How Old Is Too Old to Have a Baby?


Women are constantly told that after the age of 35 their chances of having a baby naturally significantly decreases. However, there are many stories of women giving birth over the age of 60. But just because you can have a baby in your 50’s and 60’s, should you? Some people believe it’s unfair on the child since by the time he or she reaches their teenage years they could potentially have to take on a role of caregiver to their elderly parent. What do you think LiveTribers? If you could have a baby in your 50’s, would you? How old is too old to have a baby?

Posted by on 09 Jan 2019

tweet this
  • [0] [0]
    Winifred

    You're never too old to achieve anything in your life. Your own body will let you know when you can't conceive anymore.

    Posted by Winifred on 15 Mar 2019

  • [0] [0]
    Daniel

    Well I think it is up to the couple who are thinking of having a child and the age should not have any thing too do with the age I f they still have eggs or producing eggs they must still be alright

    Posted by Daniel on 28 Feb 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Kim

    I reckon that depends on the woman how she is feeling and medically OK to have one let them but they should really think about it if there over 50

    Posted by Kim on 16 Feb 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Lorraine

    All women have an age bracket to consider. Sometimes these pregnancies and/or babies are planned and other times, well, just maybe, we should have occupied ourselves with something other than sex. When it all falls into place, love, togetherness and respect, isn't that enough. Mind you, if I kept waiting for when I could afford to have them.... I would be childless.

    Posted by Lorraine on 03 Feb 2019

  • [1] [0]
    TessEBear

    Whilst I believe that you are only as old as you feel, and limited only by your own limits; I have an example to think about. A woman I know had her child at age 22. Her partner was almost 60. Some will initially look at these circumstances and think, "Well, at least one parent is young". Let me tell you something. For a while, these circumstances worked and worked well. The child is now 8 years old. Her father has since passed away and her mother unexpectedly had a bleed to the brain and is in full time care. The child is now in foster care. The important thing to remember is the best interests of the child. Unexpected illness, like that of the mother in my story CAN happen at any age. But obviously being older when you have children, leaves the chances of a child ending up in state care a lot higher.

    Posted by TessEBear on 01 Feb 2019

  • [2] [0]
    Heather

    I have 5 beautiful babies eldest being 30 and the youngest being 15 .i was 41 when my youngest was born and i wouldnt change anything for the world it is up to the lady and man having the baby children are beautiful they bring so much happynesd to your life kind regards Heather.

    Posted by Heather on 27 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Prince

    Women should have babies at the age of 25 to 35 because that is the most active age for example at the age of 25 a woman can do as many jobs as she can but when they get to late 30s the strenght starts to decrease bit by bit....

    Posted by Prince on 14 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Amandeep

    I think it is too late to have a baby at the age of 50s. So as per my view best age for having baby is between 26 to 40.

    Posted by Amandeep on 14 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    Katrina

    So long as you can provide love and all basic needs the child requires for a healthy upbringing then why does it really matter. So long as the child is looked after and the family is a secure happy place for the child to grow in I don't really mind how old the parents are. #letsalljustbehappy

    Posted by Katrina on 13 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    Dave R

    I became a father for the final time at age sixty. I am now almost seventy. So far it's working out well. As long as you are healthy age does not matter.

    Posted by Dave R on 13 Jan 2019

  • [0] [1]
    Dr. Stitch

    I find it would be unfair on the child to watch the passing of a parent when they are still teenagers and still relying on the parents.... .. I would say 46 to 48 is too old

    Posted by Dr. Stitch on 13 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    1soccer

    It is completely up to the person involved, but my opinion would be before 45 is able to.

    Posted by 1soccer on 13 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Emma

    Around mid to late 50s is a bit old to be having babies .

    Posted by Emma on 13 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    AVA

    Personally Late 20's early 30's is exceptable, but then it's really up to the individual, also the person's circumstances.

    Posted by AVA on 13 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    matti

    I think you are taking risks on both the child and yourself by having kids when you are in your 40's. Think about this. If you have a child at 45, you will be retired by the time they are 21.

