'I resented them for having me at 41': Woman asks if she can have a baby at 50

"Would you have a child at 50 assuming you can provide for it emotionally and financially?" she asked, and the responses were brutally honest.

Eleanor Katelaris

2 min read

January 17, 2024 - 2:56PM

Parenting

Don't miss out on the headlines from Parenting. Followed categories will be added to My News.

With modern-day medical advancements, the choice to become a mother later in life is both a miracle and a matter of heated debate.

On a popular Mumsnet forum, a simple question sparked an intense discussion about this topic: "Would you have a child at 50 assuming you can provide for it emotionally and financially? Obviously, medical assistance would be needed."

Let's dive into the debate that ensued and the many and varied passionate views from women of all walks of life.

Want to join the family? Sign up to our Kidspot newsletter for more stories like this.

Image: iStock

"Baby at 50? Probably fine. Toddler mid-50s? No thanks."

The conversation kicked off with a straightforward response. "Absolutely not you mad thing," said one forum member, setting a candid tone for the rest of the discussion.

Another echoed this sentiment, expressing concern about the energy levels needed to parent at that age: "Absolutely not. Exhausting nightmare at 38. Fifty and menopausal would be unimaginably bad even with a fleet of servants!"

Then the debate took a pragmatic turn as one commenter urged people to think about long-term considerations: "Baby at 50? Probably fine. Toddler mid-50s? No thanks. Parenting a teenager in your late 60s? Hell no."

Then this person shared a deeply personal perspective: "Definitely not. And I'm childless after IVF. I'd rather not be a mother than a mother at 50. It's less about me and more thinking about the child."

On the topic of the child, another person said that "losing a parent young is emotionally traumatising, as would be caring for them in dementia at a young-ish age."

They added: "I resented my parents for having me aged 41/42... I think now it is medically possible if you have money thrown at it but I would say it's selfish and kind of wrong morally."

"I would probably keep going until it became biologically impossible"

Then there were those on the other side of the fence.

One mum provided this nuanced view: "No - my youngest child will be nearly 18 when I turn 50 and my eldest will be 25... However, if I was still trying to get pregnant with my first, I would probably keep going until it became biologically impossible."

This longing to become a mother resonated with another member who shared, "Yes, I would. I spent my 30s having fertility treatment... I'm mid 40s now and I actually yearn for it more than ever. So yes, if it was possible, I would have a baby at 50."

Finally, someone else called out medical advancements that increase life expectancy, saying, "If any of it actually pans out, then perhaps I would have a child at 50."

What do you think? Tell us in the Facebook comments.