43 is too old for a baby, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with PPs that raising a child when you’re older is an important consideration. However, it seems like your biggest concern is the increased risk of having a child with health problems and/or a difficult pregnancy. In that case, you might consider adoption. While any child can develop health problems, I would assume you would have basic information on the child’s health and would not have the physical strain of pregnancy. I don’t have direct experience, but my understanding is that while adoptive parents may need to wait a while for a baby, there are lots of older children needing families, and raising an older child as older parents might be a positive factor.

Adoption is not a cakewalk. Don't make it out to be.

+1

My aunt adopted after her oldest kids were grown. The youngest had significant behavioral issues that would have been unfair to the kids she already had, had they still been at home. And...he is a functional, independent adult! But it took A LOT to get him there.

PS - his adoptive mom (his paternal grandmother) LIED about everything.

[Anonymous]

If you really want another child this bad, adopt one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with PPs that raising a child when you’re older is an important consideration. However, it seems like your biggest concern is the increased risk of having a child with health problems and/or a difficult pregnancy. In that case, you might consider adoption. While any child can develop health problems, I would assume you would have basic information on the child’s health and would not have the physical strain of pregnancy. I don’t have direct experience, but my understanding is that while adoptive parents may need to wait a while for a baby, there are lots of older children needing families, and raising an older child as older parents might be a positive factor.

Adoption is not a cakewalk. Don't make it out to be.

I didn’t say it was a cakewalk and certainly don’t think it is. I didn’t say that they should do it, merely that it might be an option to consider that would not pose a pregnancy risk to the OP, and might let her have some information on the health of the child. I also said I had no direct experience. I would expect that anybody considering such a significant life-altering decision would research it thoroughly and not base their decision on a paragraph from an anonymous DCUM poster who said they had no direct experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wanted to add that I'm fairly certain I could still get pregnant. We conceived all of our children on the first or second try. My cycles are very regular. We are both healthy and financially secure.

So just FYI, this doesn't actually mean anything when you're 43. You could have perfectly regular cycles and be ovulating every month, but the problem is that the majority of your eggs (and very possibly all of them) are chromosomally abnormal at this point. Eggs get old. They just do.

+1

I had my first and at 42 who was very easily conceived at age 41, I got pregnant very easily 3 more times at age 43-44, its not just getting pregnant, its staying pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Realistically you will no doubt have a ton of challenges ahead if you decide on another child.

Since your husband does not want a fourth child, then I wouldn’t even consider it.
It wouldn’t be fair to bring an unwanted child into the world.

At forty-three your chance of getting pregnant on your own is basically nil.
Your eggs age more progressively in your 40’s and it is highly unlikely that you will have a 💯% healthy child.
You are more likely to miscarry or have a premature baby at your age range.
And even if you do carry your baby to term, the child could have a low birthweight or have issues such as birth defects.

Best to enjoy your family that you have + be grateful.

[Anonymous]

Depends on your health - talk to your doctor(s) and find out. I had my first (and only) at 47 with a very easy pregnancy and have a very happy healthy 3 year old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm 43 and will turn 44 in 2022. We already have 3 healthy kids. I can't help but want one more. DH is at a hard no. I think he would go for it if he thought we could have a healthy baby but thinks the risks are not worth it.

My aunt had a baby at 43 and everything was fine. I would add that she miscarried late when she was 41 and as part of moving beyond that trauma, she and my uncle wanted to try again.

If it's in your mind the risks aren't worth it then i'd say don't do it.

[Anonymous]

If you have three healthy kids, you have absolutely no idea what it would be like to have a child with problems, which is quite possible at your age. Sorry, but that's the truth.

I had a kid at nearly 46, and yes, my child had problems, and still does, years later.

If I had to do it again, I would, but I knew the risks, and I had a child with issues, so I knew what I was getting into, but I took the risk anyway.

A child with problems will take over your life, and possibly ruin it especially if your DH doe snot want a 4th child.

