age and pregnancy - how old is too old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay so I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but want to raise the point anyway. Want to clarify that unfortunately I have experience in this area, otherwise I wouldn't think to bring it up.

You 40+ year olds who are TTC--are you prepared to terminate a pregnancy or raise a child with a chromosonal disorder? There are a lot of disorders that don't get picked up by amnio and may not develop until the child is a toddler (ie autism, PDD). Are you prepared to raise a special needs kid knowing that that child will need tons of energy and may be left all on their own at a young age?

I have seen your same post on multiple threads. Do us all a favor and take a hike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay so I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but want to raise the point anyway. Want to clarify that unfortunately I have experience in this area, otherwise I wouldn't think to bring it up.

You 40+ year olds who are TTC--are you prepared to terminate a pregnancy or raise a child with a chromosonal disorder? There are a lot of disorders that don't get picked up by amnio and may not develop until the child is a toddler (ie autism, PDD). Are you prepared to raise a special needs kid knowing that that child will need tons of energy and may be left all on their own at a young age?

In a word, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay so I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but want to raise the point anyway. Want to clarify that unfortunately I have experience in this area, otherwise I wouldn't think to bring it up.

You 40+ year olds who are TTC--are you prepared to terminate a pregnancy or raise a child with a chromosonal disorder? There are a lot of disorders that don't get picked up by amnio and may not develop until the child is a toddler (ie autism, PDD). Are you prepared to raise a special needs kid knowing that that child will need tons of energy and may be left all on their own at a young age?

I have seen your same post on multiple threads. Do us all a favor and take a hike.

You don't like me; fine. Doesn't change your risk at all.

[Anonymous]

And you under 30's, are you prepared to deal w/ figuring out who you are and what you are, or are not, capable of dealing w/, knowing that your odds of having a child w/ a chromosonal disorder, or other disorder, are roughly half that as of a 40+? B/c the risk of Down is 5% over 45 and 2.5% for under 30. And the risk of autism is maybe 2% greater over 40. I know myself, my resources, and my risks now which I never thought about before I hit 30.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay so I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but want to raise the point anyway. Want to clarify that unfortunately I have experience in this area, otherwise I wouldn't think to bring it up.

You 40+ year olds who are TTC--are you prepared to terminate a pregnancy or raise a child with a chromosonal disorder? There are a lot of disorders that don't get picked up by amnio and may not develop until the child is a toddler (ie autism, PDD). Are you prepared to raise a special needs kid knowing that that child will need tons of energy and may be left all on their own at a young age?

I have seen your same post on multiple threads. Do us all a favor and take a hike.

You don't like me; fine. Doesn't change your risk at all.

I'm sure no woman over 40 has thought of the risks. Thank you so much for reminding us. Now, please go away troll.

[Anonymous]

No troll--worked with special needs kids and disabled adults who became homeless when their parents died. No one to look out for them.

[Anonymous]

If you've worked with special needs children, then I'm surprised you are so misinformed. Paternal age is associated with a possible heightened risk for autism, not maternal age. Those of us who are over 40 are certainly aware of the risks, idiot. There are plenty of us, me included, who had a healthy, happy baby after age 40. I feel sorry for your child (if you even have one) to have such a negative parental influence. Take a hike is right!!

[Anonymous]

Anything that is associated with advanced maternal age (chromosome problems such as Down syndrome, Trisomy 18, Trisomy 13) would be picked up by CVS or amnio. All that other stuff like autism, other random birth defects are NOT associated with advanced maternal age. Even at 45 the risk for a chromosome problem is less than 7%. I think getting pregnant is the bigger obstacle. Once you are, just get genetic testing if you want it.

[Anonymous]

There is always some risk/leap of faith that goes into having children- regardless of age. My mother had my sister at 29 and me at 38. My sister is autistic, while I am not. Statistically, the risks of various disorders are greater with age, but there is no guarantee your child will be 'safe' if you are below a certain age. As for caring for adult disabled children, there will always come a point in time, regardless of the parents' ages, when these children will be without parental care. Most of us do die before our kids. This will be an issue for my sister once my mother is gone. The most important thing is that my sister has a family (namely me) that will be around to look out for her when our mother is no longer able to. I really don't think maternal age has much to do at all with this situation in most cases.

[Anonymous]

I'm not a troll just think that you 40+ are fooling yourselves, there is an increased risk of problems with AMA and the standard tests can't detect them all. I have 4 children from IVF and the first 2 (twins) conceived at age 34 are fine but the 2 conceived at age 38 and 39 both have learning disabilities. Was this heredity? Maybe, although there's no family history on either side, so what am I to conclude?? I also fear my energy level isn't the same as it was for the first two, but that may be the same for any Mom with 4 kids, just something to consider.

