What's your absolute cut off for trying for a child?

[Anonymous]

My grandmother had children into her late 40s. I thinks she had 13 babies, of which 9 survived to adulthood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My grandmother had children into her late 40s. I thinks she had 13 babies, of which 9 survived to adulthood.

Why such a low survival rate? My dad is one of sixteen, with fifteen surviving and still living today. One was a stillbirth, due to complications in labor in the early 60s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:38 if I were deciding on to have a 3rd or 4 4th.

Maybe 43 if I were trying for my first/only.

What does this matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:38 if I were deciding on to have a 3rd or 4 4th.

Maybe 43 if I were trying for my first/only.

What does this matter?

DP. I think it matters for people because there are risks associated with an older pregnancy and sometimes those risks look and feel different if you already have one or more children to think about. Very personal and individual, of course.

[Anonymous]

I was 35 and on my 5th round of IVF when I got pregnant with DC1. I had already had 2 miscarriages as well. I don't know if we would have tried again if that round was not successful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:38 if I were deciding on to have a 3rd or 4 4th.

Maybe 43 if I were trying for my first/only.

What does this matter?

Having a second child is additional strain on your body. Having multiple children takes more of your energy. The risks associated with having a child and becoming a parents are a different assessment than having multiple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For your first, 40. For your second or any there after, 38.

Just my opinion though, based on what I've seen. I had my first at 28 and second at 31 and was done.

I don't get this logic. Had my first at 38 and second at 40.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s unethical to have a child if you’re over 50. Irrelevant if you’re the mom or dad of adopting or surrogacy.

Over 45, I think it’s pretty borderline. In most cases, I think that’s too old, but maybe.

If you’re both under 45 and can get pregnant naturally, power to you.

Other than that, try away if that’s what you want. But I would strongly recommend that anyone starting down the road of infertility make themselves some limits of how much time or dollars you’d spend.. Irrelevant of your age. Just for your mental health.

The Shady Grove shared risk pool is great for this. We decided we would try within those confines and it worked out, but it also gave us agreed upon stop metrics.

Couples in their late 40s, early 50s would be a good age to look into adopting older children.

[Anonymous]

My cutoff for myself was 35- I had the kids I wanted by 34 and then decided it was a good place to stop. Had I not had that option, I likely would have given myself to 43 or so. No judgment on anyone else. We don’t control this stuff.

[Anonymous]

My OB said no babies after 44. She said it gets too dangerous after that.

[Anonymous]

40 for me. I had my third and last child at 38.

If I was childless, maybe 45 for first.

[Anonymous]

I’m 50 now and I wouldn’t have a child last 35 knowing how I feel now. My son is 20 and I stetted feeling tired by his junior/senior year in HS. So for me it isn’t the age you have the baby that matters but it’s the age you are still actively parenting them at home in HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My OB said no babies after 44. She said it gets too dangerous after that.

Your OB sounds like she isn't very skilled hopefully she refers out if she comes across a mom to be who is 45+ she probably wouldn't though would want their business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m 50 now and I wouldn’t have a child last 35 knowing how I feel now. My son is 20 and I stetted feeling tired by his junior/senior year in HS. So for me it isn’t the age you have the baby that matters but it’s the age you are still actively parenting them at home in HS.

I mean this kindly but you shouldn't feel ragged at 50. If you have a kid at 40 you will be 60 when your kid is 20 and mid 50s when your kid is a teenager and again you shouldn't feel ragged at that age take.care of your health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m 50 now and I wouldn’t have a child last 35 knowing how I feel now. My son is 20 and I stetted feeling tired by his junior/senior year in HS. So for me it isn’t the age you have the baby that matters but it’s the age you are still actively parenting them at home in HS.

You would have had a child past 35 if it was your only chance to be a mom. You just do it and figure it out. I'm 45 with a 9 year old now and love it. Who knows what the teen years will bring but we're looking forward to it. I also think that for me at least, I think I'm a better, calmer parent than I would have been if I'd had my kid younger. That wasn't really an option for me anyway, but I think age has helped me become more patient and self-aware, and that has been really useful for parenting. I can see how the energy of youth would help with the early years, but the older my kid gets, the more grateful I am for my age now.