Honestly: is 41 too old to have a baby?

[Anonymous]

Thee is no difference between being 65 with a huge college debt of your kids compared to being 45. After all, you have 20 more years to work and save for retirement until age 85. Fun times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Selfish...you'll be gone by the time your kids have kids.

oh Heaven forbid that I should consider myself the CENTER of my children's world the way you do!

People fucking die.

You will, too, and it may be sooner than you think b/c life doesn't play fair.

[Anonymous]

Not at all. It worked for our family.

Would you be asking this if DH was 41 but DW was younger?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thee is no difference between being 65 with a huge college debt of your kids compared to being 45. After all, you have 20 more years to work and save for retirement until age 85. Fun times.

I don't get the debt thing.

You save for college. We're not going into debt over it.

Is that your plan, however? to take out loans until your bank account explodes?

sounds pretty pathetic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Selfish...you'll be gone by the time your kids have kids.

oh Heaven forbid that I should consider myself the CENTER of my children's world the way you do!

People fucking die.

You will, too, and it may be sooner than you think b/c life doesn't play fair.

Exactly, and our kids will exist without us ... with grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, each other. If we all did nothing due to fear of death, we'd all die a hundred deaths of boredom beforehand.

[Anonymous]

I would look at the statistics of the health of the baby from moms that are 41. Like the probability of a child born with Downs, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would look at the statistics of the health of the baby from moms that are 41. Like the probability of a child born with Downs, etc.

Here we go again . . .

At 38, with my first, my chances were 1/300. With my second, they didn't even give it a second thought b/c my first was healthy. first a girl, then a boy

In all honesty, the Down babies I've known were born to women in their early 30s - pre-AMA. All of my pals who had kids around the time I did (all working women who married late or held off) have healthy kids.

So while my experience may not be the norm, they are MY experiences. And I can't say I'm unhappy with my decision to wait.

[Anonymous]

Probably is too late . Oh well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, it is a rare choice.
"The number of women giving birth into their 40s and 50s and beyond is at record highs, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2007, 105,071 women aged 40-44 gave birth, the highest rate since 1968; the birth rate for women 45 to 54 was 7,349, an increase of 5% in just one year. (health magazine)"

There are 380 million people in the US, 200 million women, 100K births= about .005%. Less than the number of millionares in the US.
The statement above is misleading b/c there are more, but the number is still tiny.

Many of the women posters think are 45-50, sadly are not. They just look old.

LOL, Whoever posted this, needs to understand that all 200 million US women are NOT of child bearing age, and NOT EVERY child bearing aged woman gives birth EVERY year.
So we have around 4 million births every year and NOT 200 million, which brings the 100K babies born to the 40-44 age group, to a still small but a more decent 2.5%
Source: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_01.pdf

And for the sake of argument (though I dont understand why we are comparing these two %) 2.5% is actually MORE than the number of millionares in the US, which seems to be 0.9% as per Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Probably is too late . Oh well

Now that is profound advice obviously coming from a genius.

[Anonymous]

Did you go ahead and get pregnant? Status please?

[Anonymous]

OP here. Gave it a shot two weeks ago for the first time. Marriage doing poorly but if I can parent one on my own, I can do two. Feeling very ambivalent about the possibility of being pregnant, so if this one shot doesn't work I will probably not pursue this any further.

[Anonymous]

Age is just a number. That is why your 75 year old mom will make the best babysitter. Wait until she drives your baby around in traffic. So relaxing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Age is just a number. That is why your 75 year old mom will make the best babysitter. Wait until she drives your baby around in traffic. So relaxing!

neurotic much?

My 77 yo mom picks up my son from preschool and then waits for the bus for my 9 yo.

Age isn't important; health is, you moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Age is just a number. That is why your 75 year old mom will make the best babysitter. Wait until she drives your baby around in traffic. So relaxing!

neurotic much?

My 77 yo mom picks up my son from preschool and then waits for the bus for my 9 yo.

Age isn't important; health is, you moron.

+1 Too True! Different people have different problems at different ages. Your 77 yo mom could be a perfect driver, while many people in their 20-40s can't drive due to lack of focus from electronic distractions. This whole thread is so myopic. No two 41 yo moms are alike. I can't help but wonder why (it seems like) a handful of posters want to say "no" to a "trend" that's here to stay. Naysayers are so boring.