Conception and aging

LegacyUser

I am posting here because I am a little concerned about a friend. She is highly motivated in her career but got married a few years ago. She is 37 her husband is early 40s. She does really want children but is determined to make senior partner in her law firm before she does. She reckons this will be only another 2 years perhaps, but in the currently economic climate who knows.
I know it is totally her choice how she lives her life, but I am worried about this as I think it is a bit short sighted or optimistic. I pointed out by the time she starts trying she'll be 40s but she said loads of people have their first child aged 40 now and have no problems. Is this correct? She is determined she WILL have her own children and would be devestated if she didnt but does not think age is a problem - she actually seems to think once she makes partner she'll try and be pregnant straight away. I know it's none of my business, just want to see if I'm worrying for no reason??

January

You are worrying for no reason because this is not your decision to make, it's hers. If she wants to start trying for a baby at 40 then that's her choice and she'll overcome the obstacles, if there are any for her, when it comes to it.

LegacyUser

Agreed. It is her business.

But seeing as you've asked, here are the facts: age 35, 1 in 4 women are naturally infertile. By 40, that figure is one in 2. Of those who get pregnant at 40, more than a third will miscarry, so if you start trying at 40, you're more likely to not have a baby than have one. Of course, we all know women in their 40s who've given birth. It's very much about luck.

Partly I think your friend must know these facts already so she's making her own choices. But then when I first heard the statistics I was shocked even though I'm educated and over thirty, so maybe it's possible she doesn't know? It's easy to be denial about these things too. And maybe having a baby isn't really her priority. You know your friend, use your own judgement I suppose.

Neyite

babylove000 wrote: »

Agreed. It is her business.

But seeing as you've asked, here are the facts: age 35, 1 in 4 women are naturally infertile. By 40, that figure is one in 2. Of those who get pregnant at 40, more than a third will miscarry, so if you start trying at 40, you're more likely to not have a baby than have one. Of course, we all know women in their 40s who've given birth. It's very much about luck.

Partly I think your friend must know these facts already so she's making her own choices. But then when I first heard the statistics I was shocked even though I'm educated and over thirty, so maybe it's possible she doesn't know? It's easy to be denial about these things too. And maybe having a baby isn't really her priority. You know your friend, use your own judgement I suppose.

Can you link to these facts that you have stated here?

LegacyUser

Neyite wrote: »

Can you link to these facts that you have stated here?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infertility - the first section there about age.

Now, I'm sure these are the figures pre-fertility treatment. Treatment may of course change the outcome. The OP's friend may or may know the stats - it certainly possible not to know - I didn't know until I started this 'fertility journey'. And I also know how easy is it to have your head in the sand about it all - because it is scary. But it's worth remembering that most over 35's will still get pregnant. Unfortunately I just haven't been one of them yet :-(

Ms2011

Babylove999 wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infertility - the first section there about age.

Wikipedia isn't a great source of facts in my experience, I've read more than one thing that has been incorrect on that site. I'm not saying what you've posted is wrong but I would be more comfortable believing stats coming from a more reliable source.

LegacyUser

Well, I was told the same stats by my consultant at the fertility clinic, so I'm inclined to believe they're correct. I would much rather not believe them of course. Although the information is scary, I would still rather know the facts so I can make informed decisions. In the US a few years ago they had an awareness campaign to let people know the facts about fertility and age, as at that time a lot of women were putting it off 'til late thirties/early forties. Sometimes that's unavoidable of course. And we all know women who've had babies late in life.

iguana

Ms2011 wrote: »

Wikipedia isn't a great source of facts in my experience, I've read more than one thing that has been incorrect on that site. I'm not saying what you've posted is wrong but I would be more comfortable believing stats coming from a more reliable source.

All you have to do on wiki is check the references to see where the information originated. In the case of what the stats from the OP the information is coming from Dr Sherman Silber who is pretty much the most pre-eminent doctor-scientist in the world, in the field of fertility, and is responsible for the creation of many of the infertility treatments in use today.

Ms2011

iguana wrote: »

All you have to do on wiki is check the references to see where the information originated. In the case of what the stats from the OP the information is coming from Dr Sherman Silber who is pretty much the most pre-eminent doctor-scientist in the world, in the field of fertility, and is responsible for the creation of many of the infertility treatments in use today.

