How old is too old?
I read in the local paper on Sunday that a 57 year old woman had given birth to twins in Perth recently. The twins had been the result of IVF treatment. I had to pause and re-read that information. 57? Wow. Now these days, 57 is not old in real terms. People are fitter, healthier and yes we are living longer generally speaking.
But having a baby at 57? She will be 70 when her babies are teenagers. I suspect that’s going to be quite stressful for her.
I still remember when Maria Carmen del Bousada aged 66 conceived twins via IVF. She died 2 years later of a tumour and said the drugs used during her intensive fertility treatment might have helped to spread the disease. It was an incredibly sad story for all the parties involved.
This is a really interesting issue for me because my own grandmother fell pregnant by accident at the age of 46. She thought she was going through menopause, and got the shock of her life when the doctor told her she was several months pregnant. And I also know from what she told me she loved being a mother again late in life, but she also admitted it was much harder on her physically and emotionally than it had been when she had her first baby 17 years before.
It’s a pretty rare occurrence for women to give birth over the age of fifty. And according to the Health Department in Perth only six women aged 50 gave birth in WA from 1980 to 2009. A spokeswoman for the Health Department said “Fifty years is the maximum age of a mother recorded in WA…Some, but not all, of these mothers were receiving IVF treatment.”
So it got me thinking. Is there a cut off point for IVF in terms of age? I know many clinics here in Australia have one and from what I gather, these babies were the result of IVF overseas. But in your opinion, how old is too old, or is it really anybody’s business?
17 Member comments Post a reply
After a 57 year old woman gave birth to twins via IVF recently, Sarah asks how old is too old for IVF?
Read the full blog post: How old is too old?
Posted 11 November 2010 - 12:15 AM
Your never too old and why does age always seem to come into it. I'm only 24 with 4 very young beautiful children. I get looked down on a lot and constantly hear people whisper about me and I think to myself well I love my children so much and I care for them and parent them and do everything else for them that a mother in her mid thirties do so age isn't a problem not at all every body has so much love to give and everybody has the right to give that love to whoever they choose at any stage in their life ....
Posted 18 November 2010 - 10:33 AM
hmm I think 57 is miles too old for having kids even if u really really wanted them, you arent going to have the energy to deal with them, can u imagine dealing with teenagers in your 70's....you have to think of the future. In response to the OPs question, for me anything over 45 would be to old...
Posted 18 November 2010 - 12:51 PM
I only think that 57 is too old as you would be classed as a senior citizen when your kids are still little tots. However if I was unable to have kids and didn't get the chance until I was 57 I would still do it.
I wouldn't want to give up being a mum because I am classed 'too old' by the general population.
Posted 18 November 2010 - 08:37 PM
45 and over.. you have to think about your baby and how old you will be when they are getting married or have a baby themselves.. think about how old you child would be when you pass away, will they be able to handle it being so young..
Posted 07 December 2010 - 03:41 AM
I don't really think that we should be judging to be honest. Its their lives, not ours. We may think that we know whats best for them, but everyone is different, and whos to say one persons opinion is right or wrong?
Posted 23 December 2010 - 07:29 AM
i no some very healthy, fit, young looking woman over 45 years old, and id have no problem if they were to get prego threw IVF or naturally.
you can never win, your either to young or two old to have children in someone's eyes, so what is perceived as the perfect age to have children then? im certainly not the judge of that nor do i have the answers, but if i wasn't able to have kids until i was 50, i would do it, and i would be prepared for things such as passing away while they are young from old age, the same as i would be prepared incase i got hit by a bus crossing the road tomorrow.
but im pretty sure at 50+ like any other age you would have the common sense to think about the details and no if you were truly capable of such a thing, before considering such a life altering event.
IMHO
Posted 23 December 2010 - 08:50 AM
I agree i think 50 is to old,you wouldnt have the energy. If you really want kids why not have kids before you get that old? They would of had 30 years to do it....plus the risk of down syndrome and complications with the birth get much higher over age 30.
Posted 01 February 2011 - 08:41 AM
Tho if you fell pregnant by accident at 50 and decided to keep it thats understandable, i just dont think people should wait till its to late.
Posted 01 February 2011 - 08:46 AM
I don't think it is fair on the child. It is pretty much guarenteed that there parents will be dead by the time they are in their early 20's.
I personally want as many years with my own parents as possible and can't imagine having parents in there 90's at this stage of my life.
Posted 01 February 2011 - 09:31 AM
I think it's great that they have discovered ways to help people concieve babies but be realistic, there are reasons you can't concieve naturally at that age. It's not fair to bring a life into this world and not be there to care for it. Why put it off for that long?
Posted 01 February 2011 - 09:56 AM
completley agree, especially with the highlighted part, coming from a person who lost their mother at a very young tender age of 13
Posted 01 February 2011 - 10:12 AM
I honest to god think if your over 40 its time to try and avoid getting pregnant unless you are a sarogate or have had ovum donated because the risks are sooo high for your unborn child and the most responsible thing to do for the sake of your children and those that care for them is to minimise the risks. I think once your over 50 you shouldn't have children for yourself even if the ovum are donated just for the fact that children shouldnt have to look after there parents before they have had a chance to live themselves let alone the social effects it may have on them. If your over 50 and a sarogate thats a different thing.
