3rd kid at 43.

[Anonymous]

*any MORE palatable. Damnit. Too angry to type well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

My mother had me at 36 and is turning 79 next week. I'm dropping my 7 year old with her later this afternoon for a three-day stay. She is a huge help and certainly not a burden on anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

My mother had me at 36 and is turning 79 next week. I'm dropping my 7 year old with her later this afternoon for a three-day stay. She is a huge help and certainly not a burden on anyone.

Many of my friends' parents were in their early 50s when their grandkids were born. Grandparents were too young and too busy with their own lives, careers, and divorces to help and had no desire to babysit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

Man, if I'm 61 (!) years old and coming on an anonymous website to crap on strangers, someone, please, put me out of my misery.

Ok. What’s your address?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

My mother had me at 36 and is turning 79 next week. I'm dropping my 7 year old with her later this afternoon for a three-day stay. She is a huge help and certainly not a burden on anyone.

Look you can argue whatever you want, but there’s no denying that biology doesn’t favor mothers in their 40s and that having kids that late isn’t natural.

Many of my friends' parents were in their early 50s when their grandkids were born. Grandparents were too young and too busy with their own lives, careers, and divorces to help and had no desire to babysit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

My mother had me at 36 and is turning 79 next week. I'm dropping my 7 year old with her later this afternoon for a three-day stay. She is a huge help and certainly not a burden on anyone.

Look you can argue whatever you want, but there’s no denying that biology doesn’t favor mothers in their 40s and that having kids that late isn’t natural.

Many of my friends' parents were in their early 50s when their grandkids were born. Grandparents were too young and too busy with their own lives, careers, and divorces to help and had no desire to babysit.

If it was true, women would not get pregnant in their 40s.

[Anonymous]

I think some posters are hung up on the physical aspect of being a good grandparent but I’ll just throw in that my grandfather was an old father and grandparent and, while he wasn’t playing tag with us, he taught me piano, took me to the symphony and would take my sister out to lovely dinners. He was an amazing man and, while my other set of grandparents is younger and I love them dearly, they weren’t nearly as involved. I don’t think worries about not being a highly physical hands on grandparent are worth not having a child later in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my surprise twins at 43. I never wanted kids, but when I found out I was pregnant I thought "what the h*ll. " I don't find the age to be old in the DC region. I felt great and I continued to swim on my masters swim team until 3 days before I delivered.

My 70-something parents rejoiced, joined a gym and became 10 years younger.

Kids are now 12 and we are such calm parents and grandparents. Better at this age!

Now imagine if OP goes for a third and gets surprise twins.

Or special needs.

^This. Raising neurotypical kids is hard enough. If you have two heathy children already and are in your 40s, don't tempt fate.

holy shit y'all. your ableism is really awful. There are valid reasons to consider not having kids later but "omg they might be disabled" is really awful.
ANY time you get pregnant you have to know there's a possibility of a child w/ a disability.

Signed, a parent who gave birth at 28 to a kid with disabilities.

Well yes, obviously. Surely you’re familiar with statistics, though?

Higher incidence doesn't make your ableism any less palatable.

We are allowed to hope for non disabled babies. It doesn't make us evil - it makes us normal, whatever label you try to slap on it. It was absolutely part of my decision-making, and 100% the reason all the prenatal tests exist. If no one cared no one would get the tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

My mother had me at 36 and is turning 79 next week. I'm dropping my 7 year old with her later this afternoon for a three-day stay. She is a huge help and certainly not a burden on anyone.

Look you can argue whatever you want, but there’s no denying that biology doesn’t favor mothers in their 40s and that having kids that late isn’t natural.

Many of my friends' parents were in their early 50s when their grandkids were born. Grandparents were too young and too busy with their own lives, careers, and divorces to help and had no desire to babysit.

This is not true at all. It was actually common for women's last children in centuries past to be born when women were in their early 40s.

https://bloomlife.com/preg-u/advanced-maternal-age/

Bonus is that women who have children in their 40s are more likely to live longer than women who don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had my surprise twins at 43. I never wanted kids, but when I found out I was pregnant I thought "what the h*ll. " I don't find the age to be old in the DC region. I felt great and I continued to swim on my masters swim team until 3 days before I delivered.