I didn't say it was incorrect information, I was merely stating that not everything displayed on Wiki is indeed correct. If you are happy with this information then that's fair enough.

iguana

Ms2011 wrote: »

I didn't say it was incorrect information, I was merely stating that not everything displayed on Wiki is indeed correct. If you are happy with this information then that's fair enough.

Which is why Wiki provides references at the bottom of each page. It's a volunteer website, they state their sources, you check them you know how accurate the information is. That's how Wiki works when used properly. You can follow those references to see that the information Babylove999 was referring to originated from the man widely acknowledged to be the world's foremost expert in fertility/infertility. The man responsible for the existence of microscopic vasectomy reversal, tubal ligation reversal, intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection, among many other improvements to the IVF process.

It's not about being happy or not with his findings, it's not subjective. He's at the forefront of his field and those are his objective findings. Unless at some point in the future it's proved otherwise, that's just how it is.

I am a friend

unregistered wrote: »

I am posting here because I am a little concerned about a friend. She is highly motivated in her career but got married a few years ago. She is 37 her husband is early 40s. She does really want children but is determined to make senior partner in her law firm before she does. She reckons this will be only another 2 years perhaps, but in the currently economic climate who knows.
I know it is totally her choice how she lives her life, but I am worried about this as I think it is a bit short sighted or optimistic. I pointed out by the time she starts trying she'll be 40s but she said loads of people have their first child aged 40 now and have no problems. Is this correct? She is determined she WILL have her own children and would be devestated if she didnt but does not think age is a problem - she actually seems to think once she makes partner she'll try and be pregnant straight away. I know it's none of my business, just want to see if I'm worrying for no reason??

First of all I agree that its not technically your concern...

I am 39, was not trying and assumed at my age that I would not get pregnant without 'interference'. I got pg extremely quickly (1 month) and am now 12 weeks... I was under huge stress at the time and not looking after myself but obviously nature took over and all is well (as per v recent scan) so my point is, you cant live your life by statistics and I think you should leave her make her own family choices..

LegacyUser

Congrats 'I am a friend'. You're one of the lucky 50%!

I agree that we can't live our life by statistics. Behind every statistic is a person with a story like yours... or mine. I started trying at 33 - a fit person with a regular cycle. As everyone around me (including my sister who gave birth at 38) assured me not to worry, that it would be fine, I was already 35 by the time I made it to the fertility clinic to be told that I was running out of eggs early. I'm now doing ivf and hoping for the best, age 36.

I'd known that fertility falls in the 30s, but I hadn't understood how that varies from person to person. I was horrified to find out the statistics, and personally I don't think I'd have been offended if a friend gave me the information. It might have helped me to take my fertility more seriously and get into treatment earlier. Maybe I'd even have my longed for baby by now?

So back to the facts: this woman has a 50% chance of getting pregnant at 40 (like you) or a 50% chance of being childless (like me). If those were the odds on a horse I'd take my chances, but they aren't. If having her own child is as important to this woman as the OP has indicated, then she needs to know the facts, so she can make an informed choice about something that will affect every aspect of her life for the rest of her life. It's a valid question, and an appropriate place to ask.

Cooperspale

Fertility reduces in men and women as they age.
You could suggest that she get a blood test for AMH (Anti Mullerian hormone) to determine her ovarian reserve.
He would have to get a semen analysis. The issue isn't always with the woman.

LegacyUser

Cooperspale wrote: »

Fertility reduces in men and women as they age.
You could suggest that she get a blood test for AMH (Anti Mullerian hormone) to determine her ovarian reserve.
He would have to get a semen analysis. The issue isn't always with the woman.

Good advice. 40% of fertility issues are with the man.
Although I would also add that the ovarian reserve test indicates remaining egg quantity. It can't tell your friend anything about egg quality, which declines with age. Unfortunately the only sure way to know if you are fertile or not is to try to get pregnant!

LegacyUser

Hi all,

I am a single 36 year old woman. I have no children and haven't ruled out the possibility yet, I have just never met the right person. I am aware that I am not getting any younger in terms of my fertile years, so do you think it might be a good idea for me to take the bull by the horns and have my fertility tested, so that if I did meet the right person within the next couple of years I would have some idea about my chances of becoming pregnant naturally? I would appreciate some information on how to go about this (where to go, what is involved, costs etc).

