Honestly: is 41 too old to have a baby?

[Anonymous]

The vitriol on this thread is unbelievable and sad.

You are only as old as you feel and if your dream to become a parent there, then please follow your heart. You will be a great mom

[Anonymous]

LOL the author of An Inch of Gray is having a baby at 46.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its HS graduation time ....

That's you on the left, and on the right is everyone else's mom....

the kid in the picture is 5-7. the mother is around 40.

That's you on the LEFT (mom at 41). One the RIGHT is everyone else's mom. The kid is the wrong age -- should be a TEEN. Left and right, you can do it!

The little girl looks as happy as can be.

First of all, that woman on the left is not 60; try 77+. She looks older than my mom who is 74.

HOHOHO! Are you in for a shock when you turn 60! She is 61, the girl is 7, and the mother is late 30s. And it is a picture of mom, DD, and GRANDMOTHER HO HO!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:41 is pushing it - but ok.
42+ is too old.

Complete nonsense! I had one at that age and half of his classmates have parents nearing AARP application age.

This is NOT 1965; it's 2015.

BTW, my grandmother had her last baby at 43; my uncle turns 64 in January. He's fine.

Something is not okay just because a lot of people do it. A lot of people drink and drive or own guns or are unfaithful. Those things aren't okay just because there are a lot of them.

Your grandmother couldn't plan her fertility the way you can. Your grandmother didn't have access to safe legal abortions, either. She didn't really have a choice about having your uncle at 43.

In 2015, women have a choice about when to have their kids. It's selfish and irresponsible to have a kid when you are over 40. You are going to retiring just as your child gets married. You are going to be dead when your grandchildren get here. You can't contribute much to family life beyond money if you have a kid that late.

You certainly know what is best for everyone, don't you? Several of your statements arrogantly assume that everyone shares your political views, but I won't go into that.

What difference does it make if a woman is "retiring just as her child gets married"? Who cares?

Calling people "selfish and irresponsible" for having children after 40 is incredibly judgmental and rude. This isn't 1851; life expectancy is so long today that someone having a baby at 41 has every reason to expect they'll be alive long into the child's adulthood.

[Anonymous]

You asked the over 50 crowd on DCUM. They're kids are still in diapers and in pre-school. You need to ask the over 70 crowd, when they're funding their own retirement and their kids' college educations at the same time!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:41 is pushing it - but ok.
42+ is too old.

Complete nonsense! I had one at that age and half of his classmates have parents nearing AARP application age.

This is NOT 1965; it's 2015.

BTW, my grandmother had her last baby at 43; my uncle turns 64 in January. He's fine.

Something is not okay just because a lot of people do it. A lot of people drink and drive or own guns or are unfaithful. Those things aren't okay just because there are a lot of them.

Your grandmother couldn't plan her fertility the way you can. Your grandmother didn't have access to safe legal abortions, either. She didn't really have a choice about having your uncle at 43.

In 2015, women have a choice about when to have their kids. It's selfish and irresponsible to have a kid when you are over 40. You are going to retiring just as your child gets married. You are going to be dead when your grandchildren get here. You can't contribute much to family life beyond money if you have a kid that late.

huh?

You are obviously a moron.

We have college savings, retirement, a nice house, and healthcare investments. How are we not contributing to family life? The savings makes us comfortable. Money aside, I'm home over the summer and off on their breaks. My husband's job over the summer is flexible. I spend tons of time with my kids.

I'm 49 with an 11 and 7 yo. I hardly see that as an "issue," nor do I think I'm selfish. My happiness doesn't hinge on my children's desire to have kids or to stay childless. Living FOR grandkids is, however, selfish, but again, you're not smart enough to see that.

And aside from being a moron, YOU'RE an ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love to have a second but I just feel that 41 is too old. Maybe not now but I bet I'll really feel it in my mid-50s. To those who have the life experience, what are your thoughts?

Sneak it in now, if you can. I haven't read through all of these angry pages, so I don't know hold old your other(s) is/are.

I had my first at 38yo, and had to pair him up with a sibling. My second came at 40yo. She arrived 20 days before my divorce was final, a gift to myself and her brother. There's a completeness to my life that I wouldn't have had without her joining us.

