Women debated online whether they would consider having a baby at the age of 50.
Taking to British parenting platform Mumsnet, a woman asked if others would consider becoming a parent at an older age.
Views were mixed on the controversial subject with some saying they would consider it, while others said it’s not ‘fair on the child’.
The post read: ‘Would you have a baby at 50? Off the back of the “Do you regret having a baby at 40?” thread, would you have a child at 50 assuming you can provide for it emotionally and financially? Obviously medical assistance would be needed.’
Some people said they would consider having a baby in their 50s but suggested having a teenager in your 60’s would be awful.
Women debated on Mumsnet whether they would consider having a baby at the age of 50 (stock image)
One person said: ‘At 50, yeah at 54 no. I’d like a grandchild though.’
Another said: ‘ Yes, I would. I spent my 30s having fertility treatment which was unsuccessful.
‘Went into menopause late 30s and thought eventually with hormones changing I would lose the yearning to be a mother, but that hasn’t changed.
She continued: ‘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.
‘Unless you’ve experienced the bitter painful grief of childlessness not by choice I don’t think you could empathise with those who continue to pursue motherhood at a late age.’
Another said that she had a child at 40 and would have another at 50 if she ‘desperately wanted one’ unless there ‘was a family history of ill health and early death’.
‘I don’t sit around or lie in bed late, I consider myself fairly energetic, the majority of my friends are younger than me,’ she explained. ‘I need less sleep than I used to. I’m financially stable, so could afford to have time off/ go part time.
‘I would be carefully monitoring the pregnancy though and having all the tests available.’
However, other people were horrified by the idea.
Someone else said: ‘Baby at 50? Probably fine. Toddler mid 50s? No thanks. Parenting a teenager in late 60s? Hell no.’
Others said having a baby that late in life is ‘selfish’ and would be too tiring.
One person wrote: ‘No. Personally I wouldn’t have had one past 35, never mind 50.
Taking to the British parenting platform, a woman asked if others would consider becoming a parent at the older age
Some people said they would consider having a baby in their 50’s but suggested having a teenager in your 60’s would be awful
‘I think at 50, it’s selfish and not in a child’s bests interests. I imagine parenting a toddler at 50+ and a teen when you’re heading towards 70 would be difficult for the parent and the child.’
Another said: ‘I had babies at 37 and 41. I had fertility issues, which is why I ended up having them later. Both pregnancies I felt great and had no issues (I was high risk but that wasn’t age related and was managed).
‘No way I’d have a baby at 50 though! The thought of returning to square one with a baby fills me with horror.
‘I’m so much more tired than I used to be and no doubt heading towards perimenopause now that I’m almost 44.
‘My focus is on achieving a level of financial stability that means I can support the two DC I do have through key milestones – university, house, wedding. Also on being as healthy as I can be to minimize the risk of ill health in later life.’
Others said having a baby that late in life ‘was selfish’ and would be too tiring
Someone else wrote: ‘Hell no! I had my second and last child at 26. If I am lucky I might have some grandchildren in my 50’s and I hope to be a loving, involved grandmother.
‘I don’t believe it is fair to a child to be born to parents of that age.
‘A previous poster did mention that a mother would receive judgement and a father would get a pat on the back, whilst I agree this isn’t right, most 50 year old fathers are with much younger women. It is very unusual even with medical intervention for two parents to be anywhere near 50.’
A fourth wrote: ‘Absolutely not. Exhausting nightmare at 38. Fifty and menopausal would be unimaginably bad even with a fleet of servants!’