43 is too old for a baby, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had baby at 44- surprise after years of trying. Had 2 already with no problem
First, I’m now much more concerned with global Issues and environmental so for me, now I’m firm believer in smaller families. Just in general - but of course third was my miracle.
my third felt like a completion in my life- I really wanted a third.
I had a flawless pregnancy and am same in terms of health energy as two others. I am actually in best shape I’ve been in. Only problem health wise is a bad knee- which started running in the teens so been bad long time.
Now I’m 50 and all great/ my 17 year old probably would consider our 7 year old to be the best part of his life! Actually having hard time getting him to consider out of state college due to leaving his brother. P

Only thing that is negative- is I do start to think about retirement. And that seems to be really pushed back now potentially. I’m not tired - not worn out- just feel like insurance coverage and college - all things with long life span! So as my friends start to talk of next phase- moving to this place and next- empty nest soon- sometimes it seems a bit like our path is much longer.
That’s it.

Now my husband was also not on board- which wasn’t really fair of me. But he’s great. It does keep you young.

Wonderful!

[Anonymous]

Go for it! Especially if you are a generally high spirited person. Def. would not recommend if you battle seasonal depression or MDD (Major Depression Disorder).

I'm an older mom of toddlers and tweens; the toddlers keep me young and I am a lot more patient since I am also not juggling unreasonable expectations. Having youngers in the home really makes a difference in my tweens, responsibility wise. The tweens have become more caring and loving towards the youngers over time and toward each other.

In 10-15 years when my tweens begin their own families, they will have a stronger point of reference than a person who has never had to live with younger kids. I also look forward to my youngers chipping in with their potential "nieces and nephews" down the line.

I am a big family advocate, I say go for it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As several posters have said, it's important to consider how you will feel on the other side of 18 years. Really, more like 22 years. I know many active 62-66-year-olds who are full of energy, but I think I'd be exhausted if I were still in the "active" parenting years at that age.

What "active" parenting do you do for a teen-to-22 yo? Drive them to activities? Talk to them? Help with school? None of this is particularly "active". It's not like they fall on the floor in the store and need to be carried to the car, or fight car seat and diaper changes. It certainly requires mental energy, but truth be told, I am a lot smarter and self aware in my 50s than I was in my 20s-30s. But maybe I am missing something active?

I don't view "active" as only meaning physical activity, which is why I put the word in quotes. I'm a lot smarter and self-aware, as well, but I'm also more tired mentally and physically than I was in my late 20s - early 30s. I'm involved in the care for two sets of aging parents, I work full-time, and I want to have mental and physical energy for my kids, spouse, friends, volunteer work, and fun. I'm envious of those who have the same energy in their late 50s that they did when they were younger, but I am not one of those people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends on your health - talk to your doctor(s) and find out. I had my first (and only) at 47 with a very easy pregnancy and have a very happy healthy 3 year old.

Just curious, Did you get pregnant naturally? Either way it’d really amazing that you had an easy pregnancy at 47. You must have very good genes! Congrats!