What age is considered old to have a baby in DC?

[Anonymous]

I had my first at 34 my doctor said I was his youngest pregnant patient at that time. Totally normal.

[Anonymous]

I think for men, the upper limit should be 65, and no older.

[Anonymous]

Another woman here who was 30 with the first, 32 with the second, living on Capitol Hill when my kids were born. I was the youngest mom in my mothers group by 7 years. We live in Arlington now and I am definitely mostly 5+ years younger than my 1st grader's friends' moms, though of course there are some others around my age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everything is a pissing match on DCUM. There's also selection bias on who responds to what thread. This thread, for example, by asking what age is too old to have a baby, is going to elicit responses by women who had babies when they were older and want to both reassure OP and justify their own decision. So they can't just say "I had a baby at 38 and it was fine"; instead they have to say "I did it when I was 38 and because the whole world revolves around me and the people I associate with that means that everybody does it at my age so we must all be young."

The only poster who offered any actual numbers to back up that 34 isn't on the "young" end for having a baby around here is the one who linked an article where Sibley said its average was 35 and that's why is has so many risky deliveries requiring C-sections. I doubt GW's average maternal age is as high as Sibley's and I doubt any of the suburban hospitals are either.

I don't care if you decide to have a baby at 75. Do whatever you want. But none of your anecdotes and personal experiences makes a DC woman, even a highly educated professional one, who has first baby at 34 a "young" first mother. It makes her a typical one.

You need a drink.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another woman here who was 30 with the first, 32 with the second, living on Capitol Hill when my kids were born. I was the youngest mom in my mothers group by 7 years. We live in Arlington now and I am definitely mostly 5+ years younger than my 1st grader's friends' moms, though of course there are some others around my age.

Funny, I have the same stats (minus living on the hill). Had my kids at 30 and 32, live in Arlington with a first grader and preschooler. I have one other mom friend my age with similar age kids, but most of my mom friends are in their 40s (I’m 36 now). I know some of them started later/went through IVF. One friend didn’t have her kids until early 40s so she is 12 years older than me. It’s just sort of the norm around here though. I find having same aged kids puts us all in a similar stage of life. Some of my friends my age (mid/late 30s) are just now talking about starting to try for kids. I feel like more of an outlier than the people who started between 34-38.

[Anonymous]

Relax OP. There was a study that average age for first child at the World Bank (where I work) is 37.

I had mine at 29, 31 and 34. With the first, I was by far the youngest mom around. Kids are in private school and the other mom called me “baby” more than once. I am sure people thought I was the nanny. There were moms in their 50s with preschoolers.
As long as you are in good health and can afford it, 34 is absolutely not late.

In the end, while I think it hurt my career, I am happy I had kids younger than average (by DC standards)

[Anonymous]

OP you honestly just sound like you don't "get" much about living here at all by asking this question, regardless of what age you have your kid. Do you not observe those around you or have friends? We must run in completely different circles to be a 30-something having a kid (early or late 30s) that this would even be a question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP you honestly just sound like you don't "get" much about living here at all by asking this question, regardless of what age you have your kid. Do you not observe those around you or have friends? We must run in completely different circles to be a 30-something having a kid (early or late 30s) that this would even be a question.

I'll add, I half think this is a troll. Anyone in DC could tell you won't be an "OLD MOM" at 34. Get a grip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think for men, the upper limit should be 65, and no older.

Who cares about the men?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has this thread turned into a contest on who's the oldest first time mom? Because that's not a game I'd want to win.

No, it’s not a game you want to “win”. I get to compete for the honor of oldest mom because I went through a series of disruptive job changes in my mid-thirties and then I had multiple miscarriages. I had both my kids after I turned 38 and we’re having a great time!

[Anonymous]

At 32 you’re a teen mom around these parts.

[Anonymous]

I had my first at 36, and my second at 39. A friend of mine had a third baby at 43.

[Anonymous]

45, but I don’t think anyone would remark or notice.

I had mine at 29 and 30 and have been treated like a teen mom. It’s bizarre.

[Anonymous]

40 would be old for your first.

I had kids at 30, 32 and 38. I felt like a young mom for my first 2 and average mom for my third.

I also think it is how you look. Some women in their 40s still look fit. Others in mid 40s look 50s with wrinkles.

[Anonymous]

Why do you care what strangers in the internet think about being old and a mom? Who’s life is it?