Thank you for your many years of support. We want to share the news with you that after much consideration, will cease operations in its present format on October 15th. We appreciate your meaningful contributions over the years.
Back to Home

Active Questions

How old do is too old for a woman to have a baby?
Family & Parenting / 6:41 PM - Friday January 23, 2009

How old do is too old for a woman to have a baby?

I think 40 years of age is a little too old to have a baby...but that's just me...what do you think?

- Asked by dolphace, A Hippie Chick, Female, 46-55

Read more about the Rating System

The older we get, the older our eggs get. The higher the odds of something being wrong with the baby. I think 35 is a decent cutoff, but that's just my personal opinion. Ideally, the early to mid twenties are supposed to be they say. Whoever the hell "they" are.. LMAO!

- Response by southjerseygirl, A Thinker, Female, 46-55, Administrative

Rating Received:

Perhaps mid 40's should be a fair cutoff when having children...

- Response by richard77, A Creative, Male, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

Community Rating: Community Star

the better question is how young is too young to have a baby? for your's i'd say around the 40s but its not my place to tell a lady she can't get pregnant.

- Response by desota18, A Creative, Male, 22-25, Student

Rating Received:

It's totally up to the individual, but we both know you want be giving birth at 70, probably would kill ya

- Response by 2jacksam, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 66 or older, Denver, Self-Employed

Rating Received:

I agree, I feel 38 should be a cut off point. However, I applaud the grandmother who at 66 or something carried her daughters child for her.

- Response by harleygrl, A Creative, Female, 29-35, Cleveland, Administrative

Rating Received:

Well, since 36 is considered very high risk, I draw the line there, personally. HOWever, that doesn't mean a couple can't adopt more children or foster. Then it's a matter of how spry one is. There are plenty of children waiting to be adopted into loving, caring homes who don't care what age their adoptive parents are. :) xoxo Jenny

- Response by jennylf, A Career Woman, Female, 46-55, Managerial

Rating Received:

My g/f was 42 when she had hers & he turned out fine, so who knows:-)

- Response by spitfire815, A Hippie Chick, Female, 66 or older, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

35 cause babys are at higher risk for birth defects.

- Response by leeann, A Sweet Sarah, Female, 29-35, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

The only reason I'd say it's too old, is b/c it leaves a greater chance for abnormalities for a child born to a woman who is older than 35... like the down syndrome and all that... the older you get, the higher your chances are for having a baby w/ down syndrome.
I agree, 40 is about the age where it's just too old. Besides that, most whomen who get pregnant that old, it was a complete accident.

- Response by A Thinker, Female, 29-35, Financial / Banking

Rating Received:

Mother nature normally makes that decision for women. When their body is too old, they don't have babies.

We now have a booming fertility clinic industry that tries to fool mother nature. It results in some women having babies much too late in life. The percentage of deformed and mentally defective children is way up among the elderly, fertility clinic mothers.

- Response by greenwind, An Intellectual Guy, Male, 56-65, Construction

Rating Received:

if you are over 40, then the chances for the baby to develop Down Syndrom in the womb are like 30% higher. If you are considering it, I would definitaly look up online or somewhere the consequences of having a baby at age 40 or older.

- Response by An Alternative Girl, Female, 26-28, Student

Rating Received:

Im 38 this monday and I am also 4 months pregnant. Yes im considered high risk because im over 35, but the doctors also told me I couldnt conceive, so what do doctors know?!?!

- Response by dreemer43081, A Creative, Female, 36-45, Columbus

Rating Received:

Well Scientifically you are only born with so many eggs as a women and you loose those eggs, of course, 12 a year and by the time you are in your late 30's you are running low and more likely to get an old egg and that is when the likelyhood of diseases or disabilities goes way up. I would say to have a healthy happy pregnancy it would be best to have it by 35 tops. But then again Im not going to tell people what to do.

- Response by raceygirl, A Thinker, Female, 29-35, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

Once she can no longer have children naturally. Stories about women in their 60s and 70s having fertility treatments and giving birth makes me vomit.

- Response by justpassingthru, A Thinker, Female, 56-65, Financial / Banking

Rating Received:

Well, for a woman, 40 may be too old.....

But I'll have you know that I've been carrying SJG's love child for going on 2 years, and as a happy and pleasantly prego 48 year old man.........prenancy is bliss at any age!

- Response by An Intellectual Guy, Male, 36-45, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

Hi Dolphace,

In my opinion, men and women are too old to have children at the point when it is unlikely (based only on their age)that they will be able to rear the child in a hands-on, capable way. If it's true that parenting is the hardest job in the world, I'd hope to have my child when I know that my age is working in my favour: not against me.

Yes: studies have shown that having a child at a later date does hold some benefits. Broadly speaking, it's likey you're earning a decent living (since incomes generally increases with age), and have ironed out the kinks of your youth. You've lived, earned, finished going to school, and might be in a better position to provide for a child, in a material context. But then there's the flip side: Nature likes to play with numbers. And doing the math is scary.

