# If you were in my shoes....



## flashy09

I am 33, almost 34, and have a 7 month old baby girl. I would like another child, but ideally in about 4 yrs. However that would put me at 37/38. If I got pregnant in the next few months, I would deliver at 34. The big 3-5 weighs heavily in my mind - advanced maternal age! (lol) - and I am very nervous about complications, down syndrome, etc. So I am not sure whether to go ahead and start trying to get pregnant soon and aim for delivery at 34 or at most 35 and have kids a lot closer in age than I want or whether to forget the numbers and hope it all goes well at 38. 

If you are 37 or 38, do you wish you were younger and not having to worry about or deal with problems? Would you advise me to not twiddle my thumbs and really try to avoid being pregnant 35 and over? Or should I wait for my ideal spacing?

Thanks for any input. I have no health issues and had an easy pregnancy (conceived at 32, gave birth at 33) first time around.


----------



## Number3forme

It's a tricky one, but if you are certain that you want another child, and have the energy and resources to look after a second, then I would be inclined to start ttc sooner rather than later. I was 31 when I had my first, and similarly, wasn't sure when to try for number 2. I fell pregnant when ds was 8 months old by accident and sadly had an early miscarriage, it then took 6 months to conceive number 2. I do think there is a big difference between ttc in your early 30's to post 35. There are perks to having two close together in age, although it is hard work too! Also bear in mind you might want a third...you never know and having two earlier would leave more time for this. It's a tough decision but better to have two earlier than planned than yearn for a second that is hard to conceive.....just my thoughts anyway. Good luck!:flower:


----------



## Darklady

1/ My fertility clinic told me that they've bumped "advanced maternal age" from 35 to 37 because they simply weren't seeing the "increased risk" events happening until after 37 anyway. But they might just have been talking out their butts, too, since I was 36 at the time and they wanted my money for another ART procedure :p

2/ Personally, and this is EXTREMELY coloured by my history... I wouldn't wait. You never know how long it'll take to get pregnant, or if you'll manage to stay pregnant... just because you've never had a problem doesn't necessarily mean that you never will, you know?

But then again... I look at my friend... she was 36 when she delivered her first... now she's got 3 beautiful kids with absolutely no health issues. And of all the women I know who've had kids after 35 (and there are a LOT), only 1 had any of the issues that they talk about with 'advanced maternal age', and that was 40 years ago.

It's all a gamble any way you slice it... it's just a question of which set of risks are you happier with?


----------



## SabrinaKat

As a much older first-time mum (44 when I had LO!), I wouldn't be so concerned about the statistics, etc., of trying at 35 or 38 -- if you are healthy, it really shouldn't be a problem. In my case, I did have a mc at 41, but in pre-IVF blood work, it was discovered that I had an underactive thyroid and almost immediately after the correct dosage was prescribed, I got pregnant naturally at 43 with a very healthy LO. Maybe have a full check-up (thyroid, iron, etc) in another year or so, and then, keep a check on your weight, etc? 

Finally, and for any 'older mums', please don't believe all the statistics -- if there is nothing fundamentally wrong with you, it is possible to be successful in your late 30s/early 40s. I only wish I had realised I wanted children younger (doctors had said PCOS would make it difficult), but am delighted to have proved them all wrong at 43/44 and I'm just an ordinary person (e.g. not Carla Bruni or Halle Berry), etc.

best wishes


----------



## Seity

I didn't even have my first until I was 36. I wouldn't have wanted one any sooner and had the easiest most complication free pregnancy and a super healthy son. I even got right back into my pre-pregnancy shape fairly quickly by working out. Pregnant with #2 at 39 and having another fairly easy pregnancy. If you keep yourself healthy, I don't see any reason not to wait your 4 years for #2. Things can happen at any age, so I don't really go for that whole 'advanced maternal age' stuff. Especially since I come from a long line of women who had perfectly normal, healthy pregnancies at 39/40 years old. We weren't even trying for this one. Had sex once and *bam* pregnant.


----------



## Larkspur

I'm 36, pregnant with my first. 

From my own observations, I'd say there is probably more chance you will have trouble conceiving the second than there is that you will have to deal with complications or genetic disorders. Not a single one of my friends who fell pregnant after 35 (and there are a lot of them, including some who had high-risk scans) has had a child with complications, even at 42 or 43. 

On the other hand, I know quite a few women who are struggling to actually get pregnant for a second time. Both my cousins had one child and could not get pregnant again/keep a pregnancy after that. If you would be more comfortable with a bigger gap between children, and are healthy, you may well not have problems, but I would focus on staying aware of your basic fertility level rather than worrying about the actually-quite-unlikely event of complications.


----------



## vintage67

If it were me in your place, I would split the difference so to speak and try in about 2 years. I had my first child at 36, and my second at 44. It took about 2 years of trying to get the first one and 4 years and 3 miscarriages to get the second one.

Everyone is different, and the rate at which fertility declines with age does vary amont women. I know plenty of women that have gotten pregnant very easily between 35-39.