    Posted by matti on 12 Jan 2019

  • [0] [0]
    Rugbratzmum

    I had my 6th child at 35, even though I was a lot calmer of a mum and coped quiet easy, it was harder on my daughter by the time she started school, I was a older mum then most of her peers mums And she noticed that at age 5. She is 11 now and I’m 46 and she doesn’t mind that I’m older then her friends mums now. But I still feel young at heart and recently spent fun playing around racing her up and down a rope climb at the park. So having her at 35 hasn’t been a issue for me, just that my daughter had noticed I was a older then her friends mums.

    Posted by Rugbratzmum on 12 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Allison

    I would hate to be the bearer of denying a 60 year old woman trying to fall pregnant for 30 years

    Posted by Allison on 12 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Winnypoo

    Hi, it is a personal choice. My parents were 39 and 40 when I was born, wonderful parents, but lost both quite early. I do not agree with women of 50 or 60 having Ivf babies.wasting resources

    Posted by Winnypoo on 12 Jan 2019

  • [3] [0]
    Ro

    Hello all ! I dont know its a really hard topic and sensative topic as you dont want to take side and you dont want to say what is right and what is wrong because simply there is no right or wrong answer. I will give you all an example what would you do in this senario (Situation) OK so I heard read of a lady had her first baby daughter in her mid 30's. She was placed on antideprepressants after she had the birth a couple weeks later. Now she always wanted a big family and children. She was on the medication for 4 years. She took herself off medication of course speaking to the doctor first she did. So now 40 he wants another. So in this situation she having waited this long wanting a child is she old to have a child ? My opinion is no I think she is ok as this is the right time for her and before was not as she was on medication. I think whenever is the right time to have a baby then its ok. you hear about a lot of women in their 40s having a child. I personally would have at any age that I think I could manage and handle.

    Posted by Ro on 12 Jan 2019

  • [1] [4]
    Paula

    I speak from personal experience and this is not a judgement call, but if you haven't had your children by the time you are 30 you should forget it. However, people these days don't seem to be as bright as people in my day and they seem to do stupid things with their children, and some are not fit to have children. My husband was born to a 41 year old mother and hated it as all his siblings were adults when he was born. Older parents don't cope as well as younger ones. I wanted a lot of children but my husband said they had to be born while we were both young so when the last one arrived when I was 30 we said that would be it. I find babysitting my grandchildren tiring, rewarding but tiring so I can imagine what it would be like full time, and I don't think it's fair on the children. My husband and I agreed family first, careers, holidays and life after, and thankfully we are both healthy enough to have done it all. Having said that, the brat born to me at 30 says he doesn't want a life like ours, waiting to enjoy himself, he wants it all now. It is much more enjoyable when you are free to relax and enjoy it.

    Posted by Paula on 11 Jan 2019

  • [2] [2]
    Barbils

    I remember being told during my General Nursing & Maternity Training that womnn over 40 who became pregnant were more at risk of having an intellectually handicapped child.

    Posted by Barbils on 11 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Paula

    I think the stats prove that to be the case.

    Posted by Paula on 11 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    David

    Times are changing economic trends values influence this question for family's to have families at different age groups.

    Posted by David on 11 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Rossconsult

    I believe it depends entirely on the parents & their economic situation. Do they own a house? Are they financially independent? Are there already other children? etc. It is a huge responsibility & not just something to create on a whim.

    Posted by Rossconsult on 11 Jan 2019

  • [3] [1]
    Maddison

    I believe personally a 40 year old can have a baby if you are so eger and are longing for a child go for it.

    Posted by Maddison on 11 Jan 2019

  • [2] [1]
    lord mayor

    it is best that you can enjoy the children's younger years as when you get to 50 plus you cannot always be able to look after your young children. you cannot get as involved as you could the older you get

    Posted by lord mayor on 11 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    Jannette

    Interesting comments,my parents were 17 and 21 years old when My sister was born,then sister number 2 came a year later,the i was born a year after her.Our Brother came 5 years later.We are all close to Mum and Im very close to my father .Their marriage lasted 19 years and it was not a easy life but we all survived it My Father had another 4 girls,they are 37,36,35 and 32.They are all settled and all close to dad who just turned 77. I believe its up to the individuals,their own personal securities and desires.

