It should shock you, because it's pure bullshit; let Adam Ruin that for you too.

Please provide references showing it's bullshit.

Considering how fast birth defect raise after 35...yeah not bullshit at all.

Just so we're all clear, this is now an internet fight with opposing claims and zero sources.

Because any search with pregnancy risk 35 would result in hits on any medical journals, health website with the actual sources.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2729989/

https://www.nct.org.uk/pregnancy/tests-scans-and-antenatal-c...

Seriously, people are just lazy.

You can basically draw a straight line for female fertility declining between 90% at 31 and 5% at 40. https://www.britishfertilitysociety.org.uk/fei/at-what-age-d...

Calling the second half of that geriatric is completely appropriate because you’re dealing with significant age related declines.

>Yep, I can confirm this based on personal experience with a gynecologist telling my wife that at 35 the pregnancy is considered a "geriatric pregnancy" (apparently some docs now call it "AMA"...advanced maternal age).

This used to be after 30 not that long ago around here

> Nonetheless we were able to conceive in our late 30s without help or any trouble. Our baby is super healthy. Apparently we lucked out.

Same here, without 'trying' either (as in, we were not actively trying to get pregnant). It was surprising for us to hear the term "geriatric pregnancy" as well, and the ob/gyn seemed to utter out loud a lot of the worst assumptions about what could happen in the pregnancy. She also seemed somewhat surprised and judgmental that our baby wasn't conceived using IVF, which was a bit off-putting but she was otherwise a great doctor.

Worst thing that happened during the pregnancy was some sort of bladder issue caused by the baby being seated in her mom's pelvic floor or something. Not really a complication for the fetus, just for her mom being unable to pee without a catheter. I suspect this was more of an mechanical/anatomical effect that would have occurred regardless of age, but I wouldn't know. The baby also had a bit of an elevated respiratory rate when born, but she's fine now.

That said, my impression of the whole process was that this plays out quite differently for everyone. Ours was surprisingly easy, especially the labor part. I'm left wondering how well they've controlled for factors like the physical fitness of the mother (and father, perhaps), any genetic factors, etc. when trying to figure out how likely fertility issues, birth defects, or other problems occur based on age of the parents. Is there not also a generally higher correlation to poorer physical health as people age?

My mother-in-law who is in her 60s thinks she's "too young" to be called grandma. She's being a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but I routinely hear people say, "oh he was so young" after some 65-year-old celebrity dies of a heart attack. Increasingly, I just have no idea what's going on in people's heads when they think about age. Sixty is not "young." Thirty-five is not "young" with respect to fertility.

People need to get a grip on their mortality, man.

Yep. I'm in the latter half of my 50s and defintely don't feel young, at least physically. 60 is getting old. Anthing past 70 is a gift, IMO.

And yet, we have presidential candidates in their 80s and Americans seriously don't prefer younger candidates to win their primaries for whatever reason. Something is really messed up there.

I agree. I'd love to see mandatory retirement at 65 for elected offices.

Unfortunately this isn't a conversation a lot of people have until they're conceiving. It ought to be brought up much earlier in women's lives.