[Anonymous]

I just turned 37 and am having great difficulties getting pregnant and I had no trouble 3.5 years ago, at 33. So--I'm already feeling like I missed my window. I don't know where all these women are coming from, saying that they're having no problem at 44 and 46.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a troll just think that you 40+ are fooling yourselves, there is an increased risk of problems with AMA and the standard tests can't detect them all. I have 4 children from IVF and the first 2 (twins) conceived at age 34 are fine but the 2 conceived at age 38 and 39 both have learning disabilities. Was this heredity? Maybe, although there's no family history on either side, so what am I to conclude?? I also fear my energy level isn't the same as it was for the first two, but that may be the same for any Mom with 4 kids, just something to consider.

Look, it sounds like things are challenging for you right now, and I take you at your word that you just want to help the rest of us think things through and make good decisions.

But you need to re-read your posts. Phrases like, "you 40+ are fooling yourselves" are just plain rude. Really, how do you know how informed or uninformed we are about the risks and methods of detection? How do you know what risks and problems we are comfortable dealing with? You're making a lot of assumptions, and your tone makes you sound like a troll.

[Anonymous]

16:32 here- From the posts I've read on this string, I think most of the 40+ women who have contributed do have a good understanding of the risks associated with AMA. I've done quite a bit of research myself and am going into this eyes wide open (assuming I am able to get pregnant- going for my FET on Friday!). There are also a lot of unknowns, and no either/ or answers (for example, just because children born to a younger mother don't have learning disabilities while ones born to an older one do doesn't mean AMA is to blame. It might be the reason, but there are also a lot of other causes both known and unkown that can contribute).

[Anonymous]

I just turned 37 and am having great difficulties getting pregnant and I had no trouble 3.5 years ago, at 33. So--I'm already feeling like I missed my window. I don't know where all these women are coming from, saying that they're having no problem at 44 and 46.

I hear you. I had no problems getting pregnant in my early to mid-30s, and I did have problems in my late 30s. But keep trying. It took me over a year this time, but I did get pregnant without intervention and am now in my 3rd trimester (and recently turned 40). At 37, your chances are still very good, but you may have to stick with it for a while until you get a good egg.

A woman who has no problem getting pregnant at 46 is a statistical anomaly. (OK, I know someone is going to come back and say "well, I got pregnant at 46 and so did my neighbor's friend, and my great aunt so-and-so had a surprise pregnancy at age 52 back in the 1940s before IVF was even invented." I'm not saying it never happens, just that statistically, it is quite rare.) A 46-yr old has very few healthy eggs remaining, and some 46-yr olds have none - that's just a simple fact of biology.

Pregnancy is always possible if you are not in menopause, so of course there are cases of women getting pregnant naturally at quite an advanced age (ie, in their 50s), but this thread almost makes it sound like it's commonplace to get pregnant on your own without intervention and/or without donor eggs in your 40s, and I don't think the statistics bear that out. For many, many women, conceiving beyond age 40 is challenging - as someone once said to me when I was struggling, "TTC after 40 is not for the faint of heart."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I just turned 37 and am having great difficulties getting pregnant and I had no trouble 3.5 years ago, at 33. So--I'm already feeling like I missed my window. I don't know where all these women are coming from, saying that they're having no problem at 44 and 46.

I hear you. I had no problems getting pregnant in my early to mid-30s, and I did have problems in my late 30s. But keep trying. It took me over a year this time, but I did get pregnant without intervention and am now in my 3rd trimester (and recently turned 40). At 37, your chances are still very good, but you may have to stick with it for a while until you get a good egg.

A woman who has no problem getting pregnant at 46 is a statistical anomaly. (OK, I know someone is going to come back and say "well, I got pregnant at 46 and so did my neighbor's friend, and my great aunt so-and-so had a surprise pregnancy at age 52 back in the 1940s before IVF was even invented." I'm not saying it never happens, just that statistically, it is quite rare.) A 46-yr old has very few healthy eggs remaining, and some 46-yr olds have none - that's just a simple fact of biology.

Pregnancy is always possible if you are not in menopause, so of course there are cases of women getting pregnant naturally at quite an advanced age (ie, in their 50s), but this thread almost makes it sound like it's commonplace to get pregnant on your own without intervention and/or without donor eggs in your 40s, and I don't think the statistics bear that out. For many, many women, conceiving beyond age 40 is challenging - as someone once said to me when I was struggling, "TTC after 40 is not for the faint of heart."

Well said. I think this is 100% right. The obvious fact is that it gets more difficult as we get old. But averages are averages. Some people will fall below the average (have more difficulty than their average peers, at any age) and some people will fall above (have less difficulty than their average peers). The annoying thing (to me) is the lack of information -- other than knowing it was getting harder as I aged, I had no clue where I fell on the range until I started trying. For me, that's been extremely stressful.

I also agree that the key is to keep trying for a good egg . . . and perhaps to keep an open mind about both evaluation/testing after six months AND possible intervention. Sometimes pregnancy over 35 happens on its own, and sometimes a little help makes all the difference!

Good luck!