Depressed about having a baby post 35

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Had my first at 30 and second at 37. My pregnancy at 37 was easier! (Both happened first time trying). Took a couple of months with my 3rd now at 42 (almost 43). This one has been harder. I have bad hip pain and I’m more tired. BUT I also broke my hip when I was 25, so….

Let’s all promote having babies at nearly 43! An even better idea if you already have children!

Lets promote not being bitter and being supportive or at least, non-judgmental about other people's family planning decisions. I had a child in my early 30s and one at 42. I am very healthy and financially well off and love my husband and my kids. Would I tell someone to do it if they didn't have my situation, could not hire a ton of help, didn't have super involved friends and family, a great house, happiness, etc.? No, but those are the factors that I weighed. Luckily, I don't want or need your validation. Maybe keep your snarky thoughts to yourself?

You need the validation.

Sure, that’s it. It’s not at all that you’re a jerk. [/quot

I give you props for your persistence in getting that validation.

What are you on about? How would getting insulted by you be validating? How would posting on an anonymous forum be validating? You don't make any sense, and you just sound like a big old negative Nancy. Go spread some more of that cheer around. I am actually postpartum - are you? Or just trolling around on here looking for some pregnant or recent moms to attack? Sounds healthy. Good thing you had your kids young so you could put all your time to constructive use.

Why’ are you postpartum posting on here rather than doing something “constructive?” Searching for that validation for having a baby at quite an advanced age? Seemingly bothers you having a baby that old and upsets if all aren’t impressed with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Had my first at 30 and second at 37. My pregnancy at 37 was easier! (Both happened first time trying). Took a couple of months with my 3rd now at 42 (almost 43). This one has been harder. I have bad hip pain and I’m more tired. BUT I also broke my hip when I was 25, so….

Let’s all promote having babies at nearly 43! An even better idea if you already have children!

Lets promote not being bitter and being supportive or at least, non-judgmental about other people's family planning decisions. I had a child in my early 30s and one at 42. I am very healthy and financially well off and love my husband and my kids. Would I tell someone to do it if they didn't have my situation, could not hire a ton of help, didn't have super involved friends and family, a great house, happiness, etc.? No, but those are the factors that I weighed. Luckily, I don't want or need your validation. Maybe keep your snarky thoughts to yourself?

You need the validation.

Sure, that’s it. It’s not at all that you’re a jerk. [/quot

I give you props for your persistence in getting that validation.

What are you on about? How would getting insulted by you be validating? How would posting on an anonymous forum be validating? You don't make any sense, and you just sound like a big old negative Nancy. Go spread some more of that cheer around. I am actually postpartum - are you? Or just trolling around on here looking for some pregnant or recent moms to attack? Sounds healthy. Good thing you had your kids young so you could put all your time to constructive use.

Why’ are you postpartum posting on here rather than doing something “constructive?” Searching for that validation for having a baby at quite an advanced age? Seemingly bothers you having a baby that old and upsets if all aren’t impressed with it.

I am sitting around breastfeeding, which is something some people do postpartum, and commenting on having a baby after 35, which is something I have actually done. You are on here trolling and attacking older mothers. Your post makes no sense given that it is riddled with typos and nonsense, but I get that you think you're being clever. You're not. You sound dim. So I am guessing having those kids super young didn't impact your "career".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it. Some things don't go according to plan and it sucks. You're automatically considered high risk and the treatment is different. But having a healthy baby in arm is worth it.

This is not true. I wasn’t even considered big risk at 41. I did get some extra monitoring in the 3rd tri, and induced at 39 weeks based on OB recommendations, but that was a very conservative practice concerned about specific age related risks. It was not a high risk pregnancy.

And none of that was done with my first pregnancy at 38.

You may be unaware of it, but you were considered a big risk.

Massive eye roll. Please. A "big risk". You get extra monitoring and genetic testing. Teens with substance abuse are also a big risk. Multiples are a big risk. Obese people are a big risk. Its all relative.

