Having a child at 48?

[Stuart273]

Birth certificate for the child in question should sort out the question of its mother but as others have said, it's perfectly possible for a woman to give birth age 48 or even older.

Birth certificate backs it up, so I guess it must be true. What have I started?! 

[sharonmx5]

She'd had at least 9 that I've found beforehand, so yes I guess it is perfectly possible. He was still with them in 1901 by the way!
Thanks for your comments and help

Maybe she was very robust and healthy  and well  fed,          But I believe that  the odds  that such a child would be Strong and Healthy.

As I have already pointed out, my husband's Gt Gt Grandmother had a baby in just those circumstances and both she and the baby thrived, the baby growing up to become a primary school teacher.

[coombs]

My 3xgreat gran was born in 1835 when her mother was 51. Here is a thread from 2008 when I asked a similar question. This may help this discussion. I think my ancestor was an illegitimate grandchild and her middle name was that of her older sister who had 4 more illegitimate children and told some lies.

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=320153.0

I think it is possible in the 1870s to have a baby at 48 but the risk of child death or disabilities increases with age of mother at childbirth.

Not unknown for a grandmother to pass off her illegitimate grandchild as her youngest child. Much older sister is really the mother.

[ScouseBoy]

I agree with your second paragraph Coombs.

That is my belief,  based on  something I have learned in my own research.

[sharonmx5]

My 3xgreat gran was born in 1835 when her mother was 51. Here is a thread from 2008 when I asked a similar question. This may help this discussion. I think my ancestor was an illegitimate grandchild and her middle name was that of her older sister who had 4 more illegitimate children and told some lies.

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=320153.0

I think it is possible in the 1870s to have a baby at 48 but the risk of child death or disabilities increases with age of mother at childbirth.

Not unknown for a grandmother to pass off her illegitimate grandchild as her youngest child. Much older sister is really the mother.

Of course it did happen that grandmothers passed off grandchildren as their own.

The question was though, how likely is it for a woman to have had a child at 48 in 1873, and the answer is, perfectly likely.  It happened in my husband's family.

[coombs]

Any my answer was it is possible to have a baby at 48.

[Stuart273]

oooook
Having started it I think it best we stop it now 
The birth certificate gives the couple as parents so that's what I'm going to stick with, as conjecture to the contrary will always be just that.
Thanks to all who contributed, mods can we close this now please.

[LizzieW]

My g.gran had a child in 1893 when she was 43.  It definitely wasn't the child of her older daughters as they were both pregnant around the same time.  The baby in question died in 1966, aged 73.

[bugbear]

It's clearly biologically possible, so that doesn't help either way.

One obvious thing to look for, genealogically, is
wether there was a pattern of previous births; clearly if there was a birth when she was 45 or 46 an additional birth at 48 is part of a pattern, and quite plausible.

Conversely, if there was a clear pattern of a birth every two years (quite common), but that ended when she was 40, one would look at a birth at age 48 with a raised eyebrow.

I certainly wouldn't regard the birth certificate as the be all and end all of absolute truth - people sometimes lied to the registrar.

When in doubt - gather more data!

  BugBear