Having a baby with a woman who is 40-41? Worried about health of the child...

Say you’re driving down a road alone (no one ahead or behind you) and you see a stoplight in the distance displaying green. As you approach the intersection, the stoplight suddenly turns yellow. What do you do now: accelerate or brake?

Her time is running out, and you need to make a split-second decision. Smash or pass, but do it now.

Either one of you could be carrying a mutated gene, damaged DNA, or a family history of something. Her age really isn’t a factor here and you are not a spring chicken yourself. Anymore, there is not much greater risk due to age due to advances in fetal screening and OB/GYN care.

If this is a big fear for you, then you need to consider if you are ready to be a parent? Even if your child is genetically perfect, raising a kid is no picnic. If you don’t have that true unconditional love, then you shouldn’t start a family.

You have been together for 1.5 years, you think you have found your life partner, and you haven't proposed to her? Lots of contradictions here. Rather than worry about her fertility, I recommend worrying about your own problems.

Have you talked with her about your concern about the health of the child? Probably a sensitive subject, but there is clinical research to support your concern. Maybe you both could meet with an MD (Obgyn, fertility clinic doc?) and get their opinion. Also, I believe the risk is much lower if you do in vitro , if y’all can afford it.

Or, you could get a vasectomy and not tell her about it, and let the situation work itself out.

What is the contradiction?

If you live in Papua New Guinea, then yes, be worried. Otherwise, you’ll be fine.

Easier to qualify for special Olympics so not all negatives

First, if this is a great relationship, accept the consequences and live your best life with her. Love her and be loved. That's the best we can do in life.

Second, don't be led by headlines about the change in risk. Find out what the actual risk is. To use an analogy, if your chances of winning the lottery are 1 in 100,000 with one ticket, then they are 10 in 100,000 with 10 tickets. So buying 10 tickets makes it 10 times more likely you'll win the lottery, which can sound like a huge improvement and wow, you're really gonna win now, but did it really change anything? 10 in 100,000 isn't any good either. Or, if we're talking about a bad outcome, it's now 10 times more likely a tragedy will happen. But it's still almost certainly not going to happen.

Back to your question, if the odds of having a problem were 1 in 500 before, and now they're 1 in 100, you still have a 99% chance of not having that problem. My way of looking at it is sometimes things are meant to be. If the problem manifests, then it was going to manifest anyway, when the odds were 1 in 500. If you win that lottery, it isn't because you bought 10 tickets. You were meant to win. Find the good in all circumstances and enjoy life's opportunities.

Indeed, pregnancies after 35 are generally considered “high risk” due to higher probabilities of complications for both the mother and future child.

We were 39-40 old when my partner and I seriously thought about becoming parents after 7 years living together. We had basic counseling with her gynaecologist in order to be aware of the risks, usual screening procedures during early pregnancy ( trisomy, etc.). We also discussed together how we would likely react would the tests reveal some anomalies. My partner simply stopped taking contraceptive pills and we kept on living as usual, not calculating whatsoever as we were not obsessed with the idea of parenting at all costs. Within a few months she became pregnant and prenatal tests were ok, so it ended up as a totally uncomplicated pregnancy and delivery. We are now happy parents of a healthy 9 year old daughter. Although neither of us felt we must become parents to fully realise ourselves in life, retrospectively I can say that having a child is the best thing which could have happened to us.

This said, as a future parent you have to be aware of the (higher) risks and feel ready to deal with it, as not all conditions can be detected during pregnancy. In the end, it depends more on whether you and your partner feel ready to become parents and share similar views on how to bring up your future child. And this is valid at any age.

I globally agree with your post, in the end it mainly depends on whether you are ready to become a parent and to give unconditional love to your (future) child. Becoming parent is not a must.

However, from a purely scientific point of view, biology is not “equal” between woman and man regarding advanced age parenthood. Although certain risks may also increase with the father’s age, most risks are linked to the mother.

“The sperm-producing stem cells of a 50-year old man have divided around 600 times. The stem cells grow older and the risk increases for mutations and specific defects in the genetic material that can lead to many illnesses. This is why men over the age of 40 are not permitted to become sperm donors in the majority of countries. Some studies indicate that the age of the man at the time of conception could also pose a health risk for the child. To date, however, none of these studies has found a clear link between such genetic disorders among children and the age of the father. No link between the age of the father and the mother’s risk of severe pregnancy complications such as pre-eclampsia and eclampsia has been found, either.“

Hesitant? Hard stop.
1) you haven’t met the person you are dating. You have met the person who is trying to convince you to be her sperm donor and bank account for the next 18 yrs.
2) having been I the situation above and having a pregnancy afflicted by a condition that has increased incident with maternal age, I can’t tell you enough times, HARD STOP

one poster made some long-winded BS that veered into admitting no study has ever found a risk due to the man's age, i.e. the whole post was pointless.

So all you really need to worry about is, does her uterus still work, and can she still push it out when it's time. That's about all.

What BS are you referring to? My first post was related to the mother age only and it seems you haven’t really read or understood my second post.

Be specific if you want to comment on others' posts. Here’s just an example: you wrote under your user name “overall infant mortality is far greater than this”. Actually the probability to have a child affected by trisomy 21 is about 0.1% if the mother is 30 years old, but it sharply increases to 1% if she is 40 years old and 2% if she is 43 years old. To compare with, infant mortality is about 0.2% in Finland, 0.3% in Germany, 0.4% in Canada and 0.5% in the US. This is why some additional prenatal tests are systematically advised for pregnant women over 35 years old.

I'm turning 37 soon. No partner, no children. Look about 25. 5'10, 135 lbs, BMI about 19.5. Naturally thin. Never smoked or taken drugs, don't drink. Resting heart rate < 50 bpm. Healthy diet. Morning wood. Run mid 17s on 30 MPW.

There must be a lot of millennial men like me who haven't aged much and are significantly healthier than previous generations.

The risk may be higher but its still not that high overall.

Nowadays it is very common for women to have a child at that age, my wife was 40 when she had our 2nd child.

She is most certainly more aware of her timeline to have kids than you are. The real question is if this relationship is being artificially accelerated to because of this.

You better be pretty confident she is the one and you want to have children because there is no turning back.

I think you’re over thinking this. The risk for the mother to the child definitely increases but doesn’t mean your child won’t come out “normal”. Does she already have kids? My wife is also older and was close to 40 when we had my son. He is perfectly fine. Just a pain in the butt at times 😂

Older sperm is also an issue. Don’t put it all on her.

You sound like a prize. /s