    Posted by Jannette on 11 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    Leanne

    I’m 43 and still no chn as yet..definately a desire to have one..before 50 would be good..l’ve witnessed women who have had babies in their forty’s etc without no health complications for both mother and baby/s definately doesn’t concern me health wise..and depends who the individual is as the child and parents get older..parents who are healthy and active full of life have nothing to be concerned about the child will be blessed with sensible, mature, fun loving, parents

    Posted by Leanne on 11 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    Danon2019

    Too old is over 75

    Posted by Danon2019 on 11 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    tassiegirl

    I forgot to say my husband was 43 when we had our first daughter. I think some of the most important things are your physical health, keeping yourself fit and healthy, being mentally well and also your mental attitude. Some people are very old at 40 while other people are much more sharp at 80 or 90. As for the comments about teasing, I have not experienced that yet. My child is almost 4. My mother had me at 22 and then 3 other children by the age of 30. I do remember being embarrassed of my mother at school in the mornings because she was always dressed in her dressing gown and she was overweight. As an older mum, I have plenty of time to spend with my child. We play inside and outside. I have a very close relationship with my daughter. Everybody should have a child when it is the right time for them (they are in a stable relationship, they have got a job and finished their education). You can have a child before all these things are done, but it will be harder in the long term. I walked regularly when I was pregnant, ate well and went to the gym up to 3 weeks before the baby was born. I had my child naturally with no pain relief. My daughter says that we are cool, good and fun parents.

    Posted by tassiegirl on 11 Jan 2019

  • [3] [0]
    Chris

    Older people are generally more financially independent and don’t rely on welfare

    Posted by Chris on 11 Jan 2019

  • [6] [0]
    Mkleed

    im 46 my baby is 2.5 and I run rings around most 21 year olds im fitter and healthier than majority of younger people I know.. I believe that my 2.5 keeps me young keeps me active and keeps me healthy . Don't you think women who have babies in there later years consider all the possible outcomes as in declining health , capability and responsibility . Women at later age having bubs often have had the life done the travelling did the work commitments had the financial struggle so having a bub from say 35 + often means we have more time more patients more financial stability we don't lean on the already bursting childcare system or welfare system and we are often in long term relationships that have already been tried and tested . I have had 5 children ages 27 ,26,24,22,2 and I tell anyone who will listen my 2 year old is getting the absolute best of me .Thx for reading

    Posted by Mkleed on 11 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    Flutterfree

    I think people start their families at different stages of their life for their own reasons & individual circumstances. If those people are happy & healthy enough, it's their business & no one else's. I was 30 when I had my first baby, had been trying many years prior but it just wasn't natures plan. I now have 4 happy, healthy children.

    Posted by Flutterfree on 11 Jan 2019

  • [5] [0]
    poopsie

    no 50 -60 is far to old to have a child - they would end up very lonely as parents would have passed on by the time they got into their twenties - I think it is just a selfless, thoughtless act to do this to your own child

    Posted by poopsie on 11 Jan 2019

  • [5] [0]
    Laineimarie

    No I wouldn't like to be in my 70s when the child turns 21

    Posted by Laineimarie on 10 Jan 2019

  • [1] [3]
    Not_A_DoDo

    Well this has been interesting reading. What a large percentage of self centered selfish brats. life is life, and you will have children whenever, unless you take the pill or have an abortion. Apparently from the comments not many have had a broad education or exposure to people of different lifestyles.. Pity that selfishness means they will miss out on so much.

    Posted by Not_A_DoDo on 10 Jan 2019

  • [9] [0]
    Maureen

    I was 15 when my birth mother passed away aged 42. I wanted a large family and only has three children before my marriage broke down aged 32 I wanted more children but I decided to foster. I have had my three foster children now 11 years making me 55 when they came to live with me. I received four beautiful boys of the age of 3 mths, four, six and 10 birth mum who was in her early 20s gave birth to another boy four years later with severe disabilities which I was u able to take them less than 12 months later mum gave birth to a girl who came home with me when she was two days old she is now 7 and I am 66 I would never change my life the children give me so much more than I could ever give them the eldest is now out of care the next boy has decided to go back to his parents I am so happy with my additional family although I never gave birth to them they are mine in every sense of the word I now have three beautiful reasons to live for.