I don't see a way around effort. Life is rich with reward, and hardship. Am I tired? You betcha! Is there any escaping that? I have my beautiful, delightful, loving, clever little darlings to see me through.

My advice to myself (and for you) is to take good care of yourself. Sleep, nutrition, spirit. Enjoy the chaos. Be clear on your priorities.

I'm 44 now, and cannot see myself starting out. If this were your first, I'd encourage you to move on. You seem prepared to do just that if a pregnancy doesn't come easily. Whatever happens, I hope you find peace.

[Anonymous]

Is there an increased risk of complications and certain illnesses @ 41? Certainly...but the same could be said about someone that is 35.

It's not too old, you just have to do your homework so you are aware of the possibilities. Theres a good chance the baby will be perfectly fine, and parenting in the 40's really shouldn't be that hard? Since when is 40 old...I say this as someone in my late twenties.

[Anonymous]

i adopted my first at age 46, and loving it.....so, no, i do not think you are too old. i feel great...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please remember that bitterness, envy and worry, all shorten your life in much the same way as cigarette smoking. Don't listen to the negativity. I had my first at 38, 2nd at 40 and 3rd at 42. Now at 51 years people think I am in my early 40's (actually had a 20 something think I was 38). I had no pregnancy problems, nursed all three, all three are healthy, happy, thriving young children. Yes my last one was a bit more difficult with the sleep deprivation and I do have moments of worry that I will not be around for grandchildren but they keep me young, active and healthy for now and I wouldn't change a thing. In hindsight, if I had-had the choice, I would have preferred all by age 38 but the cards were not dealt that way for me. Also, I think older parents make better parents because we are completely done with "sowing our wild seeds" and "self absorbed all about me years". So honey it is all about what you and your husband want and NO ONE else matters. If you are healthy and in a healthy supportive marriage GO FOR IT, you will not regret it.

Your oldest is 9, so you've not yet hit the teen years. While I doubt you are 51 and look 38, this certainly won't be true once the teen years are upon you.

And older parents are no more qualified than those who parent in their 20's or 30's. It does not always give you an advantage of patience, money or anything else. If anything, I have found that older parents regret having children more because they lived the child-free life longer and find the transition difficult or not as wonderful as they thought it would be.

I'm 48 with a 10 and 6 yo - both one-shot deals conceived "naturally."

We live comfortably in a nice home on two acres. I couldn't have lived this life 20 years ago. We both teach and are home with our kids over the summer. My husband will retire in 5 years and embark on another career. I'll continue to teach so that my summers are spent with the kids.

I hardly think my kids are cramping my style. In fact, they're FUCKING FABULOUS! And I love all the time I can spend with them. We can pay a nanny just to watch them in the morning (b/c we're at work before 7), and she's available to step in over the summer if we're busy.

I love the know it alls who claim that older parents have regrets.

lol! no regrets, baby! I'm home to meet them at the bus and we're together all summer long.

What's not to love about having a good nest egg, no childcare issues, and all the time in the world to spend with my little ones?

btw - I work in an alternative setting with some challenging teens. I hardly think the teen years with my kids will do me in after dealing with CPS on a weekly basis.


And I have gray hair! I'm old!

Flame away, gals!

Where do you live that you can have 2 acres on two teachers' salaries?? (Not putting you down, just figuring out if i can move there!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Baby at 41 means you are 60 when child graduates HS.

Yeah and a baby at 14 means you might be a grandma at age 29. So what

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, please remember that bitterness, envy and worry, all shorten your life in much the same way as cigarette smoking. Don't listen to the negativity. I had my first at 38, 2nd at 40 and 3rd at 42. Now at 51 years people think I am in my early 40's (actually had a 20 something think I was 38). I had no pregnancy problems, nursed all three, all three are healthy, happy, thriving young children. Yes my last one was a bit more difficult with the sleep deprivation and I do have moments of worry that I will not be around for grandchildren but they keep me young, active and healthy for now and I wouldn't change a thing. In hindsight, if I had-had the choice, I would have preferred all by age 38 but the cards were not dealt that way for me. Also, I think older parents make better parents because we are completely done with "sowing our wild seeds" and "self absorbed all about me years". So honey it is all about what you and your husband want and NO ONE else matters. If you are healthy and in a healthy supportive marriage GO FOR IT, you will not regret it.