I know what it's like to want another child at an older age, and hear everyone discouraging me, so I feel for you. But you need support. I was bedridden for the final weeks of my pregnancy, so there's another possibility. No work, no nothing, full time housekeeper and child care. It took an incredible strain on my family. And I was very healthy, fit, thin, etc.

Think it through thoroughly, OP. It is risky at your age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Realistically you will no doubt have a ton of challenges ahead if you decide on another child.

Since your husband does not want a fourth child, then I wouldn’t even consider it.
It wouldn’t be fair to bring an unwanted child into the world.

At forty-three your chance of getting pregnant on your own is basically nil.
Your eggs age more progressively in your 40’s and it is highly unlikely that you will have a 💯% healthy child.
You are more likely to miscarry or have a premature baby at your age range.
And even if you do carry your baby to term, the child could have a low birthweight or have issues such as birth defects.

Best to enjoy your family that you have + be grateful.

Hate to burst your bubble, but not true!

I had a healthy baby at 45. I got pregnant very easily, as I did with my older children.

If it's what you want, OP, do it! But get your husband on board first!

[Anonymous]

I had my third at 41. However, we did IVF so my eggs were from a decade earlier when I was 30. Absolutely no way would I even consider having a baby at this age with eggs if the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had my third at 41. However, we did IVF so my eggs were from a decade earlier when I was 30. Absolutely no way would I even consider having a baby at this age with eggs if the same.

*with eggs of the same age*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How old are your kids, OP? I’m 45 with a 6 and 3 year old. My DH and I are tired. I mean, really really tired. Interrupted sleep, chasing a toddler, these things are hard. I was 39 when my 6yo was born and I’m surprised how much harder things were with my 3yo, who is otherwise an “easier” kid, but was born when I was 42. For me those years make a big difference. (Of course pandemic stress is also a factor I’m sure. I look like I’ve aged 10 years in the last 2!)

Anyway my point is if you’re removed from the toddler years or if you were already in your late 30s when you had your last child you might be thinking it’s NBD. But it is a big deal.

Also my second thankfully was a healthy pregnancy and I have a healthy toddler, but being pregnant in my 40s was nerve wracking, even compared to my late 30s.

Look, I wouldn’t say don’t do it to anyone, but you have 3 kids and your DH is against it and it Carrie’s more risk than your last pregnancy, whenever that was. Your OP suggests that you may be taking a very emotional approach to this. That’s understandable but maybe not helpful.

Just wait until you're 55 with a 16 and 13 year old. You don't yet know the meaning of the word "tired!"

Nooooo! You’re supposed to reassure me that it’ll get easier when they’re more independent!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think many of us feel this way as our kids get older and we start to realize we are hitting the end of our childbearing years. I often crave another baby even though I have three, my husband is on board with it but when I really start to think of the reasons why I want a 4th, I realize it’s mostly because I’m sad I won’t ever have a baby again or that thrill of meeting a new life I created and carried. These are feelings id likely have again after I had a 4th. So my answer is always stick to 3, and enjoy the next phase of life with them.

Well said, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea why so many women would terminate with a Down Syndrome diagnosis. Early tests are great in that they give you time tp educate yourself about Down Syndrome and locate all the wonderful services out there.

i had my son with Down Syndrome at 26. 2 more without at 32 and 38. They are 3 boys who are protective and attached despite the age differences.

" Wouldn't Change a Thing." (check it out)

If you want another baby, OP, and your husband is on board, go ahead. I think the husband on board thing is really key.

I have a friend with a 6 year old with DS and she also wouldn’t change a thing but that child has had 2 open heart surgeries to correct defects, is weaning from a feeding tube with the help of incredibly diligent parents and extensive OT, and just recently started using the toilet, which was also a long fraught journey. The range of potential complications with DS is huge.

[Anonymous]

I had my first and only at 43, after years of infertility. He is fine. But I didn't choose the age and would have preferred to be a few years younger.