Deny and eye roll all you want. It is a big risk and obvious you don’t work in obstetrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Had my first at 30 and second at 37. My pregnancy at 37 was easier! (Both happened first time trying). Took a couple of months with my 3rd now at 42 (almost 43). This one has been harder. I have bad hip pain and I’m more tired. BUT I also broke my hip when I was 25, so….

Let’s all promote having babies at nearly 43! An even better idea if you already have children!

Lets promote not being bitter and being supportive or at least, non-judgmental about other people's family planning decisions. I had a child in my early 30s and one at 42. I am very healthy and financially well off and love my husband and my kids. Would I tell someone to do it if they didn't have my situation, could not hire a ton of help, didn't have super involved friends and family, a great house, happiness, etc.? No, but those are the factors that I weighed. Luckily, I don't want or need your validation. Maybe keep your snarky thoughts to yourself?

You need the validation.

Sure, that’s it. It’s not at all that you’re a jerk. [/quot

I give you props for your persistence in getting that validation.

What are you on about? How would getting insulted by you be validating? How would posting on an anonymous forum be validating? You don't make any sense, and you just sound like a big old negative Nancy. Go spread some more of that cheer around. I am actually postpartum - are you? Or just trolling around on here looking for some pregnant or recent moms to attack? Sounds healthy. Good thing you had your kids young so you could put all your time to constructive use.

Why’ are you postpartum posting on here rather than doing something “constructive?” Searching for that validation for having a baby at quite an advanced age? Seemingly bothers you having a baby that old and upsets if all aren’t impressed with it.

I am sitting around breastfeeding, which is something some people do postpartum, and commenting on having a baby after 35, which is something I have actually done. You are on here trolling and attacking older mothers. Your post makes no sense given that it is riddled with typos and nonsense, but I get that you think you're being clever. You're not. You sound dim. So I am guessing having those kids super young didn't impact your "career".[/quote
]

You got me in the misspellings as I type. Not attacking, just not giving you your validation that you want and need. Don’t worry, I was taking care of my babies when I was postpartum. You may need to talk to you ob postpartum depression seeing that you are “taking care of your baby” all the while calling people names, seeking validation, and getting concerned about misspellings.

[Anonymous]

I’m the PP with the 3rd on the way at almost 43 (and not part in the fight above). Actually my doctor told me I wasn’t higher risk. I mean, I did the NIPT and all, but nothing wrong with me so far besides my old hip problem acting up from the relaxin. My grandmother also had two babies after 40 (for a total of 9 - in Franco Spain). I know women who started menopause before she had her last. We’re all different.

But my point was is, you can find your own right time. Everyone is different and your health and genetics are probably a bigger factor than if you’re 35 or 39.

[Anonymous]

I get it op and it’s not that it’s not a factor at all. Married at 35, had mine at 38 and 40 with ivf, which was a hassle.

But in parenting you quickly find you cannot plan or control much of anything at all. Children are a miraculous blessing but it is very one-day-at-a-time work that is full of dealing with unexpected challenges none of which has anything to do with your age and there are no guarantees except that your heart will break for them often.

I hope you get to experience it with all its highs and lows and I highly doubt the number 35 will matter to you at all in a short while if you do. Good luck.

[Anonymous]

I understand risks go up after 35, but I’m always confused by this idea that getting pregnant after 35 is terrible. Isn’t there a reason we don’t go into menopause until ~50? And it’s not like everyone throughout history pre-birth control stopped having sex at 35. Plenty of people throughout history have been born to mothers over 35 but the world wasn’t overrun with people with Down Syndrome, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't tell if this is a troll post. Regardless, this board is full of women having kids after the age of 35, myself included. I'm not sure you'll get an awful lot of sympathy, but as someone who was nearly 40 with kid 1 and will be 40+ with kid 2, I sort of get your concern (I did start worrying as I got closer to 40). You are in very good company, and at 35, you're very likely to be fine. If you're not, the scientific advances that have been made related to fertility have been incredible.