Over 40 can get a bit trickier because of miscarriage rate. Going through miscarriages is agonizing.

I feel very lucky to have conceived and given birth to 2 healthy children; one over the age of 35 and one over the age of 40. Easy-peasy for some; next to impossible for others. I did it, but it wasn't easy. But I do have underlying medical conditions.

Don't let the birth defect things scare you because the odds stay on your side until well into your 40's.


----------



## chattyB

This is #4 for me, I'm 35 and will be 36 when I deliver. I have a 1:11 chance that my baby has downs syndrome. The average age of a woman having a child with downs syndrome is actually 28. Although the risk does raise slightly as you pass 35 years, it's not a massive leap - you could have a risk of 1:10000 or a risk of 1:5 ... Either way, it's just a screening test result and you could still be "the one".

Hubby and I had decided that he would undergo a vasectomy reversal so that we could have one more baby - and we would have carried on trying for our baby for a lot longer (TTC for a year before our BFP). The risks DO increase as you get older but your chances of having a baby without chromosomal problems vastly outweighs the slight chance of a baby with chromosomal problems.

We are naturally keeping everything crossed that our baby is fine but whatever the results of the amnio may be, it won't make a difference to whether we continue the pregnancy.

Good luck in whatever you decide :)


----------



## flashy09

chattyB said:


> This is #4 for me, I'm 35 and will be 36 when I deliver. I have a 1:11 chance that my baby has downs syndrome. The average age of a woman having a child with downs syndrome is actually 28. Although the risk does raise slightly as you pass 35 years, it's not a massive leap - you could have a risk of 1:10000 or a risk of 1:5 ... Either way, it's just a screening test result and you could still be "the one".
> 
> Hubby and I had decided that he would undergo a vasectomy reversal so that we could have one more baby - and we would have carried on trying for our baby for a lot longer (TTC for a year before our BFP). The risks DO increase as you get older but your chances of having a baby without chromosomal problems vastly outweighs the slight chance of a baby with chromosomal problems.
> 
> We are naturally keeping everything crossed that our baby is fine but whatever the results of the amnio may be, it won't make a difference to whether we continue the pregnancy.
> 
> Good luck in whatever you decide :)

Thanks so much and I will be keeping my fingers crossed for you. If you don't mind me asking, did you have a high nuchal fold measurement or high risk of DS with any of your other children? Do you feel like the heightened risk with this pregnancy is age related or just chance? 

Getting away from chromosomal problems, does this pregnancy feel harder in any way physically? Has your blood pressure been higher or have you gained more weight than when you were younger?

What is the spacing of your other 3? If 2 yrs or closer together, was that a ton of work? Did you feel you were able to enjoy each child as an individual? I kind of want to focus on my baby completely and then when she is older and starting kindergarten I would like to have another baby and start over...I am nervous about two so close in age that I sort of group them together and don't spend much quality time with each.

Sorry for all the questions!


----------



## vintage67

Flashy, I know that wasn't aimed at me per se, but there are 8 years between my boys. I would have preferred 3-5 years, but I had such a hard time....

I definitely see what you mean about worrying about divided time. When I had Ethan, I just fell in love. I made him my everything. (which is one of the reasons I contemplated suicide when I wasn't able to breastfeed him). He and I were and are so incredibly close. He is 8 and happily screams "Mommy! Mommy!" and runs to me. I have been lucky that he loves the new baby so much. He actually _cried_ for a sibling for years and it was one of the reasons we pressed on so hard even after the miscarriages (which we shielded him from, which was not easy).

There are some advantages to an age gap. Ethan is very self sufficient and can be a good helper. At my age, I don't have the energy I once did and I don't think I could physically handle chasing after two little ones. For younger women, this sometimes works out great for them.

I treasure those years I had with Ethan.


----------



## Number3forme

Just to add something else, in relation to another of your questions....my NT result with DS#2 was 1:175....three years later and the test result for this baby came back as 1:34000 which I was so shocked by as I has expected the risk to be higher. Just goes to show that sometimes increased maternal age does not have a negative impact on these results!


----------



## flashy09

vintage67 said:


> Flashy, I know that wasn't aimed at me per se, but there are 8 years between my boys. I would have preferred 3-5 years, but I had such a hard time....
> 
> I definitely see what you mean about worrying about divided time. When I had Ethan, I just fell in love. I made him my everything. (which is one of the reasons I contemplated suicide when I wasn't able to breastfeed him). He and I were and are so incredibly close. He is 8 and happily screams "Mommy! Mommy!" and runs to me. I have been lucky that he loves the new baby so much. He actually _cried_ for a sibling for years and it was one of the reasons we pressed on so hard even after the miscarriages (which we shielded him from, which was not easy).
> 
> There are some advantages to an age gap. Ethan is very self sufficient and can be a good helper. At my age, I don't have the energy I once did and I don't think I could physically handle chasing after two little ones. For younger women, this sometimes works out great for them.
> 
> I treasure those years I had with Ethan.