    Posted by Maureen on 10 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Ro

    Thats wonderful. So much love and blessing to you all !! Beautiful example of how we could all be by fostering.

    Posted by Ro on 12 Jan 2019

  • [5] [0]
    seranita

    congratulations and best wishes for your continuing good health and for the love you give to these children.

    Posted by seranita on 11 Jan 2019

  • [6] [0]
    Keith

    If a teenager has problems with caring with an elderly person, they must acknowledge that the would not be in this world if it didn't happen. My wife and I are in our late 80s. I sold my business 4 years ago so we could follow our hobbies of buying, renovating and selling houses, so we have no time to have more babies. We certainly to not need a teenager to look after us. Perhaps i do not have the necessary experience to comment.

    Posted by Keith on 10 Jan 2019

  • [6] [0]
    Dutch clogs

    No I would'nt have babies in my 50s or 60s I want to enjoy my children when I'm young which I did as you never know what's going to happen when you get older in my case I got cancer 2 times in my 40s at least I could play with my children when I was young I wouldn't been able if I left having children when I got older so up to 35 is ok to me

    Posted by Dutch clogs on 10 Jan 2019

  • [0] [0]
    Paula

    I am looking after my 92 year old mother. I can just imagine what it would be like if she had me in her 40's or 50's. I would be in the middle of my life with all it's complications, and could even possibly have a baby to care for as well. It gives you something to think about.

    Posted by Paula on 11 Jan 2019

  • [2] [1]
    Greg

    42 think how old you will be when baby is 21

    Posted by Greg on 10 Jan 2019

  • [2] [1]
    aimyma

    reproduction wise and having a healthy baby with no health issues i would say 45 and under but always depends on the persons circumstance.

    Posted by aimyma on 10 Jan 2019

  • [4] [1]
    Riorita

    Never became pregnant until I was 34 then at 38 then again at 41 almost 42. And never regretted a thing. I am grateful and full of love for these wonderful gifts. I was fit and healthy and still am thankfully

    Posted by Riorita on 10 Jan 2019

  • [4] [3]
    Pupsie

    After turning 40 should be the cutoff. My Mother was 40 when she had me, and when I was 20, she was 60, and so much older than my friends' Mums.

    Posted by Pupsie on 10 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    musicveg

    so what if she was older than your friends mums?

    Posted by musicveg on 12 Jan 2019

  • [2] [5]
    Sugar Ray

    Not after 35, 20 to 35 is the optimum period. If you have a child at 35, when it is 18 you are going to called an "old fart" by your child and basically ignored.

    Posted by Sugar Ray on 10 Jan 2019

  • [3] [0]
    Mkleed

    that would depend how how that child was raised whether it was with respect or not wouldn't you agree

    Posted by Mkleed on 11 Jan 2019

  • [1] [2]
    marymont

    Have to disagree entirely with this. 35 is nowhere near the cutoff age and as for the rest, !!!!

    Posted by marymont on 10 Jan 2019

  • [3] [1]
    hardbags

    about 40 should be the cutoff to give the kids quality time with their healthy parents.

    Posted by hardbags on 10 Jan 2019

  • [1] [3]
    A48

    my mother was mid 30s when I was born. That was due to WW2 separating my brother and myself by 9.5yrs. I found my mother tried to be more involved but because of age she was unable to do the things little kids like to do in the yard. Older parents cause embarrassment for children when introducing friends - that your grandfather? IVF has seen over 40s and the trauma post natally can be something else. Baby joy is not such a baby joy. Best age is 15yrs. Old maternally physical at 25yo.

    Posted by A48 on 10 Jan 2019

  • [3] [2]
    marymont

    Are you actually saying 15 is a good time to have a baby?! What about how young is too young to have a baby?