Look at that women a thew years ago who did the same, forged her documents to make her age lower so she could get IVF treatment (even though she already had a large family, about 5 children going off memery) and she had twins and she was in her early 60's/late 50's and last year she died suddenly those poor pre-schoolers will never really know who there mother was and there father is aging rapidly!
Is that really a fair situation for those children to be intentionally put in for no doubt selfish needs?
Posted 02 February 2011 - 12:52 AM
I think 40 and over is a little late to have a baby.. You need to look at how old you will be when your child is a teenager and all the teenage problems that will arise.. and even look at how old you child will be when you die, will they be old enough to deal with death ect.
But saying that some for some women its the only chance they get to have a baby.. I would never judge or look down at older or younger women for having a baby. Its up to them individually when they are ready for it.. I get looks all the time for being 21 with a 10month old, some people think im too young, but im married and own our own business and love my daughter to death..
Posted 08 February 2011 - 10:19 PM
I completely agree!
I too get bad looks from time to time, I'm 20 with a 3 year old and trying for number two but like you no one stops to think about how I may not be a typical young mum!
I got married when I was pregnant to my sons father, I did plan on getting pregnant but only because I have fertility problems that wont allow me to wait, I have since done a cert in health sciences, I have just start up my own baby supplies business and plan on being a midwife (most of these things were inspired by my son coming into this world).
Posted 09 February 2011 - 12:26 AM
This topic has been done before, and I always personally find the responses very hurtful. Yes, I'm sensitive about this issue, it's not nice to hear other people say it's irresponsible and selfish of me to have a child. If the OP ever read other forum posts, she'd have known that this very subject was brought up just days before she posted this one (which was some time ago).
I wasn't going to (yet again) post in this thread, but as someone who became a mother at age 42, I feel I should clarify some enormous misconceptions about women who become mothers "later" in life:
For an article to become newsworthy, obviously the scenario has to be extreme, as is the case with the article the OP mentioned. I don't know the details, so I can't comment on that specific case.
A couple of posters mentioned women WAITING until they're over 40 or even over 50. Now be reasonable, do you honestly think these women "waited" that long to have a child, as part of their Life Plan? Who sits down at age 20 and decides to start a family at 50???
For many women, a stable relationship and financial stability is something they aren't prepared to negotiate on when it comes to bringing a child into this world. Some just don't achieve this happy place at the age of 25. If a woman, for instance, tragically lost her life partner in her early thirties, it stands to reason that some may take a long time to find a partner to share their life, and parenthood with.
Although a woman's fertility marginally drops from her mid thirties, most women are, in fact, capable of conceiving naturally until they're in their late forties to early fifties. Now, we're talking IVF here, I know, the fact is that Mother Nature saw fit to design our bodies to be able to have children until that age, so it only stands to reason that women who struggle with fertility issues should be assisted up to at least that age range.
Yes, I probably won't be around to enjoy my great grandchildren, I may not see my son grow into adulthood - but then, no one, regardless of age, has that guarantee, do they? Any one of us could be hit by a bus tomorrow. Both my grandmothers has children in their 40's, one passed away when her youngest was 24, the other when her youngest was well into his forties himself.
To the PP who mentioned the teenage years and all the problems that will arise from having a teenager when you're older - how does age come to play in it? It's not as if you need to be able to physically restrain your teenager. Most people in their 60s, 70s and 80s are still of very sound mind, which is surely all you need to "deal" with a difficult teenager? How will a younger parent do it better than an older parent?
The risk of chromosomal anomalies DOES increase with age. There are also some very reliable tests that can be performed to eliminate or confirm this. And even with the significantly increased risk, the risk is still very low - it's not as if one in 10, or 20 or even 50 or a 100!!! children born to a mother older than 40 are disabled. For many women such as myself those are risks we felt comfortable taking, obviously.
But most importantly, age is a number - some people won't have the enthusiasm or energy to raise a child regardless of age. Yet others have the energy and enthusiasm but just not the inclination or dedication. I have all these things, in abundance. The women I know who have children after 40, do as well. I am sure there are many who were "old" by the time they reached 30.
But just as I can say there are some young women out there who are really silly, irresponsible and selfish and who are not fit for motherhood, I'd NEVER make that a general statement to include all, because I know that there are many who are wonderful mothers. Perhaps it would be the INTELLIGENT route to not make gross generalisations about people who become parents later in life, either.
Now in conclusion, I have to be honest - I don't know what would drive a woman in her late 50s, who already has children, to want more. Women of all ages have children for the wrong reasons all the time. I suppose it goes without saying that there will be older women wanting IVF treatment for the wrong reasons, as well.
Posted 09 February 2011 - 12:28 AM
I think it also depends on health of woman to <a href="http://www.huggies.com.au/conception/blog/109-t...; at such a high age. And i also think that it is maximum limit of age to conceive but a wonder for twins.
Posted 22 June 2012 - 01:33 AM
Follow the discussion on the forum.
You need to confirm your account to comment.