If you are 50 years old and become a parent, you will be 60 when the child is 10. Maybe a spritely, fit "60", but 60 nonetheless. At age 10, a child is bursting with energy that, in turn, demands energy in spades from his parents: emotional, physical, mental. Do they have it? At 60, it's likely their reserves aren't terribly high. And, for all their love and goodwill, they simply won't be as physically capable to be there for their children. That's when the child is 10: before puberty, before late nights, before driver's license woes, and broken hearts. What about at 15, or 16, or 20? Will you even be around for that time in their lives? Will you be lucid? It's something to consider.

Was I ready to have a child at 16, when my body was supremely fertile? No, absolutely not. Am I ready now,at 31, with my body begging me to make a baby as every month passes by? No. What if I'm not ready until I'm 45? What if I don't find my partner until then? Will I decide to get pregnant? I don't know.

But I do know this: I will weigh the fact that my child will be raised by two people who, with age against them, may not be around for very long. Not long enough at all.


- Response by rougemarie, A Thinker, Female, 36-45

Rating Received:

I think as long as she can get pregnant without medical intervention, she's not too old to have a baby. For most women, they can no longer naturally get pregnant between 40-45 but if it does happen, more power to them.

- Response by soccerchica, A Creative, Female, 29-35, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

That really depends on the individuality of each unique woman.
That's something that needs to be discussed and decided by each woman, couple, and working with their doctors and hormonal ability and personal health. There is no one cut off number...
Some woman are having their first at 40, while other's are giving birth to their 5th child in their late 40's.
I'm in my mid 40's and if my health was better, I would LOVE to have another child. I have 4 kids now. My OB/Gyn says there is no reason, from his stand point, I can't or shouldn't- but I have other health issues so I don't think it would be fair.

- Response by momharleyxl, A Cool Mom, Female, 46-55, Los Angeles, Self-Employed

Rating Received:

There was a woman in Great Britain who had a child, with artificial insemination, when she was well into her 60s. Go figure.

- Response by betterbird, A Creative, Male, 46-55, San Francisco, Administrative

Rating Received:

I'm 39 years old and I still play fastball and exercise and take care of myself, but to be honest, I don't think that having a baby at my age would be a 'good' thing...I tend to think about the long term and how having a baby when I'm 40 or older would definitely be more 'work' than my body may be capable of...however, if I could still have children, I probably would have had another one when I was between 35 and 38 because I would still be 'active' enough to keep up with a small child and still enjoy their 'youth' when I was 50 and they were 15...I think that a woman should really consider what shape her body is in, what her body is capable of and how 'healthy' she really is when she decides to have children past 30 because not all women do take care of themselves and not all women are capable of keeping up with an active toddler when they are 35 or really depends on the potential parents and whether they consider themselves capable of having a child or not...:D

- Response by fastball, A Cool Mom, Female, 36-45, Edmonton, Self-Employed

Rating Received:

When she hits menopause. That's how God intended it.

- Response by jophus, A Rebel, Male, 29-35, Artist / Musician / Writer

Rating Received:

After 40 you should just quit trying to make babies.

- Response by A Sweet Sarah, Female, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

mind u, my friend's mom gave her a new little bro at 50!lol

- Response by coccinelle, A Thinker, Female, 29-35, Fashion

Rating Received:

I think that 40 is about right. I would add 20 years to my age and consider that I would want to be around to see the child, at least through school and growing up. I grew up with my children and although it was NOT planned, I think it was the best way to go. We grew up together and it was like a big adventure. :)

- Response by randyl, A Thinker, Female, Who Cares?, Technical

Rating Received:

I think 45 should be the cut off--and that only because your child would be 15 when you would be sixty--just old enough to begin to think about getting out one his / her own. If you have a child older than 45, you may not live to see him / her make adulthood.

It is obvious that the RISK of birth defects goes up when you have a child later in life, but for everyone who emphasized this point I would like to emphasize another point: so many people are damaged because of bad family lives / psychological problems. Often, the damage comes from the fact that their mother was not happy being a mother; she didn't really want the child and the child knows that.

The child would have been much better off with a mother who WANTED to be a mother BECAUSE she WAITED until she was READY to be a mother. Sure, if you wait until 45, you're going to have to be closely monitored and perhaps abort a defective fetus or two, but still--I think the most important thing is to WAIT until you know that you definitely WANT a child.

Right now, I'm 30. I don't know if I particularly want children. If I got pregnant now, it would be a major emergency and I would probably abort. In fifteen years I may finally decide that I want at least one child, and I might be HAPPY going through the gestational process and having a child.

I would rather risk it at 45 and do it when I WANT to do it rather than force myself through something I do not want to do merely because I might not be able to do it later. But that's just me.

- Response by electragold21, A Thinker, Female, 29-35, New York, Teaching

Rating Received:

I personally think mid-thirties should be the cut-off. I have never had children and i'm not going to, i'm 41 now and to me that is too old. My mom was 41 when she had me, my dad was 51. Dad died when I was 2 and mom died when I was 15. All of my grandparents are long dead. My sister is 18 years older than me and will most likely die before me. I guess my point is I turned out okay physically and mentally but a lot of my family was gone before I could enjoy relating to them as an adult because I was born too late. So that made me decide if I did not have a child before 40, forget it.

