Too old to start a family?

January 28, 2012 9:17 PM

Hello Everyone! I am 28 and my husband is 25. We have been considering the prospect of starting a family in the next 2-3 years. I am apprehensive because I am concerned that I may too old to do this (I would be about 30 when we started -- we are considering having 3 children, so I would be mid to later 30's when we are done.) I am worried that I may be too old to safely have children (I am concerned about pregnancy difficulties and complications).

I am also worried that my age may increase the likelihood that our children would have congenital defects or some other issue because I would be considered an older mother. Also, I wonder if parenting is too demanding for a woman to start with 3 children in her 30's. (I would be in my late 40's early 50's when they are teenagers, learning to drive, ect.)

I am not sure that this is a good idea, so we are considering all the options at point. Some other ideas are reducing the number of children we would plan to have (maybe one or two rather than three), or adopting children rather than creating them biologically.

Does anyone have any thoughts or experience that they would be willing to share, or any recommendations on this topic in terms of books, podcasts or other information? Thank you for reading this post and have a wonderful day! My husband and I have been married 7 months and together for 5 years.

We are both fairly established on our careers and have good financial backing in terms of savings and insurance.

We have just purchased a house.

Let me know if you would like any additional information.

posted by neanderloid to Human Relations (59 answers total)

Have one. You clearly want to have at least one child. One is much easier than 2 or 3. You don't need to decide on the total number yet.
posted by John Cohen at 9:25 PM on January 28, 2012 [17 favorites]

Hey, I am 27 and my parents are in their mid 60s. That means they were in their mid to late 30s when they had me. Although not ideal (I wish I could have more time with them on Earth!!!) I have never had any age related trouble. I can't think of ever once thinking their age was something negative. They are both well educated professionals that wanted to enjoy some time alone before having children. By the time we arrived, they already had a solid, developed relationship.

Really, from the parenting point of view, and with all the advances science makes, I wouldn't worry of being too old for my kids, I myself plan to start having babies when I'm in my early-mid 30s.
posted by Tarumba at 9:26 PM on January 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

28 is definitely not too old to have kids but I would get on it sooner rather than later. Your eggs are good until you're about 35. Having kids at this point in your life is probably the optimal time in this society - you've had time to grow up mentally and secure a life for yourself. Women may be engineered to start having kids at 16 but that doesn't mean it's a great idea in terms of your own mental maturity and physical security (which, from what you wrote, sounds like they're great). Plus being in your 40s with teenagers isn't even nearly unheard of. If you're concerned about "complications due to advanced maternal age" I would start on it now while you have little to worry about it in that regard.
posted by bleep at 9:26 PM on January 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

First off, "older mother" is someone over 35 having their first child. My wife (41) and I (43) have a 1 year old. We're old parents. You're young, yet.

Can't speak to the "too demanding" part, but 3 kids will be a LOT of work. I can't believe how much there is to do with just one.

All I can suggest is that if you are planning to start in the next 2-3 years, investigate your fertility NOW - both of you should get checkups to see if you have any issues, so if there are, you can hopefully deal with them before you start "trying".
posted by birdsquared at 9:27 PM on January 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

The average age of a first child is 25 in the US, and 29 in a number of other developed countries. You would not be considered an older mother, you're precisely at the age when women in the American middle class have children. (The American average is brought down by teen pregnancies and 25 is on the young side for a professional woman in the US to have a first child).
posted by atrazine at 9:27 PM on January 28, 2012 [10 favorites]

Anecdata: My parents had my youngest brother when they were 40, and it worked out fine. They're handling his teenage years somewhat differently than they handled mine, but they're all happy and doing great. So really, don't worry about being too worn down by your 40s/50s to raise a teenager - it's definitely possible.
posted by 168 at 9:29 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Among my family and friends, having children in one's 30's is considered completely normal. My grandmother had her last baby at 39. Unless you have health issues or things run in your family, you'd just have the normal risks. Down Syndrome risk rises as you age but the odds are still relatively small in your 30's. I had my first baby at 36, and I did have amniocentesis to check for chromosomal abnormalities (Down Syndrome risk rises as you age) but I know many women in their later 30's who stick with less invasive tests since the risk of Down's is still pretty small. I have another friend who had her first baby at 38 and is planning on trying for at least one more, and two friends over 40 who are trying.

