- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Pregnant after 35
greentea13
member
is 35 really truly that bad?
greentea13
member
I've always heard this whole "35 and you're entering into Advanced maternal age", but my mom had me when she was 40 and that was 31 years ago. My friend just had her first at 37 with no problem - is this a reality? this AMG stuff?
off BCPs after 14 years july '09
no AF for a year
Clomid BFN
BFP Jan 2011
M/C @ 7 Weeks
This discussion has been closed.
Re: is 35 really truly that bad?
I think once you're pregnant and have gone through all the tests, it's the same as any pregnancy. However, it seems that a lot of women have trouble conceiving after 35 and the risks of Down's Syndrome and other disorders are higher the closer to 40 you get.
The only thing I notice is that I have less energy and more gray hair at 38 than I did at 35.
Bronx Zoo: Summer 2013
To read my blog, click on the giraffe pic below!
My Blog
No, I do not think so.
I worked in an amnio lab about 20 years ago. The risk of Down's doesn't sharply rise at 35, but it's the age where the risk of an abnormality is greater than the risk of miscarriage due to an amnio. I'm not sure why 35 is still the magic number, though, now that amnio risks are lower...
Eh,whatever the explanation, 35 is slightly worse than 34, and slightly better than 36....right?
Before DH and I got married last Nov., a former co-worker asked we were planning to have a family and I said yes. Then she asked my age (35) and then her draw dropped and said "wow, you should have started like yesterday, it's nothing to do with your health, it's just our eggs are so old" and went on, on, about how if I was interested in learning about how she conceived (sperm bank), she would be happy to talk to me about it. Talk about unsolicited advice.
Well, we conceived only after a month of TTC and so far, so good. It's not like my eggs all of a sudden went bad on 35th birthday.
I get kind of mad about advice that states I should have tried earlier in life, like it's my fault that I didn't find a partner sooner or wasn't willing to be just randomly be inseminated. Besides, I am in much better shape mentally and pyschically to be a mom than I was 10 years ago.
DD -- 5YO
DS -- 3YO
It took us about 10 months of trying, which really isn't that bad but it was frustrating and scary because I worried constantly that my age (37) WAS a factor. So far with our initial tests my risks for chromosomal diseases have all been below my age-based risk.
I think a lot may depend on what part of the country you're in, regarding how you're treated by your doctor's practice. I live in Boston and it's very normal here for someone my age to be having their first pregnancy. No one has brought up my age even once. On the other hand, if I were in the midwest and the rest of my OB's patients were 23 to 25, I'm sure I would stand out.
I sometime wonder if I'm more tired than I would be when I was younger, but I don't think my pregnancy is any tougher due to my age. I do think that the late-night feedings, running around after a toddler etc. may be more tiring but I'll cross those bridges when I come to them. Also, I wouldn't take back the very cool things I did in my 20s and early 30s. I would not have been able to do any of them with kids and they have made me who I am today and influenced the kind of mom I will be.
well-said :-)
I gave birth 2 weeks before my 35th birthday. I thought it was funny how 35 is treated as such a big "cutoff." So if it would have taken one more cycle to get pg I would have been "high risk."
I agree with pp that it also depends on the region you live in. When I lived in NY it was common for women to wait till their 30s to have their 1st child. Now I'm in a small town in PA where I'm a rarity. I found my pg to be a constant struggle with my Obs to do things the way I wanted (such as non medicated birth, also a rarity around here).