My 70-something parents rejoiced, joined a gym and became 10 years younger.

Kids are now 12 and we are such calm parents and grandparents. Better at this age!

Now imagine if OP goes for a third and gets surprise twins.

Or special needs.

^This. Raising neurotypical kids is hard enough. If you have two heathy children already and are in your 40s, don't tempt fate.

holy shit y'all. your ableism is really awful. There are valid reasons to consider not having kids later but "omg they might be disabled" is really awful.
ANY time you get pregnant you have to know there's a possibility of a child w/ a disability.

Signed, a parent who gave birth at 28 to a kid with disabilities.

Well yes, obviously. Surely you’re familiar with statistics, though?

Higher incidence doesn't make your ableism any less palatable.

We are allowed to hope for non disabled babies. It doesn't make us evil - it makes us normal, whatever label you try to slap on it. It was absolutely part of my decision-making, and 100% the reason all the prenatal tests exist. If no one cared no one would get the tests.

+1 I’m not an ableist for hoping for my children to be born without disabilities. Pretty much every expectant parent has the same hope. As PP says, prenatal screenings exist for a reason.

[Anonymous]

I terminated my unplanned third pregnancy at 43. Now at 47, I sometimes am sad about it and regret our decision, and at other times I am at peace with it and frankly glad that we don’t have a 3rd. We are an active family and do lots of travel and activities with our two kids, and that would be hard with a baby/toddler in our 40s because of fatigue/money/logistics. One thing is certain: I am *significantly* more tired at 47 than I was at 43. Had I been in my 30s, I would have kept the baby even though imo the ideal family size is 4. We have several friends with 3 who are older parents too, and their youngest children behave more poorly than their sibs and receive a lot less attention from the parents than the older kids did.

If you decide to go for it, make sure you do all the prenatal testing and are comfortable with terminating an abnormal fetus. Raising kids well is hard; raising 3 or a SN kid is way harder, and doing so in your 40s, 50s and beyond sounds awfully difficult to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

Man, if I'm 61 (!) years old and coming on an anonymous website to crap on strangers, someone, please, put me out of my misery.

Hahaha, I know, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

"Lend a hand" -- what a joke! Start training for that century ride or a triathlon. Point proved about lazy out of shape people these days.

[Anonymous]

Another 1st -time mom at 42 . I love it! My parents (on the golf course every day now in their 70s) got me a jog stroller and there is no stopping us -- I do 3 miles on weekdays and 7 miles on weekends with my little one -- I imagine him as sprinter or marathoner -- his mom has done both!

Who the heck is feeble in their 60s? Not in my family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many Debbie Downers on this thread. And you all seem to be tremendously out of shape. I had my kids at 41 and 45, I am now 61 and my kids and I train for our century bike rides every weekend.

Get off the couch! Who could possibly be tired in their 40s and 50s??

Talk to us when you're 71, or 75, and a new grandmother and can't do squat with your grandkids and are simply a burden on everybody.

-- 61 year old with three grandkids who can actually lend a hand

My mother had me at 36 and is turning 79 next week. I'm dropping my 7 year old with her later this afternoon for a three-day stay. She is a huge help and certainly not a burden on anyone.

Look you can argue whatever you want, but there’s no denying that biology doesn’t favor mothers in their 40s and that having kids that late isn’t natural.

Many of my friends' parents were in their early 50s when their grandkids were born. Grandparents were too young and too busy with their own lives, careers, and divorces to help and had no desire to babysit.

This is not true at all. It was actually common for women's last children in centuries past to be born when women were in their early 40s.

https://bloomlife.com/preg-u/advanced-maternal-age/

Bonus is that women who have children in their 40s are more likely to live longer than women who don't.

This.
Some of you need to examine your family trees prior to the introduction of reliable birth control. It was NOT uncommon for women in their 40s to get pregnant.