Should women > 30 have children?

[lucidbrotha]

I heard that once women reach age 30 or thereabouts, even earlier like 28 or thereabouts, that their offspring have far higher chances of suffering under various inborn diseases and defects. Also that the chance of miscarriage increases considerably.

Is this true?

The reason I'm asking is that I'm not really interested in having kids until I'm about 35-40. During that age, it's most likely I'll have a girl that's above 30. So I got worried...

[CoolBee]

Not these days.

I know several women who have had their first children in their 40s - all healthy kids. And a word of caution about those tests that older women often have to 'detect' problems in foetuses. A relative of mine, pregnant with her first child in her early 40s had one that indicated there was a problem. She and her husband discussed and decided to go ahead with the pregancy and cope with whatever the Good Lord chose for them. Thank goodness. Because their son (now a teenager) is 100% healthy, incredibly intelligent boy who is already planning his first entrepreneurial venture.

Also, a few years ago I was present at a lecture session with Professor Jack Cohen - former reproductive biologist now retired and an interesting discussion ensued with several knowledgeable brains-on-sticks and the outcome was that there are just as many (or as few - however you choose to look at it!) issues with older fathers as older mothers.

Think of the many plus benefits of an older mother - more settled, won't be resentful and bitter about giving up her single life, may well be much more healthy and have much more energy than as a 20-something because she's likely to be taking more care of herself.

[firenexx]

It depends a lot on the health of the girl. There are isolated cases of 60+ year old women having healthy babies. It depends on the health of the egg and the ability of the body to survive a pregnancy and support the baby during it. It depends on the health of the woman's DNA.

People who follow tantric philosophies would tell you that if a woman followed the correct technique to avoid menopause completely and control menstruation (so that when a woman desired to get pregnant, she would begin menstruation again and produce far healthier eggs) she could have extremely healthy babies at age 40.
So if your woman is of average health or looks her age, she probably wouldn't be a good candidate for having babies at 45. 35 might be alright though. I generally hear 40 as the cut-off age for down syndrome risk and I know plenty of women who have had healthy babies in their 30s.

Just make a lot of money and find yourself a young gold-digger.

[emeadow]

I always wonder if the reason for increased medical/birth defect issues with advanced age births is due to the intervention factor. Infertility goes up with age, so does infertility drugs, treatments, etc, and probably along with it the number of pregnancies that left to nature would probably not go full term or have been conceived in the first place.

I can say this, don't try and wait too long for the perfect time. I am 36 now and a year plus into trying to get pregnant. I knew I was in no place to have children in my 20's, so it was very good I waited then. But come my early 30's I kept putting things off for my career, for the best financial situation, etc. Now I am 36 and fighting the fun battle of trying to get prego at a later age. If you research statistics of getting pregnant over 35 its not great. I am doing everything in my power to avoid conventional medical treatments, I am still very hopeful, but that does not make it any less frustrating.

I am kicking myself for the years in my early 30's where I waited for what now seem like very inconsequential reasons.

[CoolBee]

Yes, I do agree with emeadow. If you know for sure you want kids, don't put off waiting for the ideal moment especially if you are female. The ideal moment never arrives and you can find yourself late 30s and 40s desperate to start a family and it simply ain't happening. (My personal opinion is you are far more likely to find it near-impossible to conceive than to have an unhealthy baby if you do get pregnant).

[momo3bur]

Originally Posted by CoolBee

And a word of caution about those tests that older women often have to 'detect' problems in foetuses. A relative of mine, pregnant with her first child in her early 40s had one that indicated there was a problem. She and her husband discussed and decided to go ahead with the pregancy and cope with whatever the Good Lord chose for them. Thank goodness. Because their son (now a teenager) is 100% healthy, incredibly intelligent boy who is already planning his first entrepreneurial venture.

EXACT same thing happened with my aunt! They were expecting their baby to have some kind of defect that is a lot like Down's Syndrome in it's cause (double chromosome, just can't remember which one) yet a lot more serious with a short life span. What do you know, they have a perfectly healthy 3 year old girl now. They almost considered terminating the pregnancy, too.

