Is becoming a mother when you're 50 such a bad thing?

131spanner · 10-04-2014 02:31PM

It's obviously a persons own choice, and if that's what you want then best of luck with it.

In my own opinion, I wouldn't really like the idea of it. I'm almost 21 and my parents are 49 and 50. I've a lot in common with them and I share a lot of interests with the auld fella, a lot of which we wouldn't be able to do together if he was 70 or older.

BetterThanThou · 10-04-2014 02:33PM

I think the main issue with having children that age is not being able to guarantee good health to look after them until they're able to look after themselves. My grandmother is 68 years old, and recently went into a nursing home. When she was 50, she was in pretty much perfect health, other than having asthma, which she'd suffered from since she was a child. Her health started declining probably around 7 years ago, and she's been unable to look after herself the last 5 years or so. Had she had a child when she was 50, that child likely would have had to go live with someone else, and wouldn't have a mother to support them through college. That said, I've seen some 68 year olds in great health, but it's not uncommon to see a 68 year old who's in terrible health. So for that reason, I think mid 40s should be the absolute latest that someone has a kid, and even that's too old if you ask me.

Tasden · 10-04-2014 02:41PM

I had a child when I was still in my teens and I hate when people make assumptions about my abilities as a parent based on my age so it would be hypocritical of me to do the same. However medically speaking the chances of difficulties with the pregnancy are higher as far as I know so it wouldn't exactly be ideal.

Ablehnen · 10-04-2014 02:43PM

Tasden wrote: »

I had a child when I was still in my teens and I hate when people make assumptions about my abilities as a parent based on my age so it would be hypocritical of me to do the same. However medically speaking the chances of difficulties with the pregnancy are higher as far as I know so it wouldn't exactly be ideal.

Having kids young tends to mature people faster as well I find.

Chucken · 10-04-2014 03:18PM

Jake1 wrote: »

Personally, the idea of having a child at 50 would fill me with horror.
Horror I tells yiz.

Id prefer grandchildren. That way I can hand them back

Same here! I had both my children by the time I was 21, we grew up together

I'll be 50 this year

Our little grandson is 16 months now and there is no way I'd have the energy to keep up with him 24/7.
Jeez, I haven't the energy to keep up with a kitten 24/7

My own opinion is that having a child at 50 is insanity.

10-04-2014 03:20PM

My own Nana used to say about us grandkids : ' I love to see you all coming, but I love to see you all leaving ' .

Neyite · 10-04-2014 03:30PM

Gatling wrote: »

They could be asking the state to fund fertility treatments on a medical card

By the time you get to the top of the waiting list for FT on a medical card, you might be in your 50's with the waiting lists in the HSE.

I'm an older mum - had my son at 37 and now 39 hope to have one, maybe two more. I never chose to wait, it just so happened that by the time I met my partner, knew he was a keeper and that he felt the same, and we were secure enough to try for our family, I was 34. Then came a couple of years of infertilty, then a baby, and 2 years on from that, still trying. I think I'd stop trying in my early forties though. But that is me personally.

eviltwin · 10-04-2014 03:33PM

Think it depends on your current position, if you already have kids the idea of having to go through the whole thing again in your 50's is horrific. If you haven't been able to have any and its your dream to be a parent you'll probably be more inclined to try, you have nothing to compare it to. I feel too old now to have more kids and I'm "only" 37, I think if it happened I'd cope but I've changed enough nappies now at this stage. Time to start enjoying my life.

Graces7 · 10-04-2014 03:35PM

son and daughter in law of a friend in the us were going to get the baby they found themselves expecting adopted out as she said that at 46 she was too old to start a family.

my friend said she would care for the baby so that is what she did. took the baby every day until the parents were home from work

child is 7 now and it has worked fine,,, extended family is great and far better than creche or other childcare... granny is nearly 70 now .

Chazz Michael Michaels · 10-04-2014 03:38PM

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

I think having a child in your 50s is lunacy. Its a selfish move also.

By the time the child is doing their leaving cert you'd be a geriatric. There's a good chance you won't be around for their wedding day, the birth of their children etc.

