Geena Davis and her husband are having twins, due later in the year. 18 months ago they had their and her first daughter. She is now 48 yrs. old.
I am pregnant and 34yrs. old, when I have my baby I will be 35, and my Doctor is concerned about birth defects and I am not 40 yet.
Is there any truth to not having babies after 40 because of increased risk of birth defects? And I thought the risk was higher if the baby is the first to be had after 40?
Do the chances of birth defects go up after age 35 in women? Yes. But - and this is very important - MOST babies born to mothers past 40 are perfectly normal. The chance of any one particular baby having a serious defect is very small - even if the risk doubles it may still be a small risk.
The risk to the mother also rises with age. However - and this is also important - there are 45 year old women in very good health just as there are 20 year old women in very poor health. So for a particular 40 year old women, a woman in good health with a good diet, the risk might be lower than for a particular 20 year woman who eats crap and has some sort of uncontrolled chronic illness.
Geena Davis is pretty darn healthy, last I heard. That is obviously in her favor. And she can afford to eat a super healthy diet, or take time off work, and can afford any sort of specialist that might be needed. This puts her in a very good situation for having children relatively late in life. Even so, if she’s in her late 40’s and expecting twins it’s a high-risk pregnancy.
Really, it needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Truthfully - even if you were 22 your doctor would be concerned about birth defects on some level. That’s part of his job, to check up on these things.
Is it women over 35 or women over 35 who have never had a baby previously?
For instance my mum was 45 when I was born, prior to that she had babies at age 31,33, and 35.
This chart shows how your risk of having a Downs Syndrome baby goes up with age.
The risks go up with age, regardless of whether a woman has had a child before or not.
I think it used to be medical opinion that a first baby past 30 or 35 was great cause for concern, but not so much anymore. It may be that 100 years ago a woman who didn’t start having children until past 30 or so usually had some health problem or disorder interfereing with her fertility that complicated matters, but now a perfectly healthy and fertile woman can choose to delay childbirth, which is a different situation.
Out of interest, do they know if the risk of defect is inherent to the woman’s age, or if it’s due to correlation with the likely father’s age? That is, older women will tend to have even older partners, and we all know about declining sperm quality with age.
A friend of mine tried to argue that the risk of concieving a Downs-affected child did not increase with age, but that older women were less likely to terminate the pregnancy, having better coping skills etc.
She pointed me at a website where this assertion was made - I don’t remember much else about it though.
(BTW I strongly suspect that this argument is a false one).
How far along are you? It’s common practice (in this country, anyway) to have an ultrasound at around 12 weeks, which measures the thickness of a skin fold at the back of the baby’s neck (the Nuchal fold transluscency test).
If you’re further gone than that, you can have CVS (Chorionic Villus Sampling) or amniocentesis done.
The big advantage of the Nuchal fold test is that it’s non-invasive, but it’s not as accurate as the other two tests.
Talk to your doc.
When I was last going through all this, I remember reading that the rate of Down syndrome births was actually now higher in women under 34, because routine screening has been encouraged for women over that age.
Remember, amniocentesis caries a 1 in 200 chance of causing a miscarriage possibly higherdepending on your doctors technique; some do not use ultrasound to gude the needle. I was 33 and pregnant last year and after research on amniocentesis refused to even consider it. I also refused tests that would show me only problems that could be treated, and I do not consider abortion to be a treatment. I knew that no matter what, I would not abort, so that made my decision easier. Ultrasound OTOH shows many problems that can be treated, I had 3 of those. I also knew a woman who after years of trying to get pregnant, had an amniocentesis done. Results said she had a healthy baby. I don’t think that comforted her when she miscarried soon afterward.
Do your research. Find out what the risks are and decide what you are comfortable with.
I wouldn’t worry to much about your age and pregnancy problems.
The hormones that are rushing thorugh your system directly to your brain lead to spazzy thoughts during this fun 10 month time.
A woman I know has a 46 year old sister who found out this fall that she is pregnant. ( Surprise!) Her oldest is twenty. Youngest I think is 8. Everything is fine.
My best friend in high school Mom had her at 47. ( and her brother at 46. there were three older children, but brother was a boo boo, and they decided that boo boo needed a friend.) That friend is fine, except she is a total flake/tool, which in no way can be predicted by ultrasounds.
From what I’ve read, most of the babies born with Down syndrome were from women under 34. Simply because there are a lot more women around that age and younger having babies than older women.