Is 42 too old to have a baby?

Answer 1

Yeah i think so

Answer 2

No. 42 is the new 27.

Answer 3

Depends on her health condition and her determination to be a mom. But usually 42 is a bit old to have children naturally because of the health risk for the mother and the baby, but adoption is okay. Medically speaking, most doctors think mid to late 30s is the latest you should have children.

Answer 4

For some women it's fine. Depends on their overall health. I, myself am almost 37 and feel too old to have a child. But I know people older than 42 who have had healthy babies.

Answer 5

Well sort of. For a woman its not to good for the babies because they're more prone to abnormalities with the older the woman is, but I'm not sure if its that big of a deal for how old the guy is.

Answer 6

I think so. When you're kid is in its teens you're going to have problems like dementia, ill heath and death to deal with. I just think it isn't fair.

Its particularly too old if you're talking about the woman, as there is significant increased risk of the health of the fetus.

However, my husband's father was 50 when he sarted having kids, and he was a fantastic father. But it still keeps with my previous point, as he died when my husband was 14.

Answer 7

No when I was 42 I had a couple of nice babes...LOL

Answer 8

For me it is , but a lot of women are having babies in their 40s so if you are up to it healthwise & can handle the change, I say go for it! Good Luck.

Answer 9

no i dont think 42 is too old..you may have a tougher time conceiving though

Answer 10

No a friend of mine just had a baby and she's 43. She is so excited.

Answer 11

Hmm...as long as you're ready to deal with teenage tantrums when you're in your late 50's early 60's I guess you would be okay.