I worry about my energy as well - it seems like with a 2 yr old and a newborn there would be absolutely no breaks! Ugh, I am so conflicted. Sometimes I think just one would be fine, but I don't want to regret it when it's too late. Wish I was 25 and could just relax about it all for a few years without any biological clock pressure!


----------



## Bats11

Ive just had my third at the age of 37 & I had only one complication when pregnant and that was gestational diabetes, I was able to manage it through diet. 

This third time was my best birth experience by far, Im so inlove and I wouldnt change any of it for anything, I love being an older mum! And the best part is my other two girls are at a great age where they can help & they really enjoy doing so. 

So if you want to wait, then I'd say dont stress and wait, there is no rush :thumbup:, all the best xx


----------



## Squiggy

I'm 34 and just keep putting off pregnancy because of financial strife. However, the fact that my first child will not be born until I'm 35 or OLDER scares the crap out of me. The chances of down syndrome only increase by a small percentage, so I'm not worried as much about that as I am about my body changing with age. 
I never wanted to start my family at 40. I wanted to start my family at 30. Yet here I am. I'm not happy about it. I just feel that I want more for my baby when it comes. I have nothing to offer right now and I don't think it will make me happy to struggle that much more. It would be so much more added stress. I have no choice but to wait. 

Ya know. Things have changed. 200 years ago if you weren't married by the time you were 20 you were an old maid. But also, they really only lived to be about 40; if they even made it that far. Today, we live longer, our bodies are different. We can have healthy babies well into our 40's. And if we have good medical and can afford quality pre-natal then we have nothing to lose.


----------



## Terangela

I'm 35 having my 4th. I had a plan... Then life and infertility happened. I was married at 21 and had wanted my 1st at 23/24 and my second at 25/26 and be done. However by 24 I was divorced and after almost 2 years not on b/c and not having AF once I knew I had infertility issues. Got remarried and it took over a year to get into the fertility specialist. I was 28 when I had our first, 30 when I had our second... Thought we were done, gave away all the baby stuff... Then I started wanting a third when our second was 3. So I was 33 when we had him. Our first 3 were all fertility med babies. This time I am 35... My DH better go for a snip job ASAP! I think most of my tired and lack of energy is more due to having 3 kids to look after rather than age. I think if I were just having my first or second I think I would have more energy and wouldn't think twice about it. Things don't always go according to plan. 

My DH's mom's mom was 38 when she had her first, 40 with her second, 42 with her 3rd. His dad's mom had 9 with her last 3 in her 40's the last she was 44. My SIL just had her 2nd at 40 1/2. All healthy kids. My other SIL had her 1st at 38.


----------



## shanny

I say go somewhere in the middle .........I am 39 and pregnant again and have never had a problem conceiving just keeping up with all the kids!!!!!!!! never been high risk for anything either........


----------



## trying4four

Where I live advanced maternal age has been pushed back to 40 :winkwink:
I'd probably wait and try when your little one is 12-18 months.
My dr told me that you don't just wake up on your 35th birthday and all your eggs dried up overnight, so don't let the number freak you out too much.
Best of luck to you!!


----------



## Ripley

I'm 38 and 20 weeks with my first. It's going great! I do not wish I was younger. I did worry if TTC would take too long. But it only took 4 months. Every woman is different. I did do fertility testing at 3mts of TTC. Those numbers were great. So maybe I'd wait but do fertility testing during my yearly test with the OB to just watch the numbers.


----------



## J22

It's a tricky one but I'd be inclined to say go for it sooner rather than later. I'll be 39 in the next couple of months and I'm at 9 weeks with #1 but while ttc I did wish I'd started earlier, if only to reduce the stress and pressure of the biological clock ticking. x


----------



## Bumpblessing4

I wouldn't wait four full years if you are nearly 34, unless it is really important to you to wait and you are ok with it possibly taking longer to conceive, and you understand that your risk of both miscarriage and chromosomal abnormalities (even without miscarriage) are higher later. Plus, pregnancy is harder on your body the older you get--at least this has been my experience. I definitely have more hip pain and stiffness this time around (I'm 36) than I did last time at 32 (and I don't recall having it at all when I had my first two at 26 and 29).

The other thing to keep in mind is that you may change your mind about how long you want to wait, even if age wasn't an issue at all. After I had my first at 26, I really wanted to wait until she was 5 to have another baby. But then when she was just a year and a half old, I started to get the baby bug again and it took me by surprise! My second daughter was then born 31 months after my first and it felt right.


----------



## AllieM

I had my first two at 30 and 32, then waited until 38 for#3. For me it was about making sure I could provide for the first two (namely sizable college funds for them and retirement fund for me and hubby) as well as having the other two be old enough to be more self sufficient and be able to free up some of my time to care for a baby, as well as continue my career. I thought very little about the risk at 38 vs 34/35. It not like some magic switch turns on when your 35th bday rolls around!!!! I will say, I did discuss this all with my OB and had the appropriate check ups (pap, mammo, and full blood work up) before we started TTC. I did take me longer to conceive, about 6 months.


----------

