Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Be concerned and monitor closely don't listen to the people on here they think they can defy science
this isn't defying science - the women of yesteryear who had 12+ children were all having children past 35. you have no idea WHAT you are talking about.
I've heard (I listen to a lot of podcasts on health while driving so can't remember where/who) that it's easier to have children past 35 if you've already been having them. Apparently, the increased difficulty comes when you are trying to have your first.
It would be interesting to know if it's a matter of the body never having gone through the process (as a single factor) or if it's caused by a certain number of years/decades of chemical birth control messing up the system.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My SIL had BOTH her kids after 35 (38 and 43) and both came out with zero defects or delays. The two people I know whose babies had Downs were under 35 when their kids were born.
While it is commendable that your SIL had healthy children after the age of 35, it is important to note that individual anecdotes cannot be used to make generalizations or dismiss the potential risks associated with advanced maternal age. Here are some statistics and information to refute the statement and highlight the dangers of spreading misinformation:
1. Increased risk of chromosomal abnormalities: Advanced maternal age, typically defined as 35 years and older, is associated with a higher risk of chromosomal abnormalities in babies. For example, the risk of Down syndrome significantly increases with maternal age. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the risk of having a baby with Down syndrome at age 35 is about 1 in 350, while at age 40, it increases to about 1 in 100, and by age 45, it becomes approximately 1 in 30.
2. Risk of other genetic disorders: Advanced maternal age also increases the risk of other genetic disorders, such as trisomy 18 and trisomy 13. These conditions can lead to severe developmental delays, intellectual disabilities, and various physical abnormalities.
3. Health complications for the mother: Pregnancy after the age of 35 carries higher risks for the mother as well. Women of advanced maternal age have an increased likelihood of developing gestational diabetes, high blood pressure, and other pregnancy-related complications. These conditions can have long-term health consequences for both the mother and the baby.
4. Statistical evidence: While anecdotes can be compelling, it is crucial to rely on broader statistical evidence to assess risks accurately. Large-scale studies and data analysis consistently demonstrate an association between advanced maternal age and an increased likelihood of chromosomal abnormalities and other pregnancy complications.
5. Consultation with healthcare professionals: When it comes to matters of pregnancy and reproductive health, it is always advisable to consult with healthcare professionals who can provide evidence-based information tailored to individual circumstances. They can assess personal risk factors, provide appropriate prenatal testing options, and offer guidance based on the most up-to-date medical knowledge.
It is essential to stop spreading dangerous information that downplays the potential risks associated with advanced maternal age. By relying on accurate statistics and seeking reliable medical advice, individuals can make informed decisions about their reproductive health and better understand the potential challenges they may face.
Wow you know OPs chance of having a baby with Down Syndrome is 1 in 400. Also, do you know people with Down Syndrome generally live fairly "normal" lives until they get early on set Alzheimers in their 50s, so perhaps this concern for siblings is over blown. The fear mongering of Down Syndrome and the selfishness of people who will not have supposedly perfect kids is astonishing. You know you all have a 1 in 34 chance of having a child with Autism today - can we screen to kill all of these kids too asap?
It would be easier just to reject the common practice of loading little babies/toddlers up with vaccines.
It's shocking how much autism prevalence has increased over the decades, right along with the number of times little ones are injected with these chemical cocktails.
The only place ever known to experience a decline in autism rates had a decline in parents taking their kids to be injected so much.
https://deeprootsathome.com/why-marin-county-had-a-record-breaking-decline-in-autism-rates/
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Be concerned and monitor closely don't listen to the people on here they think they can defy science
this isn't defying science - the women of yesteryear who had 12+ children were all having children past 35. you have no idea WHAT you are talking about.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My SIL had BOTH her kids after 35 (38 and 43) and both came out with zero defects or delays. The two people I know whose babies had Downs were under 35 when their kids were born.
While it is commendable that your SIL had healthy children after the age of 35, it is important to note that individual anecdotes cannot be used to make generalizations or dismiss the potential risks associated with advanced maternal age. Here are some statistics and information to refute the statement and highlight the dangers of spreading misinformation:
1. Increased risk of chromosomal abnormalities: Advanced maternal age, typically defined as 35 years and older, is associated with a higher risk of chromosomal abnormalities in babies. For example, the risk of Down syndrome significantly increases with maternal age. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the risk of having a baby with Down syndrome at age 35 is about 1 in 350, while at age 40, it increases to about 1 in 100, and by age 45, it becomes approximately 1 in 30.
2. Risk of other genetic disorders: Advanced maternal age also increases the risk of other genetic disorders, such as trisomy 18 and trisomy 13. These conditions can lead to severe developmental delays, intellectual disabilities, and various physical abnormalities.
3. Health complications for the mother: Pregnancy after the age of 35 carries higher risks for the mother as well. Women of advanced maternal age have an increased likelihood of developing gestational diabetes, high blood pressure, and other pregnancy-related complications. These conditions can have long-term health consequences for both the mother and the baby.
4. Statistical evidence: While anecdotes can be compelling, it is crucial to rely on broader statistical evidence to assess risks accurately. Large-scale studies and data analysis consistently demonstrate an association between advanced maternal age and an increased likelihood of chromosomal abnormalities and other pregnancy complications.
5. Consultation with healthcare professionals: When it comes to matters of pregnancy and reproductive health, it is always advisable to consult with healthcare professionals who can provide evidence-based information tailored to individual circumstances. They can assess personal risk factors, provide appropriate prenatal testing options, and offer guidance based on the most up-to-date medical knowledge.
It is essential to stop spreading dangerous information that downplays the potential risks associated with advanced maternal age. By relying on accurate statistics and seeking reliable medical advice, individuals can make informed decisions about their reproductive health and better understand the potential challenges they may face.
Wow you know OPs chance of having a baby with Down Syndrome is 1 in 400. Also, do you know people with Down Syndrome generally live fairly "normal" lives until they get early on set Alzheimers in their 50s, so perhaps this concern for siblings is over blown. The fear mongering of Down Syndrome and the selfishness of people who will not have supposedly perfect kids is astonishing. You know you all have a 1 in 34 chance of having a child with Autism today - can we screen to kill all of these kids too asap?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Be concerned and monitor closely don't listen to the people on here they think they can defy science
this isn't defying science - the women of yesteryear who had 12+ children were all having children past 35. you have no idea WHAT you are talking about.
Anonymous wrote:I had my third at 34 (2 months before turning 35). I am extremely risk adverse and had amniocentesis with my second (at 31) and third (at 34). DH and I had genetic tests done with our third (not sure those were available with previous pregnancies). We really wanted to rule out any abnormalities and knew we would terminate if something was wrong.
However, the geneticist at our appointment told us that while we did all screenings we could, we only covered about 30% of possible conditions. There are many other issues they don’t test for. I believe they also said that 1 in 10 (or perhaps was 1 out of 100) babies are born with some sort of malformation.
My point is that while risks are low, they are there.
By having a third, you are increasing your chances that something goes wrong.
All of my children are fine for now, but they could develop something later on or have a learning disability (my third is only 4).
I feel so lucky that I had 3 healthy (at least for now) children, but looking back and knowing how hard it is with 3, I feel we would not have survived having a third child with disabilities. We are stretched thin as it is and all my kids need always more (and it increases as they get older).
For what is worth, I was “young” but my husband is 11 years older than me and was 46 when our third was born.
No where on this thread is the risks associated with older fathers, including birth defects, low birth weight, and some developmental disorders schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and autism. Risks for guys begin at 35, too!
Good luck OP
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Your age is not the issue - you are still young. The issue is that you now have two kids and so the toll and impact of something going wrong with the third would be more difficult to manage. The stakes are higher now and that can’t be changed. He has a lower tolerance for the potential impact of something going wrong. I don’t think you can change that with data. I think you can just both talk through your hopes and fears and see where it gets you.
this. the problem is not your age, which is relatively young, the problem is that there is always risk of undetectable defect or pregnancy complication. this can happen whether you are 20 or 30. it could have happened with your previous children as well, but didn't. you were lucky. do you want to roll the dice again? this is the question you are facing, not the impact of age, which does exist but it's still small at 36-37.
Anonymous wrote:I had mine at 41 and 43 via IVF and did NIPT testing around 11 weeks. I didn't to PGS testing prior to implantation, because at the time it was prohibitively expensive. I have two healthy kids and had no complications in my pregnancies, but definitely went into it with my eyes wide open as to the risks and options for termination.