If you want to start at 30, and you don't have trouble conceiving, you could have your second at 32 and your third at 34. Or your second at 33 and your third at 36. All of those are completely normal childbearing ages.

I don't think this is really anything to worry about, in the scheme of things. I would honestly worry more about the impact of 3 kids on finances and careers!
posted by rabbitrabbit at 9:29 PM on January 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

A lot of people have children late into their 30s. Like, A LOT. My own sister was born when my mom was 41, and it's even more common now. I have many friends who are having their FIRST baby at 38 and even older. I don't know where you live, but if someone in my circle worried that she was too old at 30 to start having kids, everyone would think she had lost it. It's not uncommon - sure, it's biologically more ideal to have kids at like 19, but thats not always LIFE ideal and you are totally going to be fine. Get checked to make sure you're in good health and good luck.

(and maybe start with one baby and see how it goes before worrying about being 50 and teaching someone to drive. For what it's worth, you may feel younger at 50 when you get there than you are currently anticipating.)
posted by Countess Sandwich at 9:33 PM on January 28, 2012 [6 favorites]

My mother had her first child at 25, and her sixth at 39. I can't speak perfectly for her but the youngest is now 17 and they seem to have coped with all of us pretty fine. Both parents are now in their late fifties and are still perfectly healthy and active enough to handle having a teenager, even brought him to visit me and some other relatives in the USA last year. I think you can afford to relax a little - especially because you won't be 'starting with three children', you'll start with one. You will always have the option of not having a third child if you are overwhelmed with two.
posted by jacalata at 9:35 PM on January 28, 2012

I think it would help a lot for you to discuss these questions and concerns with an obstetrician (maybe even more than one if that would help you feel comfortable). There's no harm in doing that now, even if you don't plan to start trying for a while yet.
posted by argonauta at 9:36 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I had my first at 39 and my second at 42. I had no problems conceiving and no issues, thankfully, with chromosomal issues due to my Advanced Maternal Age. (That is an Official Medical Term.)

You have plenty of time, unless you are aware of any reason why you might have a hard time conceiving.

I will say that having toddlers, more than one, in one's forties is kicking my ass around the block. If I could go back in time and meet my husband earlier so that we could have done this in our thirties, that would have been better.
posted by ambrosia at 9:36 PM on January 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

My mom started at 35 in the 1970's so, yeah, I don't see the problem here. At least get started.
posted by Bunglegirl at 9:37 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

My parents had me at 29 and my sister at 34. You're not yet old. Make some babies, be awesome. You'll only be 55 when the first one is 26, that's hot a bad gap of age.
posted by deezil at 9:42 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

My mother was 35 when I was born, my father was in his 40s. This seems to have worked out alright, in terms of health and biology. I wouldn't worry too much.
posted by Alterscape at 9:42 PM on January 28, 2012

We had one at 40 - it's been lovely. Go for it, you'll be fine.
posted by Sebmojo at 9:43 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I know many people who started having children in their late 30s or early 40s. Both my sisters have two children, and started a family much later than you are proposing. It's not a problem unless you know some specific reason why you'd be different than most people.

People in their later 40s and early 50s might be slowing down a little but it's hardly old age.
posted by philipy at 9:44 PM on January 28, 2012

More anecdata - my parents had eight kids, and five of them were between 30 and 40. All fine, all healthy, all happy.
posted by twirlypen at 9:44 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Best answer: Go talk to your OBGyn.

And do some research about the cost of children before setting your self on 3. Find out childcare options in your area. (This seems to be a shock to many.)

But really, your previous question makes me wonder if those issues have gotten sorted out. As a mom, I'd recommend making sure that all parents are fully contributing to the household and are within a commuting distance that allows for full engagement as a parent and partner.
posted by k8t at 9:52 PM on January 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

nearly all of the friends i have who have recently had, or will soon have babies (a shit load), are in their mid-late 30s. those babies are all fine. you are not old.
posted by violetk at 9:52 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I had my first kid at 31 and my second at 35. It's been great. I did have four miscarriages, but they were due to hypothyroidism. Of all the people I know who have had children, I know two who have conceived children with trisomies -- one was 39 and one was 23.

