Pregnant and 55

[Rhi_Rhi1]

When i am 40 my LO will be 20 !! lmao bloody heck ahaha

 

[PixieM]

When 55 my eldest will be 39! And my baby now will be 31 x

 

[lesleyann]

I wouldnt, and again with others, I dont think I would have a baby past 30 but again I had my first at 17 and second at 20..

My mum had me at 18 so shes now only 38 and a nanny! Where as Oh's mum is in her 50's and Oh is 23 which means she was not an "old" mummy but you can see a big difference in how the two sets of grandparents play with the kids etc

I think at 55 you really need to think about all aspects rather than just I want a baby and medicine can make me have one. Hopefully this lady has a good support system around her etc

 

[JASMAK]

I had K at 35, and I feel old, but infertility made things four years later than we planned. 55 is really old to be planning children, IMO. Not only is there lots of complications to consider, including infertility, miscarriage increase, and genetic deformity increases....but average life expectancy is, what? 76? (depending where you live). So, you are going to be a burden on your child (nursing homes, looking after you, taking you to medical, living with them, driving you around) and then your child will lose you at a young age. Of course, people can live longer, or shorter. Studies do show that although people are living longer, that quality of that life is going down from, say, people who lived past 70 years fifty years ago. Is this a reason to choose NOT to have a child at that age? I think so. But that is my opinion. Most women have reached menopause at that age, so, nature has taken away those chances for most, which I think is nature's way of saying...nope, you are DONE.

 

[summer rain]

It's a bit of a tangent but I'm into making family trees and genealogical research, I was quite shocked to find that contrary to popular belief, in the 1800s and earlier not everyone married in their teens and were done having kids by their late 20s, in fact it was relatively uncommon in my family and others I have researched. The average age of marriage for women was around 25 but I've come across women in the 1700s and 1800s marrying for the first time at 38 or even early 40s and going on to have several children, sometimes well into their 50s. In a couple of cases they weren't really their children and were illegitimate children of a daughter being passed off as their own but this was by no means the case in the majority of cases. As far as I'm aware none of these children had any type of genetic defect due to being born to a much older mother either as they for the most part grew up to have families of their own. Some of these older mothers did die when their youngest child was only a few years old but others lived well into their 70s, 80s or 90s. I was reading in a health magazine a while back that the life expectancy in some rural areas of the UK before the industrial revolution was very similar to what it was today. It's fascinating xx

 

[vintage67]

In times past, these babies (when they naturally occurred, not IVF of course) were called "change of life babies." An older, 40ish woman would miss some cycles and be unsure if it was menopause or a baby. And then very often, a very heavy period (miscarriage would occur.) My mother was born in 1936 in a rural community to a 42 year old mother. Her mother originally thought she was going "through the change". A lot of older ladies had babies then. There wasn't birth control. And miscarriages were often just very heavy painful periods that got dismissed as part of menopause as well.

It is said that Charles Darwin's wife had a baby at 48, however the child did have developmental issues. In my small town one of my friends mother's had a baby at 46 but the baby did have Down Syndrome. As some of you know, I just had a baby at 44 last November. I would love another baby, but we are not willing to risk it again. Mostly because I cannot emotionally go through another miscarriage as we had 3 in a row.

I would be very hesitant to want to deny a child to a loving couple because of their age. I also think it is a bit unfair that we focus on the mother's age.
Brad Pitt was 46 when Angelina Jolie had her twins. No one said a peep about that.

 

[Mummy Bean]

i dont know...personally i wouldnt as a few things to consider:
- would my body physically be able to cope with it?
- the fact that i would be a pensioner when my LO was in school.
- your chances of having multipules dramatically increases with age...and the chance of them surviving if i was not in top health are reduced...also could at 55 i deal with 2-3 babies?
- the risk of syndroms such as downs are increased.

my mum had my little brother when she was 44 she and her doc thought she was going through the menopause and even gave her HRT...turns out 4 months later she was preg! she had a horrific preg n birth and had to spend nearly 3 months in hospital whilst preg. then since it has completly ruined her body. - yes this is only her personal experience and she was never the fittest of ppl but being 'back in the day' our bodies were prime for children at the age of 16-20 i think 55 really pushing it.

i know none of this takes into account an older father.

 

[aliss]

See, as much as I'd love to say "go for it", my mom is 52 and has decided she wants to have a baby with her husband (who is 26, ugh ffs I'm 28). I dunno... I think I would crawl into a hole and died if my 2 sons had an aunt/uncle that was younger than them.

