Can you provide a valid reason why younger women, infertile women, gay couples, or single women/men cannot do this? Why limit this option to women over 40? For instance, why don’t you provide a home for an orphan or abandoned child?
Why then, in your reckoning, do many women have a second child? Or a third, a fourth, etc? For some women, pregnancy feels fantastic and fun. And any woman is capable of restoring her figure to previous proportions if she finds that a priority. I gained just under 30 pounds, lost it in a little over a month (thanks, breastfeeding!) and since I wear my chubby baby everywhere I go, my legs and butt are in better shape than pre-pregnancy.
Not making any promises about what might happen to the rack after she’s weaned, but hell, I’ve been packing these things since I was 17, it’s time I validated them.
Considering that a consensus in this thread may lead directly to passage of the Forced Sterilization for Women over 40 Act of 2013 (aka “Barry’s Law”), maybe the OP should’ve created a poll.
Follow-up: Is the risk higher for all women over 40, or women over 40 having their first child? In our family, there’s a tendency to use menopause as birth control: my grandmother had kids across a span of 35 years, two of my aunts have kids that are 20 years younger than their next siblings, one of my cousins has a kid. When people mention concerns about birth defects, they always claim that’s only an issue for women starting at 40.
Older mothers and fathers face increased risks to the pregnancy/child: "The age of your baby’s biological father also can pose risks. Some research suggests that children born to men 40 and older have a higher risk of autism than do children of men younger than 30… Men older than 50 are more likely to have babies with certain birth defects, such as the bone growth disorder achondroplasia, due to age-related genetic mutations. The risk of cognitive impairment also might be higher for children of older fathers. In a 2009 study, children born to older men scored slightly lower on tests measuring concentration, memory, reading and reasoning skills through age 7. "
From the March of Dimes website:
“Women over age 35 have an increased risk of:
•Fertility problems
•High blood pressure
•Diabetes
•Miscarriage
•Placenta previa, a condition in which the placenta is in the wrong place and covers the cervix
•Cesarean section
•Premature delivery
•Stillbirth
•A baby with a genetic disorder”
When reading through these stats, remember that it isn’t just the advanced age of the eggs and sperm that lead to higher likliehood of problems. An older population tends to struggle with weight problems, thryoid and other endocrine issues, diabetes, cancers, etc. Older women are sicker women, and those illnesses may or may not contribute to fertility and pregancy issues. A healthy 40 year old may a stellar pregnancy and deliver a genetically sound infant while a diabetic or obese 25 year old may struggle mightily to maintain a healthy pregnancy and deliver a premature infant with developmental delays.
The odds are with healthy women in their 20’s, but the individual’s results can vary from the average quite a bit.
Are you in a position to determine housing for foster or adoptable kids?
Do you suppose that any loving, stable home environment would be preferable to a state run orphanage or impermanent foster care situation? 'Cause I do. And I have worked in such a position, and from what I saw, every single homeless kid would have thrived in a loving, stable environment with any number or configuration of responsible parents versus an ever-changing and uncertain future devoid of loving family members.
Did those women use the Rhythm Method when they were younger? According to my mother back when it was popular women would use it succesfully for years, then suddenly after they hit 40 there cycles became irregular get pregnant because they couldn’t keep there days straight anymore.
Don’t know for certain, but that sounds about right considering that menopause starts pretty late for the women in our family - 50 or so, I’m told. The youngest aunt was born when my grandmother was 50, and the youngest of my cousins was born when an aunt turned 50 as well. That cousin just had her first at 25, while her older sister was pregnant with her 3rd at 45 (the others are in their late teens).
Delivered my son a week before my 46th birthday. He was not planned. Ideally I would’ve loved to have children in my late 20’s or early 30’s and give him a sibling or two, but mother nature had other ideas and made me infertile until my mid 40’s.
When my pregnancy test came back positive, I wasn’t whooping with joy, my first reaction was OMG this is really risky. I had an amniocentesis and thankfully the test came back good.
I would never suggest to anyone to wait until their 40’s to conceive. I just got lucky. Danny is now almost 3 and he’s as normal as they come.
I’d rather have kids at age 40 when I’m ready, and accept the physical risks, than have physically healthy kids now when neither my husband nor I are ready to care for them. If I’d been given the choice between a birth defect or growing up with parents who weren’t ready for me, I’d take the birth defect.
Having a kid is possibly the biggest decision a person can make. I will not be rushed into it by biology.
As in the many threads in which this has been discussed: Adaption isn’t nearly as easy as some people seem to think. It’s very expensive, and very time consuming.
Well, here’s another anecdote for you: My paternal grandmother did not marry until she was about 40. This was in the very early part of the 20th century. Everyone said, “Well, she’ll never have any children, she’s too old.” Then my father was born. So everyone said, “She’ll never have any more.” My aunt was born a couple years later, followed by my uncle a few years after that. Nothing particularly wrong with any of them, except for my aunt, who took up a rather weird religion. She’s still alive, though, well into her 90s.
Well, this is a timely thread. I am currently cuddling my 1 day old baby boy - I’m 43. I have always been blessed with ridiculous good health. I had an extremely easy pregnancy and a super fast 5 hour labor and delivery. I don’t feel too old for this at all
I think it’s generally a bad idea. I want mine out of the house before I hit menopause. I don’t think men should father children over the age of 40, either.
That said … if pregnancy happens over 40, I’m definitely in favor of the kid being born. My only concern is the older the parent at the child’s birth, the greater the chance they kick off before the kid is grown.
A lot of people say this, but 1) you’re making the decision for your child’s life and he or she may view that different, and 2) as with marriage, it’s not the people who worry about being ready that screw things up.
And mankind had this down for centuries before modern society screwed this up: pair off young women at the peak of their childbearing years with older guys at the peak of their earning years. The guy avoids a mid-life crisis because he’s already bangin’ a 20-year old, and by the time the kids are grown he’s dead and left you everything and it’s off to Cougartown. As Steve Martin used to say “but noooooo!”
I assume you’re talking about only an ‘original equipment derived’ pregnancy here. But if the woman’s endocrine system, uterus and cervix are as competent as they’ve ever been then w/ donor eggs from a younger woman (preferably between 22 and 32) a woman can continue to have healthy pregnancies and healthy children until finances or menopause interfere w/ the process.