    Posted by marymont on 10 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    squeekums1

    Completely agree

    Posted by squeekums1 on 10 Jan 2019

  • [3] [0]
    Iggy's mum

    If a woman conceives through IVF after eg menopase or after about 40 I do not think it a good idea. Mother Nature does things for a reason and in this case it's because it is too much strain on the woman's body or she has underlying health issues that will affect the pregnancy or baby ... or she's at an age where she won't have the energy to deal with looking after a baby, toddler or teenager. Most kids think their parents are old, can you imagine a kid with a parent that is the age of most another kids' grandparent? Just because modern medicine can achieve something, it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Remember Darwin's Theory of Evolution?

    Posted by Iggy's mum on 10 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    angrymum

    I had my first child at 41 and my second at 43. No IVF involved. My boys are now 17 and 15 and no problems. I was married at 24 for 17 years and for 14 years in that marriage we tried and tried and it just didn't happen for us. It eventually led to divorce after all the pressure and my husband did take off with another woman with two young children. I eventually met someone else and fell pregnant within months. Children fill a void that's missing. I did not feel I was too old to have children but really didn't think I ever would after trying for so long. 40 is not too old to have children but at 50, you really do start to wind down and the last thing you want to do is jump on a trampoline.

    Posted by angrymum on 11 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    Ro

    I really enjoyed reading your comment. I think so many people get scared to have children in 40's from all the reading online that how the baby would turn out. Is there special test that you did having a child at 41 and 43 ? I read there are certain test that they do if pregnant 40 and over.

    Posted by Ro on 12 Jan 2019

  • [0] [0]
    musicveg

    Funny to read at 50 you start to wind down, I am the opposite, I am over 50 and am healthier and fitter than I have ever been, feel like I am winding up. You do have to work at it a bit though.

    Posted by musicveg on 12 Jan 2019

  • [3] [0]
    Not_A_DoDo

    Firstly with respect, Darwind THEORY of Eveolution has been proven by scientist to be just what it said THEORY and not fact.. As to the rest, that is factual, if you are meant to have a bably you will have one naturally,, I have seen too many people spend a fortune on IVF and then end up in the drink... best to leave mother nature alone.

    Posted by Not_A_DoDo on 10 Jan 2019

  • [3] [0]
    Mia Bettina

    45 years would be the limit, I think.Any older and children may have to look after ageing parents. And it is quite embarrassing for the child to have Parents attend e.g their graduation , being the age of grandparents. There comes an age where wanting to be a parent is a selfish wish.

    Posted by Mia Bettina on 10 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    marli

    As a Grandparent, I loved being involved in my grandchildren's lives and they actively involved both grandparents in their school and sport and other things. I have been mistaken for the parent of my grandchildren, at different places. The 26-year-old loves it when he hears it and makes a point of coming to me and addressing me as Grandma. Some people think he is being rude, then we laugh. It's good fun, we think!

    Posted by marli on 11 Jan 2019

  • [6] [0]
    musicveg

    Never too old if you can conceive naturally, as for IVF I don't believe in it myself because people need to realize that if you are unhealthy you maybe should not have a child, if you are healthy you will conceive naturally. As for IVF after menopause, I don't think it is wise to go against nature. I had my son when I was 39 and have had no issues whatever except most of my friends at the time already had grown up kids or were not interested, so I had to find new friends which most were younger and it expanded my outlook on life and I felt younger myself. It inspired me to give up all vices, get myself fit and healthier and still does today. I have a great relationships with my son now he is a teenager and we go hiking and bike riding, I am actually fitter than him!. Also being an older mum I never missed my social life or anything else which I had already done. But bottom line is it depends on each person whether having children late in life is good or not. Many younger parents party too much or push their kids aside to fulfill their interests but then other younger ones are fantastic.

    Posted by musicveg on 09 Jan 2019

  • [0] [0]
    Mkleed

    I totally agree the unwanted preg rate in younger people is huge same with accidental preg due to no contraception mature women who have a baby late in life I do not know the percentage but im sure its not accidentally but more a choice and thought has gone into it

    Posted by Mkleed on 11 Jan 2019

  • [1] [0]
    musicveg

    Actually mine was accidental, but so glad it happened even if I did end up on my own. I was not even thinking of having kids so it turned out to be a blessing for me, got me on a better track in life.

