Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I read in somewhere that some of the older celebrity new moms actually have secretly hired surrogates to go through the pregnancies for them. It's just hidden from the public. Fertility rates decline after around age 35. After age 40, it's nearly impossible for a woman who's never had children to become pregnant--and if they use IVF, and other costly interventions, the miscarriage rate is very high. The odds of successfully carrying a pregnancy to term after age 40 aren't good at all.
Society needs to figure out how to enable adults to become parents in their 20s, when it's biologically optimal. There might be a few folks out there who are keen to start a new family in their 50s, but life is short, and most people don't want to go down that life path.
Meh. 40s are possible for plenty of women. Heck, we had a family member become pregnant by accident at 43 and give birth to a healthy baby at 44! She had given birth before, and she had health problems resulting from the late-in-life birth, but it was certainly possible. And thirties are certainly more than fine for having children.
Why does there have to be one right answer? Certainly looking at cultures without birth control, women have babies from their teens into their 40s. Now women and men can, for the most part, choose when best fits their lives. People make it work. Who is to say it is harder or easier one way or the other? A couple well off and with more time in their 40s could overcome being more physically tired if they have less stress and more time to exercise. It might be harder for a couple in NYC in their 20s trying to both work and pay for kids (or 30s) and be happy.
All depends on the lifestyle and the choices that make sense for the family.
Meh. 40s are possible for plenty of women. Heck, we had a family member become pregnant by accident at 43 and give birth to a healthy baby at 44! She had given birth before, and she had health problems resulting from the late-in-life birth, but it was certainly possible. And thirties are certainly more than fine for having children.
That's exactly what happened to me! I learned the hard way to "never say never." I agree that the thirties are the best time for women to have a family - financially secure, emotionally mature, and (usually) physically in good health.
why is no one talking about the birth defects!! The chances go way up. These celebrity moms are causing a misconception I think, about reality...
Quote:
Originally Posted by dunno what to put here
Eh, that kind of thing varies from person to person though. My sister is 31 and has had dodgy, weak ankles since the moment she began walking despite every other aspect of her being fine. I'm 28 and find my ankles occasionally giving way when running up stairs.
Anyway, I'd say no. I know plenty of people who have had children at 40 - not a single one at 50, or even 45. By your late 30s, the risk of birth defects increases noticeably, though by your mid-40s it's a significantly high risk.
The risk of infertility overpasses the risk of conceiving by your early 40s:
For everyone it's different, but as a general rule I would say - have kids before you're 40.
I waited until my early 30's to start and THAT was too old. That put me in my late 40's with two kids in the thick of their teenage years - exhausting! I would have been much better equipped to handle the energy requirement of being a parent if I had started a decade earlier, mid-twenties tops. Of course, these celebrities can do it because they can afford to pay for all the help they need; nannies, cooks, house keepers, etc.
My dad was in his mid-40s when I was born, my mom was in her mid-20s. They had my sister 2 years later. It was his 2nd marriage and he had 2 girls from his first marriage who were teenagers. The only thing I really noticed as a kid is that we didn't run around and play ball as much as some other kids with their dads. But both I and my sister were in our 30s when he had kids and he passed away just before our oldests were born (his 2 other daughters did not have children, one also died of cancer in her 30s), so he never got to see being a grandfather.
My mom on the other hand was very active in my life and has been a very active grandparent.
So I was 33 when my son was born and 35 for my daughter, I'm approaching 50 and my wife is slightly past 50 with2 teenagers (which means she was in her late 30s when our youngest was born). It is a bit exhausting but I'm not sure it would've been much less so if I had them 10 years earlier. What I will say is though if I were to become divorced or widowered and remarry, I would not be interested in this point at "starting over" in regards to having more kids, so I kind of agree with all this on that point. Regarding my wife having kids in her late 30s, her parents were in her 30s when they had her, my kids just lost their 81 year old grandfather this year, their grandmother is 83 but is a very active 83 so that is still going well.
50 is 50 no matter how much anyone can try to sugar coat it into the new 40. Most people in their 50s do not have the energy and patience it takes to take care of an infant and then run after a toddler a couple of years later and then a teenager when they are in their 60s. There's a huge difference between being an active grandparent and babysitting, and having to raise a little one 24/7.
There's a good reason why nature prevents women from bearing children after a certain age and it's not about discrimination.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
