If I wait to have my second until after I'm 35, which is soon,

[_jellybean_]

does that mean that I will be in the high risk group?

I kind of feel like I would like to have another one right after this one, but I'm not sure. Part of me would love to wait til I'm 37 or so, but would that put me in a high risk group?

Thanks.

 

[crushh7]

I guess based on your age but truthfully I had my first child at 34 and am pregnant with my second at 40 and have the same worries now as I did with my first. Also, I was blessed to get pregnant quickly both times so I figure my body is still in good pregnancy carrying shape so hey I have no regrets that I waited a few years in between regardless of my age. No problems outside of regular pregnancy symptoms to date and I am a little over 8 weeks.

 

[MummyMEE]

I am 39 in Jan and am 35 weeks pregnant with my second, when you say high risk do you mean for Downs etc? My risk was 1 in 3000 even at my age

 

[AngelUK]

I don't think you are automatically high risk just cause you are over 35! Most of my friends had their kids at around 35 and one of them had her first at 39 and her second at 41. I am 41 and am having my first one now. If you are worried about Downs then my test for my twins came back 1:2900 and 1:5500. This is very low risk.

 

[Sewergrrl]

Technically anyone giving birth over 35 is high risk. Chances of genetic abnormalities are elevated, but most of the time bloodwork in conjunction with an NT scan drastically lowers those risks. That being said, any woman at any age can be of the same risks as us older ladies and not even know it because they're usually not screened.

My OBs do not consider me high risk based upon my age. They do not even categorize me as such even with a history of borderline preeclampsia in my previous pregnancy.

My OB's office is affiliated with the hospital where I get my ultrasounds, so they let them handle scheduling routine scans for their patients. They consider me high risk because of my age, so they scheduled me for ultrasounds (after my initial 12-week NT scan) for 18 week anatomy and now I will get one every 4 weeks. I will not complain about any extra chances to watch my baby girl on the monitor. Sometimes it's OK to be "high risk" because of age.

 

[marlene]

I am 35 pregnant with first child and my pregnancy has been classed as 'low risk' despite spotting throughout my first tri. Being over 35 is listed as one of the factors that could make you medium/high risk but I think you need a combination of 2-3 of the listed factors. I am in the UK and this might vary from country to country...My risk for Downs was 1:13000

 

[_jellybean_]

Thank you so much to everyone You are all so helpful and kind.

 

[xxembobxx]

I'm 36 and due in a few weeks. I had the nuchal test and was low risk so although risk is supposed to increase with age it doesn't seem to affect many 'older' women.
I found the testing on everyone is quite stringent now regardless of age.

 

[Sunshine12]

Technically yes but I wouldnt worry. I didnt want any kids up to now (Im 38) and although risks are supposedly higher there are still loads of cases where downs risks etc are just the same as someone who is much younger. Miscarriage risk is supposed to be higher but again it doesnt mean its going to happen. x

 

[Nat0619]

I'm 37 and expecting our first and am not classified as high risk. My hospital does apparently put you as higher risk when you hit 38, which midwife says just means you see a consultant at the hospital a few times during pregnancy, rather than just midwife-led care.

I declined all DS screening so have no idea what my risk would be there x

 

[AngelUK]

Nat0619 how odd, once again it seems to differ from hospital to hospital! I am 41 and though I am being monitored more often as I am having twins I was not offered to see any consultant. I was told unless things don't go normal and I need a c-section I would be completely cared for by midwives.