    Posted by musicveg on 12 Jan 2019

  • [5] [0]
    Horn

    What a sensible answer , good for you and what a lucky boy your son is to have you for his mum !!!

    Posted by Horn on 10 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    Greg

    You need to think carefully about whether you will still be around to support your child through until at least their 20's. It is bad enough losing your parents in later life without losing them when you are young. Yes there is much joy in being a parent but to become one for purely selfish reasons can end badly for the child.

    Posted by Greg on 09 Jan 2019

  • [3] [3]
    Jenny

    l think its once youare over 40 you need to be able to keep up with your child and not be too old for them .

    Posted by Jenny on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    Rhiannon

    I personally think have a child when your younger to prevent not having one at all

    Posted by Rhiannon on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [3]
    Marie

    No because at 46 when the child is school age you are 51 or 2 and other children will tease or call the Mum Grandma and this causes stress to the child. Also if you are still working as u get older it's much harder to do both. I am the voice of experience.

    Posted by Marie on 09 Jan 2019

  • [6] [3]
    Harry

    Wow there are some rubbish comments here. My mother was 43 when i was born. My father was 62. Autism? To much acid in your younger or ice these days. Seriously, you can do whatever you want in a free world. As long as you are all happy. If you can do it, well do it. And if it feels good, do it.

    Posted by Harry on 09 Jan 2019

  • [1] [1]
    hjlkpt

    good on u i agree

    Posted by hjlkpt on 10 Jan 2019

  • [2] [1]
    Horn

    Good on you Harry , people need to get a life , it is the business of no one else . As long as people are happy !!!!

    Posted by Horn on 10 Jan 2019

  • [4] [1]
    Yerongaboy

    For women, nature says the menopause. For men, as long as they can still produce sperm and engage in the act for procreation.

    Posted by Yerongaboy on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [1]
    Roqia

    Around 45 up to 60

    Posted by Roqia on 09 Jan 2019

  • [4] [4]
    Maggie45

    I think that you should not have any babies after the age of 45 it is not fair to the child as he or she gets older. Up to 45 years old is okay to have a child if you are healthy like my Mom and her son who is 1 1/2 years younger than my son and 6 months than my daughter. All three children grew up together.

    Posted by Maggie45 on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [2]
    Barry

    I would say 45 or to be exact 40-45. Depending on gender make up the risks of a new born child suffering from an abnormality are greater at a later age and the consequences of greater needs of care can be devastating to some families.

    Posted by Barry on 09 Jan 2019

  • [1] [2]
    Lyn

    Mid to late 40’s is old enough.

    Posted by Lyn on 09 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    David

    It all depends on your level of physical fitness and time you have to send with your child, not just now, but well into the future, at least 20 years

    Posted by David on 09 Jan 2019

  • [3] [5]
    marli

    I think 40 is the maximum age. Considering how times change so fast now, are you going to be able to cope with the sports, the study, the social expectations, your own health? However, there is always the exception to the rule. Some people may manage, but their children are not going to have the same relationship with the grandparents or their parents as a child with younger parents. Many 'stars' have twins and older ones have late children, like Anthony Quinn. I suspect IVF. I think IVF should be banned.

    Posted by marli on 09 Jan 2019

  • [1] [1]
    coaster

    Don't agree that IVF should be banned. Some women and men have physical problems and they would love to have a child or two. Most are financially secure and can give a child a great life. Compare this to a young 18 year old for instance who is on drugs and unemployment or a single mothers pension. Who has the most right to have a child.

    Posted by coaster on 10 Jan 2019

  • [5] [3]
    kallico2004

    How on earth can you say IVF should be banned?. Do you not know the joy it can bring?

    Posted by kallico2004 on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [2]
    DJC

    I think that 40/45 is about the cut off limit as you have to consider how whether you will have the stamina and ability to cope with a child as you grow older.