Your oldest is 9, so you've not yet hit the teen years. While I doubt you are 51 and look 38, this certainly won't be true once the teen years are upon you.

And older parents are no more qualified than those who parent in their 20's or 30's. It does not always give you an advantage of patience, money or anything else. If anything, I have found that older parents regret having children more because they lived the child-free life longer and find the transition difficult or not as wonderful as they thought it would be.

I'm 48 with a 10 and 6 yo - both one-shot deals conceived "naturally."

We live comfortably in a nice home on two acres. I couldn't have lived this life 20 years ago. We both teach and are home with our kids over the summer. My husband will retire in 5 years and embark on another career. I'll continue to teach so that my summers are spent with the kids.

I hardly think my kids are cramping my style. In fact, they're FUCKING FABULOUS! And I love all the time I can spend with them. We can pay a nanny just to watch them in the morning (b/c we're at work before 7), and she's available to step in over the summer if we're busy.

I love the know it alls who claim that older parents have regrets.

lol! no regrets, baby! I'm home to meet them at the bus and we're together all summer long.

What's not to love about having a good nest egg, no childcare issues, and all the time in the world to spend with my little ones?

btw - I work in an alternative setting with some challenging teens. I hardly think the teen years with my kids will do me in after dealing with CPS on a weekly basis.


And I have gray hair! I'm old!

Flame away, gals!

Where do you live that you can have 2 acres on two teachers' salaries?? (Not putting you down, just figuring out if i can move there!)

Mo Co

[Anonymous]

You'll be fine! Had mine at 41 they are going on 13 now and I'm keeping up just fine. They art aware I'm in my 50's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:41 is pushing it - but ok.
42+ is too old.

Complete nonsense! I had one at that age and half of his classmates have parents nearing AARP application age.

This is NOT 1965; it's 2015.

BTW, my grandmother had her last baby at 43; my uncle turns 64 in January. He's fine.

Something is not okay just because a lot of people do it. A lot of people drink and drive or own guns or are unfaithful. Those things aren't okay just because there are a lot of them.

Your grandmother couldn't plan her fertility the way you can. Your grandmother didn't have access to safe legal abortions, either. She didn't really have a choice about having your uncle at 43.

In 2015, women have a choice about when to have their kids. It's selfish and irresponsible to have a kid when you are over 40. You are going to retiring just as your child gets married. You are going to be dead when your grandchildren get here. You can't contribute much to family life beyond money if you have a kid that late.

My dad had me at 40. Yes, he retired a few weeks before I got married. It was a joyous occasion and my then-fiance and I attended his retirement party.

My dad died early, and though he did live to see his first grandchild, he missed his second. It's sad, but I've never thought "gee, I wish my dad didn't have me, because he wasn't around to see my second child." Both of my own grandfathers died before I was born, and they had kids in their early 20's. I'm sure it would have been nice to have them around, but you don't miss what you never had.

I will add something that you forgot. I did have to deal with caregiving for both my father and a newborn. Yes it was brutally difficult. And then it was over--the baby grew and my dad died. As difficult as it was, it was an honor and I would have gladly done it longer. I wish his illness and death had happened even a year or two later, but we don't have that much control over life. What got him was a very rare, exotic cancer that normally happens to much younger people. If not for that I think he'd have made 90. He was a healthy man.

It would pretty absurd to say that my dad contributed nothing to family life because he had me at 40. He was my family life, and is my family even though he is gone.

Your post makes it sound horrible to be the child of an older parent, which it is absolutely not. At worst, it's not as perfect as life might be in Utopia. Maybe sometimes things are hard or disappointing in the moment. But most of the things you describe as terrible are not at all. I'm glad I was born, and while I'd have loved an extra five years with my father, I'm grateful for the 30+ I had.

[Anonymous]

Hell, no, 41 isn't too old. LOL. My dad was 41 when I was born, and I was 41 when my third was born. My parents are in their 80s now and going strong.