You can never be sure that things will be fine, not ever. It's worth it anyway. You clearly want to have a kid: have a kid.
posted by KathrynT at 9:56 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

My mom had me when she was 33. I am plenty fine. Your kids probably will be too. :)
posted by These Birds of a Feather at 9:56 PM on January 28, 2012

Also in my thirties, and there's been a baby explosion among friends in just the last year. Seriously, so many. And some are already having another within just two years. My mom also had me at 35 in the 70s. But this all depends on your own body, husband's body, genetics, health and just luck, honestly. We could share stories all day but you should talk to your doctor.
posted by sweetkid at 9:57 PM on January 28, 2012

My husband and I always said that we would start trying when I turned 32, because we deemed that "still young" and indeed we were the first of our peer group to start trying. (maybe atypical, New York City, mostly medical professionals?). We then delayed starting trying two months so I could "enjoy myself" at friends' wedding and I gave birth 3 days after my 33rd birthday, all well.

anyway, anecdote to say that no, not too old for you at all.
posted by gaspode at 9:59 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Have a baby. I was 36 & my wife was 39 when our son was born. He's healthy, she's healthy, & it's been great.
posted by Devils Rancher at 10:12 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

You would have been considered YOUNG to be thinking about babies in my circle of friends when we were your age. I had my daughter at 32 and was the first of us. My two closest friends had their first babies at 43 and 38, respectively. The second one is having her second now, at 40. And two other friends have had babies in the past month, one at 42, the other at 44.

We're not average, statistically speaking; we're all urban-dwelling, university educated, multiple degree holding (except me, underachiever) women with big careers. Without exception, we had our kids when we did because there were no fathers in the picture until there were. And two of us haven't had kids, one isn't trying to, but one has been trying for several years.

All of which is to say, it's totally possible, and not even uncommon, to have babies in your thirties and forties. It's really only past 35 that people start calling you a Mother of Advanced Age. Your fertility does start to decrease past 30, and then more sharply after 35, but that leaves you seven good reproducing years in there, more than enough time to have three kids. And since you've already got the father, a house and a job, you really don't have to worry.
posted by looli at 10:14 PM on January 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

Best answer: I would be less worried about being physically "too old" (in your 30s is definitely not too old, as pretty much everyone is saying) and more focused on thinking about how your marriage will adapt to these hypothetical children. You say you're fairly established in your career - will you continue to work? Do you plan to go part-time or work from home or quit altogether? What about your husband - is he going to scale back his career to do more child management and housework? What are your plans for childcare? If you plan to continue your career, how much of the responsibility will you realistically be taking on for children and housework vs. how much he will take on? Do you have a good support network - close friends and family nearby? How do you and your husband get along - what are the areas of stress in your relationship so far? How do you divide the work of your household already? It's hard to convey when you haven't been through it yet, but having children is often a big shift in your relationship.

From my thinking, 1 child can be juggled with a career and a household. 2 children is harder, and if they're close together, you're going to have some bumpy years trying to keep all your balls in the air. 3 children close together is going to be crazy filling up your plate if you're continuing to work full-time and so is your husband. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I find this is often something people don't explore very deeply before they plunge in. And the stress of trying to "do it all" as a mother can really strain a marriage.
posted by flex at 10:16 PM on January 28, 2012 [15 favorites]

I'm 29 now, and nobody from my immediate circle of friends has kids yet. And only one has plans of doing so in the near future.
Gotta echo a few others in saying that thinking late 20s/early 30s is too old to start a family strikes me as bizzare
posted by Greener Backyards at 10:22 PM on January 28, 2012 [10 favorites]

My mother had my sister and I when she was 30 and 35 (my father was two years older). My mother-in-law was 33 and 35 when she had my husband and his brother. This seems completely normal to me.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 10:29 PM on January 28, 2012

Best answer: Turned 30 in the hospital just after my son was born.

Risk with pregnancy does increase as you age, and so does risk of some health problems for the child, but it is like this slow steady increase -- it's not like there was no risk before, and not like it suddenly appears when you hit 30.

However, it can feel a bit like risk is slamming you in the face at 30 because (at least here in BC) that is the age when you are instructed you must get amniocentesis and all these other tests. I was happy I had my son before all that was an issue, it is just too interventionist for me.

Two of my friends had their kids in their 40s. They are both doing great! One recently said she felt reinvigorated having a child at 40, while she had worried she'd not be able to keep up.

My one advice: I had a doula and I highly recommend it (she is on sabbatical, but here is her info on what doula's do).

It was really calming to have someone with us who knew what to expect, and she was there to help my husband know what to do and stay calm as well.