@OP YES! I don't even think they start worrying much about any of that until the woman is 35 or so. Word of caution, in case you wouldn't want this, the incidence of twins is much higher in women above their 30's because we start spurting off two eggs at a time (sometimes) getting ready to begin premenopause. Or at least that's what I've been told by an OB/GYN friend. I was asking because both of my grandmothers have twins and both sets were fraternal, male and female, and both born while my grandmothers were close to 35. I was just afraid I might be genetically inclined to have twins. LOL. And she then explained the age factor to me.

Anywho, have FUN until you're ready to settle down. Then you get to have settled down fun with BABIES!!!!!

[janicelou]

My mother in law had a child at 44 years old! A Healthy and beautiful baby girl! (she is now 16 years old!)

[Kaie]

I wouldn't worry. While with each year it may get more difficult, I know people who have children into their 40s, and it is a personal choice. 30s is pretty common though.

[ginkgo]

Yes that covers only about 10%. So having them late will give them a 10% disadvantage. But 85% will be their choices like if they smoke like a chimney, take lots of drugs and eat mostly candy and ice cream and get very little vitamin D and never get exercise!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[aelle]

From our teens onwards, our reproductive health starts decreasing ever so slightly. It is worse when we are 22 than when we are 18 and worse at 26 than at 22. There is no clear-cut line as to when you should stop trying, except for menopause. Odds get a little less in your favor, but it could go smoothly at 40 just as you could have a difficult, unhealthy pregnancy or a hard time conceiving at 22.

I think that no matter at what age you start trying for a child you should discuss with your partner what you want to test for, if anything at all, above what odds (no test gives you a clear yes/no answer) you would choose to terminate if this is an option for you at all, how long you'd like to try naturally before turning to fertility treatments or other options, how much time or how much money you are willing to put into fertility treatments, etc. Talk it all through before you are faced with the situation and don't settle for anything that makes you or your partner feel uncomfortable. It's 100% your decision to make as a couple. If will just be one of many parenting discussions you'll have before getting started.

lucidbrotha, would you mind telling us how old you are now, and why you are putting off having children?

[lucidbrotha]

Thanks for great and detailed answers everyone! Much appreciated.

Originally Posted by aelle

lucidbrotha, would you mind telling us how old you are now, and why you are putting off having children?

I'm 28, and I'm putting it off because I don't even have a girlfriend yet. I was just asking to make sure I still have some time to focus on my other more pressing goals (financial and career-wise). However, I feel the time is approaching (maybe after 1-2 years) when I start actively looking for a girl.

According to your answers, I seem to have ample time to settle down and start a family, especially if I choose a girl who's not much older than me.

[Clint Cora]

I've had lots of contact with the Ob/Gyn community when I was in the pharma industry and the concensus these days is that mid 30s would be a target range for first time moms when the ob/gyns would automatically prop up their radars more for possible complications.

Yes, there have been women 40+ who had their first borns - I personally know two such women who are my friends. One had her first at 40 while the other had her first at 42.

In both of these cases, their ob/gyns automatically referred them to their colleagues who sub-specialize in 'high-risk' pregnancies. One lady actually developed gestational diabetes during her term.

So while it is still possible to have children, even a first one at 40, it is considered a high risk case by the ob/gyns.

I once asked one of these doctors why the mid-30s range was the target and she explained to me that when a woman reaches that age range, an embryo doesn't divide its cells as nicely. It was a simplistic explanation for me since I'm not an MD.

[firenexx]

Keep in mind that the Ob/Gyn consensus is for women of "average" health. Some women will experience complications or higher risk of downs even in their 20s, and some women will be able to have healthy babies well into their 40s or even later.

[michellesears]

I personally have two very healthy children. My first child was born when I was 28 and the second one when I was 30. I do believe that it's how you take care of yourself before and during pregnancy.

That being said there are a lot of things that happen during pregnancy for no real reason at all. So I feel it's a risk at any age. But let me tell you it is definitely a risk worth taking.

I also breastfed my children until they were 15 months and I believe that also contributes to their great health.

Best of luck and don't stress yourself out about the risk just focus on the rewards.

Michelle

[Clint Cora]

Originally Posted by firenexx

Keep in mind that the Ob/Gyn consensus is for women of "average" health. Some women will experience complications or higher risk of downs even in their 20s, and some women will be able to have healthy babies well into their 40s or even later.

Agree. But nevertheless, if a woman, even a healthy one, is in her 40s and she lives in a region where there is a high-risk ob/gyn available, she will still likely get referred to that particular specialist anyway.