Tell me about being pregnant at 42

[Anonymous]

I had my first at 38 and my second at 44. It's tiring, but worth every minute. I have two girls and they fight far more than I ever would have expected. I think we should have been kinder to our older when I second was born, but that is an age difference issue that I don't think you'll encounter. We expected our 6.5 year old could handle us attending to the needs of our infant, but she just felt left out.

Go for it.

[Anonymous]

do ignore immediately. it might not work and you might end up more committed to #2 after trying. this is want happened to me after MC for #3 at 43 - I was much more motivated to have it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

OP here. I'm really glad you're talkiby about this. Kids of older parents invariably seem to feel this way. Not much we can do now for our son but part of my rationale is to give home a sibling to share that stress with instead of having to weather it solo.

I think it could be a generational thing. Ppl my age (40) all probably had moms who were in their 20s early 30s when they were born, but as time goes by and fertility treatments improve many more educated professional women are having kids later. I think it may be less of "a thing" for today's kids to feel bad bc their parents are older. For example, I went to a small girls school for high school so I have a set of 50 ppl who are comparably college-educated. I know of 9 ppl from my class with kids under 3, 5 of whom have delivered in the last year.

It also depends on what your "bubble" is. If you having babies later in life, you will find similar ppl and it will help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

This is not a reason not to get pregnant. Some people lose their parents when they are 10 years old, you can't plan for this at all.

It is statistically more likely to lose your parents sooner when they are older.
Next, you will tell us your aunt didn’t smoke and got lung cancer so lung cancer can happen to anyone.

[Anonymous]

I was 42 for my first. I would go for it, though you should see a specialist to watch your blood pressure throughout.

I am a much better mother than I would have been in my 20s. *shudder* I also find many parents at my child's schools are my age and have similar careers/education, etc. It's a different world now.

Also, I sympathize with the thought that as older parents it's nice to have siblings if at all possible so they can, ideally, be there for each other later on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op being pregnant at 42 is a piece of cake compared to having a 10 year old at 52

Yes, this is the much harder part. I'm now 57 with a 16 year old, and really feeling it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

This is not a reason not to get pregnant. Some people lose their parents when they are 10 years old, you can't plan for this at all.

It is statistically more likely to lose your parents sooner when they are older.
Next, you will tell us your aunt didn’t smoke and got lung cancer so lung cancer can happen to anyone.

and you will be there to point out that there is no point in stopping smoking at 40 if you didn't stop at 20.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

This is not a reason not to get pregnant. Some people lose their parents when they are 10 years old, you can't plan for this at all.

It is statistically more likely to lose your parents sooner when they are older.
Next, you will tell us your aunt didn’t smoke and got lung cancer so lung cancer can happen to anyone.

but OP is one person. she does not have 1000 lives to live so that the law of large number kicks in. she can either have a child or not, right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

This is not a reason not to get pregnant. Some people lose their parents when they are 10 years old, you can't plan for this at all.

It is statistically more likely to lose your parents sooner when they are older.
Next, you will tell us your aunt didn’t smoke and got lung cancer so lung cancer can happen to anyone.

but OP is one person. she does not have 1000 lives to live so that the law of large number kicks in. she can either have a child or not, right now.

But her child IS statistically more likely to lose a parent while under 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

This is not a reason not to get pregnant. Some people lose their parents when they are 10 years old, you can't plan for this at all.

It is statistically more likely to lose your parents sooner when they are older.
Next, you will tell us your aunt didn’t smoke and got lung cancer so lung cancer can happen to anyone.

but OP is one person. she does not have 1000 lives to live so that the law of large number kicks in. she can either have a child or not, right now.

But her child IS statistically more likely to lose a parent while under 18.

so what? the only alternative is that he does not exist at all. I would much rather statistically lose my parents young than not be born at all.

Clearly most people feel that way; otherwise you would see massive suicides among children of older parents. That doesn't exist:

[Anonymous]

My parents were 23 and 25 when I was born. As a teenager I thought they were old. I had my kids at 40 and 41, I am sure my kids will say I am old also. I would not base my decision to have kids on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

This is not a reason not to get pregnant. Some people lose their parents when they are 10 years old, you can't plan for this at all.

It is statistically more likely to lose your parents sooner when they are older.
Next, you will tell us your aunt didn’t smoke and got lung cancer so lung cancer can happen to anyone.

but OP is one person. she does not have 1000 lives to live so that the law of large number kicks in. she can either have a child or not, right now.

But her child IS statistically more likely to lose a parent while under 18.

so what? the only alternative is that he does not exist at all. I would much rather statistically lose my parents young than not be born at all.

Clearly most people feel that way; otherwise you would see massive suicides among children of older parents. That doesn't exist:

It’s selfish of the parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom was 43 when she had me. I didn't really like it TBH. Its the other side of the issue this board never shows. When I was 15/16/17 my parents were getting old and really didn't have anything in common with my friends parents. People claim it doesn't matter but it mattered to me. They dressed older, they moved slower, and they started coming down with (manageable) but age related health conditions. They were active, fit, and working but they were active, fit and working 60 year olds. Thats much different than 45 years old as most of my friends parents were. Also when I turned 30 and had my own kids my mom was 73 and definitely past her prime. She didn't die till 83 but my oldest was still only 10 and youngest was 4. I would have loved to have some more active years on that end of the spectrum too.

This is not a reason not to get pregnant. Some people lose their parents when they are 10 years old, you can't plan for this at all.

It is statistically more likely to lose your parents sooner when they are older.
Next, you will tell us your aunt didn’t smoke and got lung cancer so lung cancer can happen to anyone.

but OP is one person. she does not have 1000 lives to live so that the law of large number kicks in. she can either have a child or not, right now.

But her child IS statistically more likely to lose a parent while under 18.

so what? the only alternative is that he does not exist at all. I would much rather statistically lose my parents young than not be born at all.

Clearly most people feel that way; otherwise you would see massive suicides among children of older parents. That doesn't exist:

It’s selfish of the parents.

having kids is the opposite of selfish.

[Anonymous]

For a forum that is about supporting each other in our journey to motherhood, there are a lot of horrid ppl on here trying to shame ppl outside of their narrow definition of what is a "good mom." Its kind of ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For a forum that is about supporting each other in our journey to motherhood, there are a lot of horrid ppl on here trying to shame ppl outside of their narrow definition of what is a "good mom." Its kind of ridiculous.

+1 It certainly isn't being stated in a supportive way, but seems to speak more to their poor circumstances. How bad must a person in their 20s/30s feel that they think 40s is too old and that parenting in his/her 50s wouldn't be doable? Or did you have really unhealthy parents/family members?