She gave us the best advice of all: everyone worries about the delivery, but it is parenting that really throws you, especially when newly minted as parents. Make plans for the support you will need. (She gave us a list of things we would want people to do so when people asked what we would want, we could give them a chore--it was awesome!!) Her whole job is to help make the experience of pregnancy, birth and post-partum better.
posted by chapps at 10:39 PM on January 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Your eggs are good until you're about 35.

This is simply not true. Please get your OB/GYN to explain why the age 35 is significant in terms of fertility and genetic defects.
posted by Specklet at 10:45 PM on January 28, 2012 [12 favorites]

I think it's wonderful that you are thinking ahead this way. You're absolutely correct-- many, if not most fertility experts recommend starting families no later than age 30 if more than one child is desired.

In my own family, I noticed that my mother's pregnancy in her late 30's (she had me when she was 25, and my youngest brother at 38) was waaay more complicated than with my middle brother, whom she had at 28. During her last pregnancy she had many health issues including a terribly difficult birth including a C-section. She had never even had an epidural with her other pregnancies. She is a much less energetic mother for my little brother than she was with us-- I think it's really hard to keep up with a teenager in your 50's vs 30's or 40's. I'd never do it, and I don't recommend it, either, based on my observations.
posted by devymetal at 10:48 PM on January 28, 2012

I married at 30, had my first child at 32.5, my second at 35.75, and my third a few weeks before my 40th birthday. The youngest just turned one, I'll be 41 in a few weeks and my husband will be 40 in the fall. Three is work - mostly because they require zone defense rather than man-on-man coverage.

The only thing I might have done differently is not have them quite so spaced out. My oldest is almost 8 years older than the baby, so I don't know what their relationship will be like as they age.

As others have said, start with one and go from there. That's what we did, and it really has worked out. Yeah, I'll be 58 when the littlest finishes high school, but that's not really THAT old. And I had a shitload of irresponsible fun in my 20s, when I had the energy. I'm ok with the idea of being a mellow older parent, and I think being older has helped me be a better, more relaxed parent even now. Though sleep deprivation is a little harder to cope with at 40 than 25, I will admit.
posted by Lulu's Pink Converse at 11:17 PM on January 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

IANAD, but I believe having that first child at an optimum age is advisable. You are there now.
It seems it is better than trying to have a first in your mid 30s. I do not know your family, but I do know a woman who waited too long and is now unable to conceive. Biological clocks really do tick.
posted by Cranberry at 12:12 AM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Shorter [everybodyaboveme]: You're not to old. Talk with your OB; have your husband talk with his GP/urologist if you have doubts or concerns. FWIW, I think there's a lot of artificial anxiety in the OH YOU MUST HAVE KIDS BY 30 OR THERE WILL BE PROBLEMS *wags finger* messages in the US. Relax: have kids. You'll know when your family's big enough.

(Our third and last was born a year ago. I'll be 57 or so when she finishes high school. We've not ruled out adopting at a later date.)
posted by Emperor SnooKloze at 12:14 AM on January 29, 2012

I am 51, my 12 year old is asleep upstairs. My wife was 42 when he was born. He is the apple of our eyes.
posted by LarryC at 12:37 AM on January 29, 2012 [5 favorites]

You're not too old, patently. Lots of people have children at an older age than you. Lots of people start having children at an older age than you.

But - if you were to encounter problems conceiving, then you would be very glad you started now. It takes some time to try, some time to diagnose and if you have treatment, time to treat. You would have a better supply of eggs, and you would be well under the 35yo threshold fertility treatment clinics tend to view things as a a bit easier. Seeing as you want three, earlier is better.

Also, and it bears saying it: if you end up having 3 kids your back will be younger than if you start later!
posted by MuffinMan at 2:53 AM on January 29, 2012

Something no one's mentioned yet - if you have your first child before 30 it reduces the odds of having breast cancer down the line. If you're concerned about that, it's something to consider.

Getting pregnant can take awhile -- I have more than one friend who, despite being a healthy 20-something, ended up with IVF to get pregnant. If you wait until 30 to begin trying, it's harder to fit in that 3rd kid if the 1st pregnancy gets delayed.

Pregnancy in your 30s shouldn't be much different than pregnancy now. You don't automatically turn high-risk if you're 35. They may offer more tests (you don't have to take them), but for me being pregnant at 36 was the same as at 33. A good midwife or OB/GYN should spend time with you to talk about these things, though -- if you don't like your doctor or haven't found one yet, it's time to look for someone whose style and philosophy matches yours.