- Response by tydydgrll, A Thinker, Female, 46-55, Los Angeles

Rating Received:

I totally agree.Although my grandmother was 40 when she had my father.And he was a twin.And my mom was 38 when she had my sister.There is 16 years different in our age.One of those Mistakes that you end up loving. :)

- Response by roanna, A Hippie Chick, Female, 56-65, Self-Employed

Rating Received:


- Response by luckyinkentucky, A Cool Mom, Female, 29-35, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

Menopause is the natural cut-off. I'm 32 and ideally, I'd like to have kids around 40, because until then I'm busy finding myself, the right father for the child and building a career.

HOwever, you shouldn't worry so much about this, because nature has a way of solving it. There are plenty of women whose fertility is SO in the cellar that not even artificial means will help. There are very very very few women who manage to get kids around 40. Even in vitro etc. Look up the figures and you'll see that at 40 the chances are slim to none.

There's also the question of the woman. Some are ripe and ready for kids at 40 and have plenty to offer. Including their own life expectancy of 80+. I'd prefer a mother at 40 rather than one at 16.

- Response by A Thinker, Female, 36-45

Rating Received:

i think 40.

- Response by diamondgirl1018, A Trendsetter, Female, 29-35, New York, Self-Employed

Rating Received:

I'm with u dolphace. I think after u turn 40 it's too late to have children. At that age u often have complications.

- Response by phenomenal1woman, A Thinker, Female, 46-55, Chicago

Rating Received:

Sorry, Dolly but I had my last baby when I was FORTY TWO. She was a perfectly healthy and beautiful daughter and I did not have so much as an asparin for the lavor. I did worry only becasue I had been a heavy drinker before the pregnancy. I had two sons who were 20 and 17 when she was born.

I was so joyful and I would have had one more but my husband (who had not wanted children at that time) didn't comply so she basically grew up as an 'only' child. Now she is a beautiful 22 year old woman and the love of my life.

- Response by englishrose4945, A Life of the Party, Female, 66 or older, Miami, Alternative Medicine

Rating Received:

I think she is too old once she hits menopause. :-)

- Response by seductivepisces9, A Thinker, Female, 36-45, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

you're having my baby-what a lovely way of showin how much you love me.

- Response by movi, A Guy Critical, Male, 56-65, Administrative

Rating Received:

I think it is a very personal and individual decision. My personal one was at the age of 44. Everyone's health, financial means, and support network is different.....some interesting perspectives have been given here.

- Response by nysbikergirl, An Alternative Girl, Female, 56-65, Who Cares?

Rating Received:

I would say no older than 40, the eggs start degrading at age 35 and there's more chances of the baby being born with problems. My mom had my little brother at 46, he's 12 now and has some learning disabilities and problems communicating/relating to people. When he was in the womb, they did an amnio and the dr. said that there was an anomaly in the chromosomes, that this may cause problems in the future but didn't know what exactly.

- Response by kismet3, A Thinker, Female, 36-45, Los Angeles, Other Profession

Rating Received:

It depends on the woman. Alot of women like me are chosing to have children when they are a little older and wiser.

- Response by truefan, A Thinker, Female, 36-45

Rating Received:

After the age of 35 you put yourself at higher risk of having a baby with down syndrome

- Response by cmims3, Female, 46-55, Dallas

Rating Received:

Honestly, I fee that this is God's decision. My sister who is now almost 49 never intended to have any babies, and she didn't think she could, but God saw fit to give her a baby @ 46. Funny thing was she didn't know she was pregnant at first, and she had a really easy pregancy. She did get gestational Diabebtes, but other than that she had a really easy pregnancy and now I have the most adorable neice named Madison! Wea re all so happy about it, but it was a shock when she told us. We didn't believe her at first. LOL!!

I am 41, and never had kids, and I don't intend to, but God might see it differently and who am I to say no to God?

- Response by voodoo68, A Hippie Chick, Female, 46-55, Medical / Dental

Rating Received:

You are never too old if you feel you would like to have a baby. have everything checked. Good luck!

- Response by francoise, A Thinker, Female, 56-65, Teaching

Rating Received:


- Response by osieboo, A Thinker, Female, 56-65

Rating Received:

risk goes up with age but I believe it is a personal choice..if you think you can handle the possibility of a child that may have medical problems, I am almost 38 and I would really love to have another baby...with 4 boys I am still wanting to have another and try for a daughter...but first I have to find a new man.

- Response by nymphgirl1, An Alternative Girl, Female, 36-45, Civil Service

Rating Received:

My wife had our baby at 42 (an accident), and our daughter is fine. In fact, her teachers think she is a genius or at least advanced. She is beautiful and loved by us and all who meet her. I don't think we would have been ready for a child before then. (I was 46)

- Response by cottontown, A Mr. Nice Guy, Male, 56-65, Self-Employed

Rating Received: