BlsdMama Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 be pregnant or have a new baby? It's curious. My mom was considered "old" when she had my sister at 33. She told me a few months ago I might be getting too old for babies. :001_huh: The thought hadn't really occurred to me, especially as they seem to be coming CLOSER together now instead of further apart. (I heard fertility wasn't supposed to work that way.) Plus, frankly, I just don't feel like an "older" mom. Maybe a little bit experienced, but not "older" though my body definitely handles pregnancy differently now than when I was younger! Many of MY friends from high school are just NOW starting their families and have toddlers, new babies, etc. Goodness, I'm only 34. It does feel odd that this baby and our oldest will be 15 years apart. So when does someone *begin* to fall into that "older mama" category? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrothead Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think I'm too old now. I'm 44. But that is me personally. I have one half grown child and really don't want to start again. I'm getting to a point that I can do things on my own again. Don't get me wrong. I would have loved to have had 5 or 6 or 9 kids but we have unspecified infertility. :confused: We were lucky to get one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JVA Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think 35 is considered AMA- Advanced Maternal Age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3lilreds in NC Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since I had Schmooey right after I turned 36, I don't think you're too old for babies. :) People from our parents' generation have a different perspective on what an "older" mother is, I think. They were generally married younger and had their children younger that women do now; there weren't as many career options and such. My mom, for example, was married at 18 and had me at 22. I will say that everyone in her family thought she was pregnant - she's quite proud of having the record-setting gestational period of 4 years. :lol: My sister is nearly 6 years younger than I am, so she was born when my mom was 28. That's when I had my first child. (I'd have liked to have her sooner, but that is neither here nor there.) My MIL said something similar about someone having babies over 30. If you were 34, just starting, and planning to have 10, I might question your sanity - but it's still up to you. At 34, having your 10th, I am not sure how else you would have done it! Is she thinking you might not be able to have any more because you are "older," or that you should think about stopping now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginevra Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 To me personally, it's 40+, but really I don't pay attention to it unless the mother was working against nature to have a baby. I do know people though who think anything over 30 is too old. Or 35. I think if the body parts still work, it's not too old. There are advantages to being a child born later in the parenting years, i.e., the parents usually have a better handle on what they're doing and why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennifer in MI Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I had my last at 35. I felt GREAT!!! AMA nothing! But, I'm now 40. Dh is 45. I wouldn't necessarily feel old at this point, but, after a scare last month, my dh admitted that he would. We have a woman at our church who had twins at 53!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleni Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think 35 is considered AMA- Advanced Maternal Age. :001_huh: and :glare: That is depressing. I will be 35 in a few weeks and Im having a hard time with it. Dh and I toss around the idea of another child sometimes, which made me realize a few weeks ago that I don't have years of fertility ahead of me anymore. Our youngest is 7. My mom had my brother when she was 42... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Rat Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 For me, 40+. I'm turning 40 in a few months I feel too old for another at this point. Medically, I think 35 is when you start earning extra tests and more warnings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantlion Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I consider 40+ as well to be "older". I was 30 when ds was born. Dh was 37. For us it was the right age as I we have more patience being older parents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawana Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I consider 40+ to be old for having babies. I had dd at 37, and ds when I was just a few months shy of 40. That seemed to be old enough.:glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LidiyaDawn Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Well, I'm 34 and having one in June, so I obviously don't find that "old". :laugh: Most (maybe all, not sure about one) of the moms in our local homeschool group are actually older than me and I only have one friend who is younger - so I don't tend to feel 'old' in general anyway. :p As for what's old? I don't know - and really, it ain't up to me. If someone feels like they can be a mom at [whatever], I say go for it.. it's your body, your family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritaserum Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Mid-40s and up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merry gardens Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 be pregnant or have a new baby? It's curious. My mom was considered "old" when she had my sister at 33. She told me a few months ago I might be getting too old for babies. :001_huh: The thought hadn't really occurred to me, especially as they seem to be coming CLOSER together now instead of further apart. (I heard fertility wasn't supposed to work that way.) Plus, frankly, I just don't feel like an "older" mom. Maybe a little bit experienced, but not "older" though my body definitely handles pregnancy differently now than when I was younger! Many of MY friends from high school are just NOW starting their families and have toddlers, new babies, etc. Goodness, I'm only 34. It does feel odd that this baby and our oldest will be 15 years apart. So when does someone *begin* to fall into that "older mama" category? Past menopause is usually too old. :D Fertility and having babies are signs of youth. If you're young enough to get pregnant, you're young enough to have a baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 While I would certainly never want to be pregnant or have a baby at my age (late 30s), I don't really consider it "old" until about 40. My sister had a baby in September and turned 40 in December. I'd say she just slipped in under the "old" rope. Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangermom Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 By 42 it's getting tricky. But my MIL had her last at 42, I believe; my mom was 39 for her last. I would say that if you're trying to start at 42, there's a good chance you'll have a hard time because you're getting older. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In2why Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 When you have children younger then your grandchildren. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lauracolumbus Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My limit was 45 which is the age my grandmother had my aunt. I had my last child at 41 and wanted another til I was about 44. I'm 48 and that seems ancient to have a baby. I know when I was 35 w/my first everyone thought that was ancient and of course looking back that seems rather young! Laura Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommymilkies Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) I would say 45 simply because of the increased risks and the decreased chances of pregnancy. Edited April 9, 2011 by mommymilkies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalypso Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 34 is still young for having babies, I think. I had my last at 40, and I have many friends in their late 30's and early 40's that are still having babies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indigomama Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think it's definitely a personal decision. I wanted to be done, done, done by 30 and I will be:001_smile:. I know a woman who started at 33 or 34 and had 8. She was a very active involved mama and she loved it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tricia Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I didn't stop having babies until they stopped coming. My youngest of 12 is a preschooler now and so far no more babies have arrived.:tongue_smilie: Sadly. I suppose I would consider too old to have babies when they simply stop coming!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChristusG Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Personally, I'd rather not have babies after 35 or 36. I dont want to be elderly when my kids are grown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaKinVA Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Well, considering about 1/3 of my 42ish friends are preganant, or have just had a baby... it's not too old. I'm having serious baby pangs right now. My baby is 2. I had just turned 40 before she was born. My mom didn't hit pre-menapause utnil she was 52, and it lasted :gulp: 8 years until the change was finally over. I'm borderline...have a baby or not have a baby. Kinda hoping if it's meant to be, it will happen. (like #3 and #5). Our record for being on the wrong side of the "odds" is pretty good, apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwlKnits Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My mom was 38 when she had me and I've always thought that was really old. But, that was back in the 80s when having a child "late" wasn't nearly as common. People constantly confused her for my grandmother. She was always the oldest mom of my friends. My kids have the opposite issue. I was 26 when DD was born, which I didn't think was that young but apparently is for our area... All of our children's friends are 5-10 years older than DH and I are. A couple of them with kids the same age as DD are old enough they could be MY parents (which doesn't bother me...don't get me wrong). It does make me sad though that most of the kids DD is friends with have made comments that they wish I was their mom because I'm young and active. We're having #3 (a surprise) in October and this will definitely be our last. Mostly because I can't handle another Hyperemesis pregnancy. But partly because I feel like I'm getting near the point of being too old to be the type of parent I want to be when the child is 10, 12, 17.... (I'll be 33 next month.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnsinkableKristen Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think what we view as "old" keeps changing as our child bearing years are increased with medical science and societal norms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heatherwith4 Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Personally, I'd like to be done by 30. That means DH will be 39. We want some time to ourselves after the kids are grown. :) I will say I am much more patient at 28 than I was at 23 when I had my first. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danestress Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 but I would say that anything over 60 is too old to have children still in my home. I don't want to be planning a wedding at 65. I don't want to have DH retiring and having "boomerang" kid home for a year after college. I don't want to be up at midnight waiting for my teen to come home with the car when I am 60. I don't want to pay for college at 62. All of that seems just too old to me. I don't plan on being a really "old" 60 year old, either. My Mom didn't seem old at all at 60 - and I know 60 is the new "middle aged." But still, I want to enjoy those years in a different way that I am enjoying these years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In2why Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think what we view as "old" keeps changing as our child bearing years are increased with medical science and societal norms. I think so as well. A lot of it has to do with the shape you are in. I am in my mid 40's and I coach both of my boys soccer teams and play a mean game of Basketball. I think the only thing I won't do with the youngers that I did with the olders is ride RollerCoasters. I didn't like them then, but I rode them, now I won't for any reason because they make me feel sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JVA Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think 35 is considered AMA- Advanced Maternal Age. I laughed when my OB told me that- since I was 39 , having our 5th. I have several friends who have had babies up into their 40's. Not a big deal, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mom2scouts Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 At one point in my life, I thought mid to late 30's was too old, but then I started having recurrent miscarriages and stillbirth. I ended up having my 4th son at age 38, followed by a stillbirth and then my dd at age 42. I'm a little less energetic than I was with my older children, but I love having young children at this age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joanne Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I'll be 45 next week. I think for me, that is too old. However, I would have still felt comfortable in my early 40's. 35-40 would not even cross my radar as "advanced maternal age". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amy g. Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I'm almost 45, and I really feel like I'm getting too old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonshineLearner Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think it's more of "why" you're having babies :) I can say that I appreciate that my mom can be a Grammy and not a "mom" to a lot of little kids right now. Of course, it's your own business... But, after around 15 or 20 yrs of having babies... it seems like at some point a person might reach "enough kids" versus being too old. My parents were both born to their moms ... when their moms were about 45. So, I am glad that their moms had them :) Their fathers were both older than 45... Course, my g-pa died when my mom was 15... and I loved my g-ma... but essentially I didn't really have grandparents. (My g-ma lived till I was 13... after being really sick for a while... so I had a g-ma long distance... till I was that age..) :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scuff Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I'm 34 and it's just starting to sink in that I'm not young anymore. Seems kinda crazy that I have a 10yo or that my friends when I was a teenager have teenagers. Doesn't seem like that should be possible. So 34 can't be too old. It wasn't that long ago we were kids ourselves, right.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journeytolily Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I started very late. Our kids were adopted, and our first one was born when I was 40. I will be turning 50 this month (OMG, did I just type that???), and we have a 9 yr old, a 7 yr old, and a 2 yr old. We are also working on our fourth, and last, adoption right now. Did I ever imagine that I would be "having" babies when I was 50? No. But I feel young, and my DH and I are very active with our kids. We love being parents, and we love having a large family. Really, I would say over 40 is an "older" mother. But there are tons of older mothers these days, so I have plenty of company! Veronica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hannah C. Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 When you have children younger then your grandchildren. :lol: :iagree: :lol: But just because you're an "old" mom doesn't mean you're too old. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbt1294 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I just had my 6th at 35. I don't feel old and my kiddos see me as young. I have people ask me two questions all the time. 1. Are all of these yours? And 2. How old are you??? I feel like I have to prove that I wasn't a pregnant teen (not that it is really any of their business). I say, well the first one came when I was 23, so I was old enough. I just try to take it as a complement. :001_smile: Wow, I have never thought about being "too" old to have kiddos until this thread. I just figured when God shut the factory down we'd be done! LOL!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gailmegan Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I didn't start having kids until I was 30. Had #3 right before I turned 38. I'm 40 and would love another one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kchara Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think that when you hit menopause (assuming it's natural, and not induced by a hysterectomy or something), it's probably getting time to stop having children. OTOH... I have a half-sister who's in between my first and second kids in age. Dad seems to do fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I'm 47 and would love another one. We're not trying or anything like that. I know that if I got pregnant it would set off all sorts of alarm bells at the OB/GYN's office due to "Advanced Maternal Age". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tap Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) My father was 47 when I was born. He had a 2yo grandchild. He died when I was 29, he was 75. When I was 22, my husband-to-be and I moved in to his house to nurse him through cancer. My dad retired when I was still living at home. From my 21-30yo, I didn't have a father, he was a physically sick-depressed man. I only knew him for a couple of years as an adult. I would have like to have had more. Everyone in his family lived into their 90s as vital, active people...he thought he was fine having a child at 47. One of the things that was hard for me, was hearing all the stories about my dad and how he used to take my siblings to do things. Swimming, camping, etc. He was very active with them. He was tired when I was old enough to do those things. My memories of my dad are similar to my memories of my grandmother. Sitting around talking about the olden days, and the things they used to do. Due to my experience, I personally wouldn't have a child in my late 30s. I DO NOT in ANY WAY, begrudge people who do. Everyone has a different path. I would not encourage a parent over 45yo. Ds16 was born when I was 22 (younger than even I had planned :tongue_smilie: ) and dd12 when I was 26. Dd4 was an unexpected adoption (we thought we were just fostering her LOL), and she was born when I was 36. Having children later in life isn't looked down on in my family, but we are just a family who have families young. Maybe that is why we are largely uneducated LOLLOL This is probably only interesting to me: of my 9 siblings and dh's 2 siblings...none of us gave birth after 30yo (almost all were under 25). My 2 nieces who have also given birth, have 3 children each, all born before they were 25yo. Young moms/dads run in our family. We have had several moms under 15-16yo with babies in my immediate family. ETA: I don't think age has anything to do with having babies, in the sense that any certain age is too old to have a baby. My experience is that of an adult daughter whose parent was fine at 47 to father a child, tired at 57, ill at 67, and dead at 75. Edited April 9, 2011 by Tap, tap, tap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabrett Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) I had my first at 22-that, IMHO was really, really young! I had my last at 36. I didn't feel old at all. I am almost 40. Although I am done, I don't feel like I am too old. I would say mid 40's. I when I was pregnant with my last dc, I was was told I was maternally old. I thought it was quite funny! I think having a baby's between 30-40 is very normal. Edited April 9, 2011 by Tabrett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pretty in Pink Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I'd say 40+ is older in terms of having babies. Of course, I just turned 30 and my mom told me that I was too old to still be having babies when we told her about this pregnancy. :001_huh: I have friends who haven't even started their families yet, and those who are just starting. My mom was 28 when she had her last baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mommyfaithe Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 be pregnant or have a new baby? It's curious. My mom was considered "old" when she had my sister at 33. She told me a few months ago I might be getting too old for babies. :001_huh: The thought hadn't really occurred to me, especially as they seem to be coming CLOSER together now instead of further apart. (I heard fertility wasn't supposed to work that way.) Plus, frankly, I just don't feel like an "older" mom. Maybe a little bit experienced, but not "older" though my body definitely handles pregnancy differently now than when I was younger! Many of MY friends from high school are just NOW starting their families and have toddlers, new babies, etc. Goodness, I'm only 34. It does feel odd that this baby and our oldest will be 15 years apart. So when does someone *begin* to fall into that "older mama" category? My oldest and youngest are 18 years apart in age. I think it is old to have a baby after 45. I was almost 40, but also very I'll the past 8 years.....so we stopped having babies with my last. :-( Faithe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peela Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 It seem "young" nowadays to have kids in your early twenties- as if you shoudl wait till you are more mature, had more life experiences etc- but really, you are at your fertile peak then. Dh's mum had hi, when she was 21, my um had me when she was 21, and her mum had her when she was 21- it was normal back then to start young. I am 43 and if I got pregnant (not happening ) I would consider myself an older mum, for sure. But now that i am here- I think being an older mum would really have some advantages. I like myself nowadays :) I had my 2 in my late twenties and that was probably ideal for me. But most people I know who have kids similar ages to mine, are older than me, and had their kids through their thirties. I feel like a "young" mum of teenagers and am often told I look too young to have teenagers, but I think it is all relative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest momk2000 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I was 35 when I had my first, you have plenty of time yet. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFSinIL Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 My mom was the oldest of her group of friends to have her first - at age 25!!!! I didn't have my first until I was 32...had the last the month before I turned 37. You are not too old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs.MacGyver Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 DH and I laughed so hard during my last pregnancy at 35 and the doc actually wrote down the words "ELDERLY PREGNANCY." :confused: really?? Can we at least stick to the regular medical terminology? And, I am 38 and pregnant right now... I still feel as young and excited as I did with the first one. Do whatever you and your hubby feel is right...:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick_Mom Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I didn't stop having babies until they stopped coming. My youngest of 12 is a preschooler now and so far no more babies have arrived.:tongue_smilie: Sadly. I suppose I would consider too old to have babies when they simply stop coming!! This describes me, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjbeach Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I had my first at 30, last at 35, and now at 40 I *FEEL* too old to go through another pregnancy. I'd love another baby, but not another pregnancy, kwim? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.