Completely ignoring recent trends in life expectancy, quality of life improvements, predictions about future medical techniques, etc.

jester77 · 10-04-2014 03:42PM

It wouldn't be for me. The thought of being a pensioner when kids are still in secondary school is not appealing at all. And if they then go to Uni, you would want to have a public service pension to fund the costs.

Birroc · 10-04-2014 03:43PM

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

See no issue with it personally.

The kid would be in their 20's when the Mum is in her 70's.

Isn't there a higher risk of pregnancy issues and health problems (for both) if the mother is over 40 never mind 50?

Akrasia · 10-04-2014 03:44PM

jester77 wrote: »

It wouldn't be for me. The thought of being a pensioner when kids are still in secondary school is not appealing at all. And if they then go to Uni, you would want to have a public service pension to fund the costs.

I wouldn't worry about being a pensioner at 68. They'll keep us working well into our 70s

Capt'n Midnight · 10-04-2014 05:19PM

seamus wrote: »

Yes, there's an increased chance that you will die and leave a child needing care, but every parent regardless of age should make plans for this possibility.

Roll back the clock to before modern hygiene and medicine and mortality was pretty high. Lots of women died in childbirth too.

kowloon · 10-04-2014 05:49PM

Working couples are really common now, you could argue that having a child and not having a parent at home is less than ideal. By 50 there's a much greater chance of having the financial stability to have a parent at home. On the other hand, a friend of mine's girlfriend had an aged father who was confined to a chair and was asleep the majority of the time, it made for a pretty miserable home life. A 50 year old mother might be too old to see her grandchildren, even with increases in life expectancy. My folks had me pretty young, I got to meet all my grandparents, and my folks are still alive, I can't begin imagine how tough it would be to lose a parent as a child or to never meet your grandparents.

Sleepy · 14-04-2014 11:37AM

seamus wrote: »

Neh....I'm on the fence about that bit. The main issue for me is that you couldn't discriminate. So if a fit and healthy 50 year old woman can get state-funded fertility treatment, then you'd have to provide the same funding to the 30-fags-a-day, wheezing and obese 50-year-old who can barely look after her own daily needs, never mind a child's. I don't object to the former, I do object to the latter. But legally you wouldn't be allowed discriminate.

Quite honestly, I wouldn't agree with it being state-funded in either case.

Providing things like fertility treatment, cosmetic dental work etc. which are essentially lifestyle choices under the public system seems perverse to me when it can't currently cope with the medical problems of patients in a timely fashion.

Muise... · 14-04-2014 11:57AM

I think not even public sector workers, bankers, developers and politicians combined, are subject to such judgement as mothers. All mothers - young, old, single, married, breast-feeding, bottle-feeding, working, stay-at-home - just because everyone had a mother does not make everyone an expert. I haven't had children, for my own reasons which are my own business, but I'd imagine the crying and sleeplessness must be heaven compared to the whole world telling you you're doing it wrong.

ncmc · 14-04-2014 12:22PM

Muise... wrote: »

I think not even public sector workers, bankers, developers and politicians combined, are subject to such judgement as mothers. All mothers - young, old, single, married, breast-feeding, bottle-feeding, working, stay-at-home - just because everyone had a mother does not make everyone an expert. I haven't had children, for my own reasons which are my own business, but I'd imagine the crying and sleeplessness must be heaven compared to the whole world telling you you're doing it wrong.

Totally agree with this, I'm pregnant with my first at the age of 34 (we were married 10 years before becoming pregnant) and the amount of people that feel it's acceptable to question and badger you on your reproductive choices is incredible. Then when you are pregnant, it's open season, some people think they can say whatever they like to you (at what other time of your life would you have people coming up to you and saying "jesus you're huge") and are always on hand with an unasked for opinions. I can only imagine it will be ten times worse when the baby arrives and then I expect the "when are you going to give them a brother/sister" will start.

Here's an idea, how about everyone just minds their own business. I don't agree with it being funded by public health care when the system is in such disarray, but my attitude is if two consenting adults decide they want a child late in life, then it's no ones business but their own.

Is becoming a mother when you're 50 such a bad thing?

Comments