The biggest adjustment, I think, comes after you have the first baby. It's a huge shock to the system as far as lifestyle. Once you've gotten through that first baby, the 2nd and 3rd are easier because you've already adjusted your lives to accommodate. If you want to maintain a career through the child-bearing phase of your life, then child care is going to be the big thing to look at -- what can you afford, back up plans for sick kids, etc.

As for being an older parent... that's totally individual. I'm about 10 years behind my mom, but I'm also happily married (my parents divorced when I was in grade school), my career is more advanced, etc. Life is not a straight path, and there isn't a perfect time to have a baby. I know I'm a better parent for having waited; if you're more settled and sure of yourself, then maybe now is the time. Either way, it'll work out.
posted by hms71 at 3:07 AM on January 29, 2012

Best answer: Forty weeks pregnant here, age almost 35. My mom was 36 (dad 37) when I was born and 40/41 when my sister was born.

I too think 28 is young for babies (my demographic is also urban dwelling families with big degrees and careers though). And like my parents, my husband and I waited many years to have babies, because we were off having adventures and getting financially prepared for kids. I wouldn't go back and change that for a second because that was right for us and I think it has made us a stronger more resilient couple and hopefully better parents. My parents have been absolutely wonderful and their age has never seemed to stop them.

A few areas for thought though:
- My parents are now 71/72 for their first grandchild. That's pretty old and the sad reality is that they are unlikely to get many good years with this baby, let alone future babies my sister and I may have. Now that we have a real baby on the way that makes us sadder than when the babies were just hypothetical (or me anyway).
- I may not have been much more tired being pregnant at 30 than 28, but definitely am significantly more tired at 34 than I would have been being pregnant at 28. Ever having a second child sounds absolutely daunting right now. When I was younger and just fantasizing about babies, 3 sounded ideal. Now when I think of the realities (daycare at $1500/month per child here; being exhausted/sick/pregnant with older babies to take care off; etc.) three children sounds like punishment - not something I would be in my right mind doing to myself. So re how many kids to have - I wouldn't spend too too much energy planning that now. Obviously YMMV on this, but you won't really know until you're in it.
- Many of my friends have had to see fertility doctors. Currently one is doing IVF (granted her husband had a vasectomy that was not successfully reversed and she is 38), another (34) was told it will be very, very difficult for her to ever conceive, and another (34) is just getting into all the fertility testing. Three others saw fertility drs (all at roughly 33) and after 6-24 months got pregnant. The rest of us got pregnant surprisingly quickly (1-6 months). My anecdotal sense is that most women in their thirties ultimately succeed in getting pregnant but it can be quite challenging/sad/stressful/expensive until they get there. So I would consider getting a thorough work up now, since you know you want kids. If there are issues, you could choose to have them earlier than ideal. If not, great.

Last, I think it's smart that you're thinking all this through, but kids are a ginormous crap shoot. (Conception each time, each baby's health, your health, etc.) Ultimately - if you haven't already - you will probably have to surrender to that fact. (As one who likes to plan and control my life, I'm struggling with that now.) If you choose to embark on parenthood, your dreams and plans may very well work out beautifully. Or you may be thrown the most serious curve balls of your life. You should probably at least be somewhat open to curve balls. (Still working on that here.)

Best of luck!
posted by semacd at 3:44 AM on January 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm a mother of three, I had them at 27, 31 and 35. I never thought I was "old" to have children. In terms of risk factors, yes age is one of them, but more importantly is socio-economic status and maternal health (especially the risk factor of Obesity). Those are two things you can control more than your age. If you are seriously considering adoption keep in mind the wait list for a newborn can be far greater than you expect.
posted by saucysault at 5:10 AM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

My mom was 31, 34, and 35 when she had my siblings and me. She hasn't really talked about it much, but I think she's glad she waited til she was older, so that we were more financially stable (my parents were both public school teachers).
posted by mesha steele at 5:30 AM on January 29, 2012

The best laid plans. . .and all that. We started trying when I was 32. Discovered it was nigh on to impossible to conceive, even with medical intervention, at 35. Adopted our amazing daughter when I was 36. And then I discovered that I was perfectly fine walking away from my tenure-track teaching job that I had worked many, many years to achieve (very competitive field) in order to stay home with her full time. So now we are adjusting to a one income household with an active toddler where every day is different (and we couldn't be happier).

All of which is to say - you can't really "plan" anything when it comes to kids - a fact that holds true (maybe even more so) after they arrive. When you feel like you are ready, go ahead and try - and then take one day at a time.
posted by dirtmonster at 5:56 AM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mother of three here, first born when I was 28. I was much more tired with the 3rd in my early 30s but chasing two little ones while pregnant and then having the third kid not sleep through the night for 2 years was certainly a factor. No one talks about the fact that babies and toddlers are easy - it's when they start having tons of activities that having 3 kids kick's one's behind schedule-wise. At this point with only one still left at home it feels like a rest cure since we're only going to one person's activities. You just don't know what will work for you until you're in the thick of it.

It's also a cultural thing. We live in a small blue collar town near a university town. In our little town we were OLD parents, most people started having kids in their late teens or early 20s. When we moved our kids to private school in the university town (a whole different story but let me just say that kids are expensive in ways you may not plan for!) we were absolutely in the mainstream of grey haired professional parents of teens.
posted by leslies at 6:04 AM on January 29, 2012

I've seen "taking charge of your fertility" recommended a lot; might be useful reading to you. We're having our first and I'll be 32. This is good timing for me, but it's intensely personal. Do think about your medical and your families' medical history, do talk to your OB-GYN. Do not rush into it because you think you have to do so unless personal factors tell you otherwise. Also, a house is a lot of work. I'm so glad we had about two years to work out our house routine before we started having kids, and to buy a few things for it while we still had the budget.
posted by ejaned8 at 6:11 AM on January 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

Flex favorited 50x.
posted by k8t at 6:43 AM on January 29, 2012

I'm 39 & had my kids at 34 & 37. (My second pregnancy was much easier than my first. My doctors were definitely not concerned about "advanced maternal age.") My facebook feed is filled with college classmates' newborn & toddler photos. I also have a couple high school classmates who are becoming grandparents, which is really kind of a mindfuck for me.

The thing is, you just don't know. You might conceive easily & have healthy pregnancies & births. You might not. You might find yourself going through fertility testing & IVF & all sorts of other things. This might happen at 28 or it might happen at 38; the main difference is that if it happens when you're 28 you have more time to figure things out & try again if you want to.
posted by belladonna at 7:21 AM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

My baby is due in a few weeks. I'm 29. Everything seems to be going super fine with the baby, and our OB congratulates us after each ultrasound.

I do recommend you talk to your doctor about getting blood tests to check your thyroid, hormone levels and such before you start trying to conceive. We got pregnant on the first month trying two times, but miscarried due to undiagnosed hypothyroidism. Nothing to worry about now, though, with treatment and regular check ups from an excellent endicrinologist.
posted by CrazyLemonade at 8:08 AM on January 29, 2012

There's just not a huge difference health-wise and fertility-wise between having a kid at 35 and having a kid at 33, or 28 and 30. The bigger statistical difference would be say between 19 and 33. But that's not the choice you're facing here.
posted by yarly at 8:14 AM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Have one. You clearly want to have at least one child. One is much easier than 2 or 3. You don't need to decide on the total number yet.

Indeed--your experiences with the first are the only real data you can get on how it will work out.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:21 AM on January 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

Some perspective on the number of kids to have - a friend told me that the big difference between having two kids and three is that with two, you can be like, you take that one, I've got the other one. Not so with three. He said it was a lot more challenging going from two to three than one to two.
posted by kat518 at 9:26 AM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Best answer: I really dislike statements like these issued by medical regulatory bodies because I feel like they're really fearmongering. They send the message of "If you don't do it within a certain window of time, you're screwed!" Sounds to me that you have internalized this message. Then there are the experiences of real-life people, like in this series of motherhood after 40 articles. I hope they give you some perspective.

Also, in terms of being afraid of congenital defects and whatnot, this book notes that fertility does not drop off a cliff at age 35. The risk of down's (for e.g.) increases gradually each year as you age; it doesn't increase exponentially. The book also talks about timing pregnancies and being ready (emotionally, financially, etc.) which I think would be really helpful for you. (Yes, all these sources are Canadian; but I'm sure they'd still be helpful if you live elsewhere.)