I don’t think it’s a troll post because I can relate to OP. I wanted both kids by 35 but logistically it didn’t work out that way. I didn’t meet my husband until I was 30. I was for at bummed at having kids at 35+ hug quickly realized it wasn’t a big deal when I met many other women who had kids later in life. I realized I was much more confident about how I wanted to raise my kids, my marriage was solid, and we were financially stable. I had my kids at 35 and 37. I could have done it earlier but I would have still been just getting to know my husband and finishing up my masters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP with the 3rd on the way at almost 43 (and not part in the fight above). Actually my doctor told me I wasn’t higher risk. I mean, I did the NIPT and all, but nothing wrong with me so far besides my old hip problem acting up from the relaxin. My grandmother also had two babies after 40 (for a total of 9 - in Franco Spain). I know women who started menopause before she had her last. We’re all different.

But my point was is, you can find your own right time. Everyone is different and your health and genetics are probably a bigger factor than if you’re 35 or 39.

Your risk at that age are not comparable to that of a woman at a younger age. You are indeed high risk at that age and it is standard among obstetrics in the medical field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been acutely aware of the dangers of infertility past 35 and wanted to procreate earlier but it never quite worked out logistically. Finally we are ready to TTC but I’m turning 35. I’m very depressed.

It is what it is…just go for it! I think trying to start a family at 35 is the most DC thing ever. I read somewhere that the median age of mothers delivering babies at Sibley is 38 years old. You’re in good company. I had my two kids in my early 40s and FWIW have never felt much older than the other moms. Maybe on average I’m 5 yrs older…but the rare mom in her 20s is far more unusual than my age. Would I have rather had mine younger? Looking back I think being your current age would have been perfect. Don’t let DCUM get you down. Best of luck!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP with the 3rd on the way at almost 43 (and not part in the fight above). Actually my doctor told me I wasn’t higher risk. I mean, I did the NIPT and all, but nothing wrong with me so far besides my old hip problem acting up from the relaxin. My grandmother also had two babies after 40 (for a total of 9 - in Franco Spain). I know women who started menopause before she had her last. We’re all different.

But my point was is, you can find your own right time. Everyone is different and your health and genetics are probably a bigger factor than if you’re 35 or 39.

Your risk at that age are not comparable to that of a woman at a younger age. You are indeed high risk at that age and it is standard among obstetrics in the medical field.

Statistically, yes. Risks go up with age. But my risks are low. I’ve had 2 healthy pregnancies, I don’t have high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, didn’t have trouble conceiving, and don’t have any other factors that require extra monitoring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand risks go up after 35, but I’m always confused by this idea that getting pregnant after 35 is terrible. Isn’t there a reason we don’t go into menopause until ~50? And it’s not like everyone throughout history pre-birth control stopped having sex at 35. Plenty of people throughout history have been born to mothers over 35 but the world wasn’t overrun with people with Down Syndrome, etc.

Menopause is not a one day it appears thing. It starts in your 40’s and egg quality is absolutely diminishing and that will not change no matter if women continue to have babies at this age. You may not like it, but you cannot stop it and deny that it is happening. No one said younger women don’t have babies with birth defects. However, it is a fact that advanced age increases this and many of this age do have Downs children and I see many miscarriages. Much higher in older woman and very, very common. You just don’t hear about it and many aren’t even aware that it happened to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it. Some things don't go according to plan and it sucks. You're automatically considered high risk and the treatment is different. But having a healthy baby in arm is worth it.

This is not true. I wasn’t even considered big risk at 41. I did get some extra monitoring in the 3rd tri, and induced at 39 weeks based on OB recommendations, but that was a very conservative practice concerned about specific age related risks. It was not a high risk pregnancy.

And none of that was done with my first pregnancy at 38.

You may be unaware of it, but you were considered a big risk.