    Posted by DJC on 09 Jan 2019

  • [8] [1]
    Writer Steven

    I'm male so it's probably not my place, but they never say a man is too old. Anthony Quinn fatheted a child in his 80s and he was praised for maintaining his virility. The double standards are staggering.

    Posted by Writer Steven on 09 Jan 2019

  • [3] [0]
    frannymanny

    Absolutely! A few years ago a man in his 90s married a woman in her 40s and to their amazement, they had a son. Young Oscar was 6 when his Dad, a farmer, died. It seems that the little boy was his father's shadow on the farm and for 6 years didn't miss out on love and care in any way. My parents were both in the army during the second world war. They married in the middle of the war,1943. My mother had three children who did not survive, they would have done now but prem babies were a whole different ball game then. I was my parents first surviving child, born when my mother was39, my sister was born 18 months later. We never experienced teasing or embarrassment because of our grey-haired parents. Our Dad was much more engaged and fun than our friend's parents. In fact, our friends were jealous that we had such a "funny" father and wished that their Dads were just like him. Mum was always there and always interested in us and our friends. The aging parents thing never came up because mum died at the age of 63, when I was 23 and dad died at 72 when I was 34. Again, they died of things which would not be an issue today. You do not know how things will turn out but I have to say, we had great parents.

    Posted by frannymanny on 10 Jan 2019

  • [3] [3]
    libbazz

    50s. Must think of child's childhood being more subdued than a younger woman's lifestyle. More possibility of having a disabled child due to old egg/young sperm complications, namely autism.

    Posted by libbazz on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [9]
    vegandelight

    Autism is Proven to be from vaccines & has nothing to do with the age of the parents. Prior to 'autism', there were many, many normal kids born to parents vastly differing in age. I know because I grew up with some.

    Posted by vegandelight on 09 Jan 2019

  • [3] [4]
    musicveg

    You are right vegandelight, but most people don't believe that vaccines are such a tragic, debilitating, unnecessary, unproven and evil, full of toxic chemicals that you would not feed a baby so why inject it?

    Posted by musicveg on 09 Jan 2019

  • [7] [2]
    ToWin4Me

    You don't get Autism from vaccinations and has never been proven. Wrong info like this is why misinformed parents don't get their kids vaccination which is totally irresponsible. Autism doesn't discriminate against vaccinated kids, age of parents. Normally comes from a gene defect in the parents. Like Aspergers..comes from the fathers side. People need to be educated more about vaccinations

    Posted by ToWin4Me on 09 Jan 2019

  • [6] [2]
    Yerongaboy

    there has been no credible research that has linked autism with any vaccines. Reading DSMs III, IV and V, the diagnosis of conditions such as autism have changed their criteria over the past three decades.

    Posted by Yerongaboy on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [0]
    aaallyy

    I'm convinced you're trolling.

    Posted by aaallyy on 09 Jan 2019

  • [0] [0]
    vegandelight

    ToWin4Me.... the many links between Autism & vax has been proven year after year by independent researchers & verified by testing vax samples given, which are easily traceable. Of course Big Pharma have funded their own studies to disprove these findings, but they have been successfully rebutted by a growing number of Medical Professionals. Currently, due to Big Pharma imposing a liability limit of $1000 a patient, the victims are being 'compensated' by the Federal Govt or are on a waiting list for this. Of course Big Pharma don't want their multi-billion dollar income stream interrupted, so they are doing everything to suppress & 'manage' the situation, from Govt Lobbying to Media Pressure to killing off the victims or otherwise silencing them. For loving parents who bother to research what those pricks jam into their kids bloodstream directly, bypassing the immune system totally, and reject the myth of 'herd mentality' is not 'misinformed' as you said, but is the exact opposite! Individuals, not doctors nor The State have sovereign rights over their own bodies! At the heart of the Western Medical Profession for centuries has been "informed consent", which is clearly replaced by cajoling, bullying, shaming & Force today. Stop blaming things that Big Pharma caused (to keep you sick your whole life whilst being fed their quack remedies to ease your symptoms) on the parents, genes or the child - history has repeated itself there (they just keep on repeating every time what has worked for them before!). Reading further, history shows (the Real history), that vaccines never ever fixed anything at all & rising Living Standards, improved sanitation, public works, etc, etc did more to eliminate every disease known to man faster than anything Big Pharma ever gave us. Informed Consent. Remember that no doctor has any right to force their treatments on you nor your children ever. Mark my words, in my lifetime there will be a Royal Commission upon the Medical Profession that will break it down so much that it will never rear its ugly head again.