Bottom line: do some research and really inform yourself about preparing for having kids.
posted by foxjacket at 9:42 AM on January 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

Hi, I recently had my first baby at age 30. I had a mild pregnancy complication at the end that necessitated an induced labor (the labor and birth went really well). Baby is perfect and healthy and I recovered well from everything.

Individual stories don't really matter when it's odds you're worried about, but I think it's important to remember that, while odds of various problems increase as mom gets older, they're still really very low. Early to mid 30s is a very normal time to have babies.
posted by thirteenkiller at 10:32 AM on January 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

It's not like a switch is flipped when you turn a certain age and things will automatically be difficult. The likelihood of health problems for you or the child gradually increases as you age, so the sooner the better statistically speaking, but 30 doesn't mean doom.

Anecdote: I was 30 when my first (and only) baby was born, and in my immediate circle of friends, nearly everyone with babies the same age is also in their 30's. We're all middle class, stay at home mom types with healthy kids and uncomplicated pregnancies.
posted by chiababe at 12:09 PM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm 30.25 and not trying yet. Which is a bit of a relief for me in light of what looks like hypothyroidism. I likely would have experienced a miscarriage (or two) if o had been trying to get pregnant.

I'm very glad I have the chance to sort this out before learning the hard and sad way that my body isn't properly equipped for the endeavor. So my answer is in line with others above. This is a multifactorial issue, and your age may or may not be the most pressing concern for yiur situation.

Talk to your doctor(s) and your husband.
posted by bilabial at 2:01 PM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

My parents adopted me when they were 40. They did an awesome job and they never seemed "extra old." They're 64 now still super active. Age is just a number.
posted by OsoMeaty at 4:59 PM on January 29, 2012

I was 42 when my youngest (now 8) was born and, if anything, I think the kids help me stay young. I haven't seen anything that I could do better if I was younger concerning the kids. Biological issues exist for females, of course, but these are different for everyone I think, so medical advice specific to you including some examination of family history might be worthwhile.

I would never encourage anyone to have three kids - one of them always seems to be left out in my experience. Someone years ago gave me advice that I should have followed - never have more kids than you have hands. When they are younger, three can be a real handful if you are looking after them on your own.
posted by dg at 6:00 PM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

There are slightly, slightly higher risks at 30 or 32. One of the risks is infertility, another reason not to delay too much. The risk of genetic illnesses, especially trisomies like Down syndrome, rises with age, but is generally more of a concern in the late 30s and after.

I had my healthy son when I was 32. Babies are a great joy, and children are wonderful. I'm sorry things didn't work out for me to have more than 1. If you want children, and can offer love, then I encourage you to have them.
posted by theora55 at 6:25 PM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

I, too, would like three kids. I had my first last year at 29, putting me at probably 35 if/when I have the third and I space them a few years apart. While on some level I wish I had started younger, I'd much rather have the kids when I'm older than not have them at all. So I couldn't have my first baby at 26 like I would have liked - that's just how things worked out. The extra three years meant that I was more stable, had a better relationship with my partner, and more financial resources. Those were all worth the investment of a few years' time.

You can't plan everything perfectly, this is especially true for babies. There's never a perfect time. And pregnancy is unpredictable. Sometimes you're trying so hard NOT to have a baby and BAM! And then, in a sick twist, a couple who is trying for years to have a baby just... can't. And there's secondary infertility to worry about too. You get pregnant once, that doesn't mean it'll ever happen again.

What I'm trying to say is that while it's good to have a general outline and do your best to be emotionally and financially prepared for kids... you're over thinking a plate of babies. Talking to your OB would be a good start if you have actual medical risks in mind or want more info on the increased risk of pregnancy at a certain age.
posted by sonika at 6:31 PM on January 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

More anecdotal information from a child of "older" parents.
My mom was 37 when she had me and 35 when she had my older sister. This was back in the 80's when my mom was considered a bit 'old', but even then it was not that big of a deal.

I think having kids later kept my parents young. Most people assume they are in their early 50's not mid-60's (also 50 is definitely not old).

There were never any issues with them being too old to do anything with us, and if you have more than 1 child, the kids can play sports with each other, drive each other around etc. (once the first one has their license, its easier - my sis was my chauffeur the minute she had her G2).
posted by devonia at 3:04 PM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

My mom had her first child at 28, and then gave birth eight more times. Like you, she also married a younger man, which probably helped, since male sperm declines in quality with age.

You'll be fine.
posted by PrimateFan at 8:04 PM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]