 

[vaniilla]

I couldn't do it, I wouldn't want to risk leaving them without parents from a young age or to have them grow up with the worry that their parents are elderly and all that comes with it, selfish reasons too - I can't imagine being on my pension and having a very active pre-teen running around! my mum's friend had her second baby when she was in her 50's and there's a 30 odd year gap between them and her daughter gets really embarrassed by it. I would personally rather adopt if I got to my 50's, it's for a very good reasons that in adoption the maximum age gap between parent and child is 45 years.

 

[Dalila]

alittle off subject but though i'd share... a lady told me the other day, wow you are so young, referring to me having a DS and DS2 will be here next month... i'm 24...shows how different everyones views are.

 

[PitaKat]

When I'm 55, my son will be 32, old enough to have made me a grandmother.

 

[JASMAK]

When I am 55 (grabs calculator)
...my son will be: 27
My eldest daughter will be: 25
My youngest daughter will be: 20

 

[Andypanda6570]

When I am 55
My oldest will be 35
my second will be 32
my youngest son will be 25
and my Ava would have been 14

 

[Jaylynne]

If she managed to conceive naturally with NO aid, fine. If she was pursuing IVF or other methods then I would be very uncomfortable with the idea. Sure she may be fit now, but what about in 5-10 years? Not very fair on the child.

 

[vintage67]

At 55, G_d willing that I am healthy and alive, my children will be 11 and 18.
My husband will be 48.

As someone mentioned earlier, this does vary with culture and even where you live. When my oldest son started preschool at age 3, I worried about being the oldest mom there at age 40 and I wasn't. But I sent him to preschool in a section of town where that is common. Other parts of our city the preschool moms would likely be early 20's.

I hope this 55 year old mom whoever she is, loves and cherishes that child; that is the most important thing. She may also have an extended family to help. That is one thing that is bad about our situation; we have had children late in life and have no family.

 

[aliss]

^This is one thing we struggle with too. My MIL and FIL both love our son so much and are so happy to help us, but the unfortunate truth is that physically it is just so difficult for them. FIL is in his 70's with several heart surgeries behind him and keeping up with a toddler boy (soon to be 2...) is just too much him, as much as he tries bless him.

I think it kills his self esteem a little each time as he wants so badly to help but his poor body just can't take it.

I was a young mom - 25 (I know that's not as young as others but it's young to me! haha!), and I hope I can help out more when I am a grandmother.

 

[vintage67]

Yep, my mom will be 76 in a few weeks. There is only so much she can do. She is the only grandparent my children have. My husband's dad is living but we haven't really seen him in years and don't wish to do so either.

I realize I will be an old grandparent even if my sons have children young. And from the mother in law threads on here, my age will just be one more reason I won't be allowed near my grandchildren. If I dwelled on it, I could get really depressed.

 

[Sarahkka]

Age is just a number and that has never been truer than it is today. For every story I am hearing about 50+ being hard-pressed to keep up with toddlers, I could give you an example of my parents and their circle of friends - all in their 60s, all very physically fit and more energetic than many not-so-fit 20-somethings of my acquaintance.
It is just as silly to make sweeping statements about older parents having less energy as it is about young parents being irresponsible or unfit as they are only teens.
I know very few people who had babies in their twenties. Almost everyone I know had their kids in their early thirties. BnB has way more younger mums. Personally, I love the mixed demographic - we've all got valid viewpoints and none of us would be too happy if we were told that our parenting was going to be limited by the number that is our age.
When you are talking about assisted fertility, then yes, it can get into a different territory, but at the end of the day, you could make the same "nature has decided for you" argument to anyone with fertility issues. Why should age be any different from PCOS or whatever?

 

[summer rain]

See, as much as I'd love to say "go for it", my mom is 52 and has decided she wants to have a baby with her husband (who is 26, ugh ffs I'm 28). I dunno... I think I would crawl into a hole and died if my 2 sons had an aunt/uncle that was younger than them.

My two eldest kids have an aunty who is younger than them, my youngest sis in law is only just turned 6, my MIL was nearly 43 when she had her and she was a bit of a surprise xx

 

[Foogirl]

Sarahkk, I understand your point, but you can't stop time and older people naturally aren't as physically able as younger people, no matter how fit or active they appear to be. My parents are mid 60s and have been active all their lives, but even they are now staring to admit there are physical limitations to what they can do. The fittest pensioner will still find they aren't as capable of things they could do in their 20s