    Posted by vegandelight on 11 Jan 2019

  • [1] [3]
    Not_A_DoDo

    ToWin4Me, you might like to do some research before having an opinion.. also try reading the flyers that come with the so called vaccines and see what is in them.. Just a question seeing you are you educated... why do newborns and then at 4 months need hep a & b ????? I know you are the one that is misinformaed.... Dont know where you live, but the Australian and other countries have the information on their gov websites...j And I wouldnt be going any where near what they call vaccines to day because vaccinnes is a lie. AND PROVEN OVER AND OVER AND OVER, but some people still live where the sun dont shine...

    Posted by Not_A_DoDo on 10 Jan 2019

  • [1] [1]
    musicveg

    Yes they do need to get educated,but most information you will find is biased. Try GreenMed Info for information about the toxic ingredients used in vaccines.

    Posted by musicveg on 09 Jan 2019

  • [2] [1]
    vegandelight

    One of the issues is finance & access to all the help & money required that younger people seem not to have as much of as when they're older. Reliable networks of friends & helpers are very important. Younger people sacrifice their careers for their families. Government help at all levels is next to useless, as it has become totally conditional - 'do as we say or you get nothing but abuse'. I'm pro-population. There's nothing wrong with older, experienced & wiser people raising children & there are many benefits to be had from this. It'd be good to see teens caring for the elderly & it's not just a 'one way street' as you seem to project.

    Posted by vegandelight on 09 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    tassiegirl

    I had my first child at 37. My child was healthy and well. I was generally very well during pregnancy. It depends on the individual and their circumstances. You can try having a child up to your mid 40s, although IVF success rate is very low. It is more successful with younger people. Our child was naturally conceived. If people in their fifties and sixties want to have children, they should foster a child. There are many children that need fostering, who need attention and love.

    Posted by tassiegirl on 09 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    Hoonette

    I wish it was as easy to foster and/or adopt as it is to say 'just go adopt one'. You have to fill in soooo much paperwork, jump through soo many hoops and pay soo much money and then there is STILL no guarantee. Yes there are many many children out there needing permanent homes, but the legal process in this country makes it so very difficult to give them one.

    Posted by Hoonette on 09 Jan 2019

  • [4] [0]
    vegandelight

    Have you tried the foster care process? We have. After months of expensive 'training' & 'education', we were booted out by the state. People should have more freedom of choice, not have family planning intervention by the Nanny State. Even if older people did have a caregiver agenda for their kids, is that so bad? I had several jobs side-by-side with my education - mostly unpaid or massively under-paid. If family were the care-givers, like we see in many other developing countries, it'd take a big burden off the economy & give teens skills, experience & responsibility, including a better set of family values.

    Posted by vegandelight on 09 Jan 2019

Join LiveTribe
Thousands of Aussies and Kiwis have already discovered the benefits of their FREE LiveTribe membership. Join and start earning online today! Sign Up
Get Rewarded!

Comment on brands, products and services and be rewarded for your opinions! Join in and discover LiveTribe’s extensive range of rewards.

View More
Join Our Monthly Competition!

Enter for a chance to win a $100 prize. LiveTribe's Autumn Word Jumble 345 x 145

Members Testimonials
Lyn
"This is a great site. Love doing their surveys." Lyn B., QLD
Mary
"Just found out I won $150 in the competition – Thank you LiveTribe." Mary H., SA
Barbara
"Boy! Am I happy, to win a $150 Hoyts voucher, I love my movies." Barbara F., VIC
Elizabeth
"Awesome survey giving so much information on mining, thank you." Elizabeth A., WA
Frank
"My rewards from LiveTribe just keep rolling in. Keep it going, LiveTribe" Frank B., VIC