Right age to have children

[Nyla]

It's extensively rumoured that the child with Down's was Bristol's.

 

Really? Damn. Never heard that rumor. I thought Bristol had a son without birth defects and Sarah had Bristol's brother with DS.

 

It is only a rumor as well. However, the information I posted is not.

 

I'm going to repeat that a woman can have a healthy child past 35 or 40...just gets more difficult in certain ways.

[Art_Critic]

Sarah Palin's age was a huge risk factor.

 

 

You cannot know that, sorry.. it can be speculated but that is it, for you to make the factual assumption is what ?

 

You post to me like I don't know anything about the risks or what I am talking about ? I was 45 when my son was born and my wife was almost 40, you mention that I should be informed, I am and was while I was going thru a pregnancy that had those risks.

 

It is wrong of you to bring Sarah Palin in this thread, unless you know her and can speak for her then you don't know if her age had anything to do with it.

[tbf]

Really? Damn. Never heard that rumor. I thought Bristol had a son without birth defects and Sarah had Bristol's brother with DS.

 

It is only a rumor as well. However, the information I posted is not.

 

I'm going to repeat that a woman can have a healthy child past 35 or 40...just gets more difficult in certain ways.

Okay...let's talk risk and Down's.

 

At age 35, the risk of Down's is 0.25%.

At age 45, the risk of Down's is 2.86%

 

Now let's do a comparative to other risks:

 

Risk of being murdered is 0.71%.

Risk of dying in an auto accident is 1.33%.

Risk of dying of heart disease is 16.67%.

 

When you look at risk in terms of relevance and relativity, you start to get a better feel of it.

[ImperfectionisBeauty]

Had both my sons in my mid-thirties. Both have no health issues, big, strapping baby boys.

 

It's less about deterioration of egg, as reduction in number of eggs as women age. We start out life with millions of immature eggs where by the time puberty hits, it's down to around 400,000. From there, we lose around 12,000 a year, so by 32, we have around 160,000, 42~40,000 left. When we hit menopause, there are very little to none left.

 

If you consider the above numbers, who has that many children? The last decade's push for women to breed younger was Conservative based, concern for a dwindling population incapable of supporting the baby boomers through social security/OAP. Don't fall for it. Have kids when you feel ready.

Question, so if I take seasonique birth control, giving me 4 periods a year does that mean I use lose of my eggs so then I can have babies later in life if I wanted?

[BrokenPrincess]

You will never be financially ready & possibly not in the perfect house. You will figure it out, just like all the generations before us. Our house is old & has zero closet space & I didn't think we'd be able to fit a whole other person in here, plus all his "stuff" But I just kept telling myself that people have babies in Manhattan & make it work, so we can do it.

 

Would renting out your condo & then renting a house for yourselves be an option, at least for a couple years?

 

At 35, you're considered "high risk" and you basically get the joy of double the dr appts. I had my baby in my 30s and I'm sure in my 20s I probably would've had an easier time physicality, but overall my pregnancy was fine & healthy.

[tbf]

Question, so if I take seasonique birth control, giving me 4 periods a year does that mean I use lose of my eggs so then I can have babies later in life if I wanted?

Not a fertility doctor so I can't say with any expertise.

 

But if you look at the numbers that I previously posted, why would you be concerned?

 

It's less about deterioration of egg, as reduction in number of eggs as women age. We start out life with millions of immature eggs where by the time puberty hits, it's down to around 400,000. From there, we lose around 12,000 a year, so by 32, we have around 160,000, 42~40,000 left. When we hit menopause, there are very little to none left.

 

The only valid and tested method that I'm aware of, to preserve eggs is through cryopreservation.

[ImperfectionisBeauty]

Not a fertility doctor so I can't say with any expertise.

 

But if you look at the numbers that I previously posted, why would you be concerned?

 

 

 

The only valid and tested method that I'm aware of, to preserve eggs is through cryopreservation.

 

I'm just afraid of losing eggs and stuff. I get sad when I get a period because its like I'm wasting an egg.

[tbf]

I'm just afraid of losing eggs and stuff. I get sad when I get a period because its like I'm wasting an egg.

I don't know exactly how old you are but somewhere around 22 years old. This means that you probably have around 280,000 eggs. Even Octomom would be aghast at having that many babies!

[Nyla]

You cannot know that, sorry.. it can be speculated but that is it, for you to make the factual assumption is what ?

 

You post to me like I don't know anything about the risks or what I am talking about ? I was 45 when my son was born and my wife was almost 40, you mention that I should be informed, I am and was while I was going thru a pregnancy that had those risks.

 

It is wrong of you to bring Sarah Palin in this thread, unless you know her and can speak for her then you don't know if her age had anything to do with it.