Massive eye roll. Please. A "big risk". You get extra monitoring and genetic testing. Teens with substance abuse are also a big risk. Multiples are a big risk. Obese people are a big risk. Its all relative.

Deny and eye roll all you want. It is a big risk and obvious you don’t work in obstetrics.

DP who had my first at 37 and second at 41. Increased risk, yes. But "big risk" is overstating it. You make it sound like these pregnancies are more likely to fail than not, and that isn't the case.
I had several appointments with an MFM with my 2nd that I didn't have with my first, out of an abundance of caution. But my pregnancy and delivery were both uneventful, and DD2 is perfectly healthy.
You know, having children well into late 30s and 40s isn't some new, rare thing. My mother comes from a large family. My grandmother had her first at 21 and last of 8 kids at 42. Her own mother also had children from her 20s to her 40s. Prior to the widespread use of birth control, this was common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it. Some things don't go according to plan and it sucks. You're automatically considered high risk and the treatment is different. But having a healthy baby in arm is worth it.

This is not true. I wasn’t even considered big risk at 41. I did get some extra monitoring in the 3rd tri, and induced at 39 weeks based on OB recommendations, but that was a very conservative practice concerned about specific age related risks. It was not a high risk pregnancy.

And none of that was done with my first pregnancy at 38.

You may be unaware of it, but you were considered a big risk.

Massive eye roll. Please. A "big risk". You get extra monitoring and genetic testing. Teens with substance abuse are also a big risk. Multiples are a big risk. Obese people are a big risk. Its all relative.

Deny and eye roll all you want. It is a big risk and obvious you don’t work in obstetrics.

DP who had my first at 37 and second at 41. Increased risk, yes. But "big risk" is overstating it. You make it sound like these pregnancies are more likely to fail than not, and that isn't the case.
I had several appointments with an MFM with my 2nd that I didn't have with my first, out of an abundance of caution. But my pregnancy and delivery were both uneventful, and DD2 is perfectly healthy.
You know, having children well into late 30s and 40s isn't some new, rare thing. My mother comes from a large family. My grandmother had her first at 21 and last of 8 kids at 42. Her own mother also had children from her 20s to her 40s. Prior to the widespread use of birth control, this was common.

No matter how many times you say it, having a baby at an advanced age is not comparable to having a baby at a younger age. You cannot fight it, it is inevitably. Yes, you are the cases where it worked in your favor. It does not often, go work in Obstetrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it. Some things don't go according to plan and it sucks. You're automatically considered high risk and the treatment is different. But having a healthy baby in arm is worth it.

This is not true. I wasn’t even considered big risk at 41. I did get some extra monitoring in the 3rd tri, and induced at 39 weeks based on OB recommendations, but that was a very conservative practice concerned about specific age related risks. It was not a high risk pregnancy.

And none of that was done with my first pregnancy at 38.

You may be unaware of it, but you were considered a big risk.

Massive eye roll. Please. A "big risk". You get extra monitoring and genetic testing. Teens with substance abuse are also a big risk. Multiples are a big risk. Obese people are a big risk. Its all relative.

Deny and eye roll all you want. It is a big risk and obvious you don’t work in obstetrics.

DP who had my first at 37 and second at 41. Increased risk, yes. But "big risk" is overstating it. You make it sound like these pregnancies are more likely to fail than not, and that isn't the case.
I had several appointments with an MFM with my 2nd that I didn't have with my first, out of an abundance of caution. But my pregnancy and delivery were both uneventful, and DD2 is perfectly healthy.
You know, having children well into late 30s and 40s isn't some new, rare thing. My mother comes from a large family. My grandmother had her first at 21 and last of 8 kids at 42. Her own mother also had children from her 20s to her 40s. Prior to the widespread use of birth control, this was common.

Your argument doesn’t fly then if you saw an MFM to be cautious. You downplayed prior generations having babies later in life but then you saw a specialist because of the risk that you claim is not a risk.