I am not on any form of contraception at the moment (no need for it!!!) and am healthy, if just a few pounds too cuddly

Any opinions/advice?

LegacyUser

Hi justwondering,

You could probably start at your GP and get a blood test on day 3 of your cycle - the third day after your period starts, and another on day 21. Doc will advise. This looks for hormonal abnormalities. Talk to doc about where to get an AMH test which will indicate how many eggs you have left. That would probably be done through a fertility clinic.

BUT these tests only give indications. Unless there is a glaring problem, they can't tell you too much about your true fertility potential e.g. if tubes are clear etc. Fertility is a complex business. Also, what happens if you did get bad news? Wouldn't that add a lot of pressure to a situation you can't fix right now? - unless you're prepared to go solo? Alternatively, things might look fine and you might get a false sense of security. I would just worry that you might make life decisions based on some very crude tests.

IMO You might be better not to cross that bridge til you come to it. No point stressing? Good luck.

Koala35

Hi, sorry I disagree, I think Justwondering should be proactive. I \m in similar situation and my doctor receommended egg freezing. It can't be done in Ireland, you would need to go to UK.

LegacyUser

I really, really hope I am wrong about this but as far as I know, although clinics abroad are currently taking the over-30's eggs for freezing, unfortunately, defrosted older eggs result in very few live births. There have been articles published in magazines about this. I'm in my mid-thirties with fertility issues (attending a clinic) and it was something I looked into though mostly through internet research back when himself and myself had a wobble.
I've hesitated to post, as it's still definitely worth a shot, but during my research I found quite a number of articles from experts saying that freezing eggs shouldn't be anyone's 'insurance policy' as the figures were something like 8 live birth per 1000 eggs frozen. That's not to say that in 5-10yrs they won't have a better way to defrost so it's still worth finding out more. If I can source articles I will. If not please talk to the docs and report back to us.
Freezing embryos is known to be much more effective currently but then there's that sperm issue.
Sorry to be so negative, and I wish you all the best girls. You're probably right, pro-active is the way to go.
I really wish I hadn't had to learn so much about this stuff! :-(

Fuinseog

January wrote: »

You are worrying for no reason because this is not your decision to make, it's hers. If she wants to start trying for a baby at 40 then that's her choice and she'll overcome the obstacles, if there are any for her, when it comes to it.

The later the child is conceived the greater the risk of an unhealthy child.

nesbitt

At 39, I got pregnant within a month of deciding to have a (2nd) baby... Imagine our shock to discover at 10 weeks that we were in fact having twins... I asked medical staff in passing during my pregnancy check ups and was told that perhaps my body had a 'surge' of fertility. The last 'hurrah' if you will. All was well with the pregnancy and birth, both kids now seven healthy and happy, thankfully. In fact the pregnancy was far better and easier on my twins than my eldest daughter whom I carried at 32.

Anyway one glaring observation to point out that yes not only does fertility go down statistically after mid thirties in women but risk of having 'abnormal' baby goes up ie. Downs Syndrome being the first problem that comes to mind.

Carey Leigh

Does anyone know if an older father affercts the health of the baby? There is 12 years between me and my oh (25 and 37)

Victor

Carey Leigh wrote: »

Does anyone know if an older father affercts the health of the baby? There is 12 years between me and my oh (25 and 37)

It may have some effect, but it it the mother's age that is the dominant factor.

iguana

Men's fertility declines fairly rapidly from around the age of 40-45 depending on the man's lifestyle. This was unknown up until fairly recently but sperm DNA fragmentation is now recognised to be one of the biggest causes of what was known as "unexplained infertility" and recurrent miscarriages. The good news is, that it is relatively easy to mitigate/reverse the damage quickly.

A healthy diet, elimination of alcohol, smoking and drugs, including many prescribed medications, wearing loose underwear, taking certain food and mineral supplements, moderate exercise (not cycling) and ensuring ejaculation happens every second day can vastly improve seminal volume, sperm count, motility and DNA stability. Once the changes are made improvement starts happening within a few days as many sperm problems originate in the transport and storage phase of sperm production.

Carey Leigh

Thanks for the replies :-)