 

I also don't know that her age had nothing to do with her son having DS and neither do you.

 

While I cannot be sure, I know that her age very likely had something to do with the outcome.

 

You are saying that you had a pregnancy in your forties and were told of the same risks, so thank you for proving my point.

[dichotomy]

 

Medical advances cannot always fight against nature.

 

...and some times they can, as they did for us at 42 with our child. Downs was highly unlikely thanks to medical advances which were amazing to me. Which I was why I mentioned "if you got the resource$".

 

Edited January 27, 2013 by dichotomy

[Nyla]

I'm very happy for couples that have healthy children no matter how old the parents are.

 

I did not say that older parents cannot have children without DS.

 

I merely stated a medical fact, but I never said that parents in their forties will automatically have children with DS.

 

I know several women who had healthy babies in their forties.

 

If you know that you had healthy kids in your mid-thirties or forties, there is no need to be offended or become defensive.

 

Sorry for the threadjack. Carry on.

[Queenie42]

The latest estimate I could find (June 2012) is ~$235,000 to raise one child to age 17 for a middle-class family (income between ~$59,000 - ~$103,000)... NOT INCLUDING college costs.

 

What Having a Child Truly Costs: Around $1 Million | TIME.com

 

Moral of the story: Don't have kids unless you REALLY REALLY want them!

 

True, that's a big scary number and probably pretty accurate. But it isn't something which has to be paid upfront. And you do get a bit of warning. Even my folks, who never planned to have kids at the age they did, knew they had nine months to get a head start on savings for all the extra stuff I would cost them. They always joked about handing me an invoice on my 18th birthday You don't have to be a millionaire to give a child a good, loving home so don't let finances be the only thing holding you back.

[Art_Critic]

You are saying that you had a pregnancy in your forties and were told of the same risks, so thank you for proving my point.

 

Those same risks are also told to someone in their 20's.. so I didn't prove your point, the risk %'s are different but the risks exist at all ages and the parents are told about the risks.

 

As the pregnancy proceeds those %'s either go up or down, each test that is passed they re-adjust the risk.

I will say that our risk at 12 weeks was lower than that of 6-7 weeks...and at 18-20 weeks was almost that of a 20 year old.

 

Everyone speaks of risk%.. but remember those are a fluid number as each baseline is passed.

[Silly_Girl]

I accidentally fell pregnant at 19, my own error but basically an issue with medications clashing and causing problems.

 

In hindsight I was not being realistic to want my baby, but we could not imagine an abortion when we had jobs and a loving home. I was devastated when a close friend of mine - when my son was about 9 months - said he would never have children in the same circumstances as me and be too poor to give them a good start in life.

 

My son, despite challenging financial situations, has had more than one holiday/break every year and has had a life jammed with experiences and learning and fun. I went back to school when he was a baby, got myself a profession, and now he's the best-travelled kid in his peer group. He's 16 and asks for nothing and values money and material things despite owning all the consoles and the latest gadgets.

 

If I had waited until I could 'afford' children I very likely would not have any.

 

In fact, I hope to have more kids. My fiancé and I would like 2. We will be 37/38 before a baby is born, provided we're able. We'll have a much bigger house than I had first time around, and much better job prospects, but still it will be hard, with massive financial sacrifices, plus sacrifices where our social life and leisure time is concerned. But if we don't do it now we'll never do it. We plan to start trying on our honeymoon because there's always reasons/excuses (valid ones) not to. I'm worried about my job and it would be sensible to change jobs, then wait before trying, but really, you can't ever control everything and sometimes you just have to have faith that everything will be alright/you'll find a way to make everything alright.

 

In your shoes I would go for it, honestly.

[veryhappy]

Your priorities are not where they should be. The only people who should mind a baby in a condo should be the neighbors hearing him cry.

 

Having a child can go well or it can be bumpy. You or your h can have infertility problems. There are birth defects, special needs kids and cases where life is not perfect. You take a chance every day you delay. Your body is aging.

 

A few years...you'll probably be fine, but putting a mortgage before a child is questionable.

[dichotomy]

Those same risks are also told to someone in their 20's.. so I didn't prove your point, the risk %'s are different but the risks exist at all ages and the parents are told about the risks.

 

As the pregnancy proceeds those %'s either go up or down, each test that is passed they re-adjust the risk.

I will say that our risk at 12 weeks was lower than that of 6-7 weeks...and at 18-20 weeks was almost that of a 20 year old.

 

Everyone speaks of risk%.. but remember those are a fluid number as each baseline is passed.

 

If you go high tech conception - the tests can be performed pre-pregnancy as well.

Edited January 27, 2013 by dichotomy