girl and an introvert and saved up all my rebellion for the college campus, as did all of my fellow nerd friends. What about having teenagers when I am in my 30s or 40s is better than when I am in my 50s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For me it is. 38 with a newborn. I don't think I could do this at 40

what difference is two years going to make?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a baby in your early 40s doesn't seem bad, but I can't imagine dealing with teenagers well into your 50s.

Maybe I am incredibly naive, but could someone explain why this would be so terrible? I was a teenager, and all I remember doing was reading and brooding, and dreaming about one day leaving home and going to college. Then again, I was a girl and an introvert and saved up all my rebellion for the college campus, as did all of my fellow nerd friends. What about having teenagers when I am in my 30s or 40s is better than when I am in my 50s?

Because of the sleepless nights and emotional drama -- it's harder to deal with when you are older, tireder, and have less overall energy.

[Anonymous]

Only you can answer that question, OP. I’m 39 and my youngest is 7. There is NO WAY I’d want a new born right now. I don’t ever want to go back to not sleeping!

[Anonymous]

OP-come back and update us.

[Anonymous]

My wife was 44 when our child was born. He's in elementary school now and we're doing just fine. We tried for another about 2-3 years later without success but would have been thrilled if we had succeeded.

Sure, you might not have as much physical energy but there's a lot to be said for experience, patience, and perspective.

[Anonymous]

I was 39, when I had my first baby. Now at 40, almost 41, I would like to try for the second one. I’m worried about people judging me, saying I’m too old. Even though, I didn’t worry about it 2 years ago...

[Anonymous]

I had my first at 42 with IVF and then a surprise baby at 46. It is great awesome and frustrating often but nothing to do with my age. Only theirs. Go for it.

[Anonymous]

I'm 50 with a 17 year old and a 14 year old. No way would I have a baby at 40.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm 50 with a 17 year old and a 14 year old. No way would I have a baby at 40.

Hmm, but you had one at 36? Really not that different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm 50 with a 17 year old and a 14 year old. No way would I have a baby at 40.

Hmm, but you had one at 36? Really not that different.

And 36 was too old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a baby in your early 40s doesn't seem bad, but I can't imagine dealing with teenagers well into your 50s.

Maybe I am incredibly naive, but could someone explain why this would be so terrible? I was a teenager, and all I remember doing was reading and brooding, and dreaming about one day leaving home and going to college. Then again, I was a girl and an introvert and saved up all my rebellion for the college campus, as did all of my fellow nerd friends. What about having teenagers when I am in my 30s or 40s is better than when I am in my 50s?

Because of the sleepless nights and emotional drama -- it's harder to deal with when you are older, tireder, and have less overall energy.

Tireder? TIREDER? Good lord.