My personal opinion is from 35 and beyond. What do you guys think? I read an article about a NJ 6o year old woman who just gave birth to twins & thought it was ridiculous!! imangine- she's gonna be 80 when her kids are off to college how funky is that?? I'm 24 and on my second child and i think that's it for me. What do you older women think of this?? if ur over 30 would you consider having more children?? why?
2007-06-26 11:53:47 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
35 because the risk for birth defects in the child and complications during pregnancy go up. Though I say go for as long as your body can handle the stress of pregnancy and child birth. Which would be around the time you start menopause would be a good time to stop.
2007-06-26 20:15:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think that over 45 is too old. I mean then you're really getting up there when you're kids are graduating from college, any older than that, and some people who arent very healthy to start with wont even be around for their kids graduation, and the kids end up in a foster home because the parents were too old and died of old age. 60 yrs old is ridiculous, I agree. I'm 27 and have my 2 kids. I think the younger the better because then you have more energy to keep up with them. I'm not in any way saying that older women CANT. I'm just saying, when you're younger your body can handle a lot more than when you're older. you heal quicker, you lose the weight quicker. My future MIL is always complaining she's too old to keep up with the kids. I would consider having more children up until I was about 36-37 yrs old. Any older than that, no way.
2007-06-26 19:12:15 · answer #2 · answered by mannasox 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, I used to think 35 was about the cut-off, too, but I'm 33 now and divorced, just starting a new relationship, and we've talked about having a baby....I don't think I'd want to go through the whole terrible twos (and threes!) and potty training and all again, but I COULD. I think probably 40-45 is a more reasonable cut-off age for having a baby. I'm sure the safety would vary by the person, too, so only a doctor could say for sure if it's safe.
2007-06-26 19:27:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am 35 I hope that it is not to old. I think really you have to take into cosideration a lot of things.
1 your health
2 your families health at older ages
3- your reasons for wanting a child at any age
4 your doctors opinion on when it is too old
These are a few I can think of. Id have to say if I had to pick a number Id say 43
I think over mid 40 they say the health risks are many. I have known many women who have had babies in there early 40's and they all seem fine. In fact they say they felt better having a baby in their 40's then any other time.
Jenn
2007-06-26 19:01:16 · answer #4 · answered by jenn 2 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I guess it's your personal preference. I am 30 and 25 weeks preggo with my first baby. When I deliver I'll be 31. Now was just fine for me to start a family. All my friends have kids and I'm just beginning. When I was your age kids weren't even on my mind. I was young, single, free, traveling, shopping, and having the time of my life. Now I'm about to become a mother and a new chapter is beginning.
2007-06-26 19:17:43 · answer #5 · answered by Who is it? 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm 29 and don't want to get pregnant again after 30, I have four kids and think my body has had enough. I want to know how bodies bounce back after 35 I'm betting it's not fast.
2007-06-26 19:07:43 · answer #6 · answered by SP Addict 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You might want to re-think your anti-age attitude. When you're 35 you will realize it's not that old.
I had my last child at 41. He's 5 now, and I have no problems keeping up with him, parenting him or enjoying him.
2007-06-26 18:57:26 · answer #7 · answered by Questing 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
You might rethink that when you hit your midlife crisis.
2007-06-26 19:04:59 · answer #8 · answered by Belgariad 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