Depressed about having a baby post 35

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This debate is so silly. I have numerous friends in their 40s born to moms over 35 because many many women had their final baby at 43 back then. I have many friends now that had kids over 35. Most, in fact. People don’t look at the “research” when they decide to have children. It’s based on where they are in their lives. The risks discussed in this thread like increased risk of generic abnormalities are known and so tested for. Most children with Down syndrome for example are born to younger mothers. Older ones are more aggressively screened. The judgment on here needs to tone way, way down. If a woman over 40 is having a child and is financially good and in a stable relationship, let’s worry about her less than the woman in her early 30s who is broke with no support system. It is all relative. Risk is a relative concept and personal assessments of it will vary.

Here is one where it doesn’t apply to her, she is exempt.

Yes, but she then says that older mothers are more aggressively screened. But argues that it’s relative. What?!

What are you not getting? How is anyone arguing they’re exempt? You’re having a total straw man argument with yourself. Yes, the risk goes up relatively for age for things like chromosome issues. Nobody debates that. Older women get extra screening. Women as sentient beings are capable of weighing this risk against other factors like financial status, time, career, relationship. Their calculus may be different than yours. Why does that chap you so?

Ask yourself why are you so chapped?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

Has it occurred to you that some don’t find their spouses until their 40s, 50’s, and beyond? Can they all have babies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

Wow. What is wrong with you? Why are you so triggered by people having children later than you chose to? It’s really odd. And your silly no it’s not you are responses are not shedding any insight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

So you’ve made several aggressive posts indicating you’re some kind of nurse in obstetrics. Your employer would be really alarmed if they saw these unhinged posts. I’d stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

Has it occurred to you that some don’t find their spouses until their 40s, 50’s, and beyond? Can they all have babies?

I 100% do not understand your question. Yes, I am aware that some people don't find spouses until their 40s or 50s. No, I do think they are all still capable of having babies by the time they meet said spouse. What is your REAL question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

So you’ve made several aggressive posts indicating you’re some kind of nurse in obstetrics. Your employer would be really alarmed if they saw these unhinged posts. I’d stop.

You’re one of the desperate ones?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

Wow. What is wrong with you? Why are you so triggered by people having children later than you chose to? It’s really odd. And your silly no it’s not you are responses are not shedding any insight.

Not PP, but I WILL circle back to my original question. Did the science change that said having children over 35 is riskier, or are people just ignoring the risks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

Wow. What is wrong with you? Why are you so triggered by people having children later than you chose to? It’s really odd. And your silly no it’s not you are responses are not shedding any insight.

Not PP, but I WILL circle back to my original question. Did the science change that said having children over 35 is riskier, or are people just ignoring the risks?

They will not answer the question because it contradicts what they say which is not in their favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

So you’ve made several aggressive posts indicating you’re some kind of nurse in obstetrics. Your employer would be really alarmed if they saw these unhinged posts. I’d stop.

You’re one of the desperate ones?

I have no idea what you’re asking or talking about. You don’t make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

Wow. What is wrong with you? Why are you so triggered by people having children later than you chose to? It’s really odd. And your silly no it’s not you are responses are not shedding any insight.

Not PP, but I WILL circle back to my original question. Did the science change that said having children over 35 is riskier, or are people just ignoring the risks?

No, there are higher risks. Didn’t see any post saying there was not. Higher risks for fat people too, and all kinds of them having kids all about. Some risks are unavoidable if you want to have kids, age is one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

So you’ve made several aggressive posts indicating you’re some kind of nurse in obstetrics. Your employer would be really alarmed if they saw these unhinged posts. I’d stop.

You’re one of the desperate ones?

I have no idea what you’re asking or talking about. You don’t make any sense.

Then don’t provoke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

Wow. What is wrong with you? Why are you so triggered by people having children later than you chose to? It’s really odd. And your silly no it’s not you are responses are not shedding any insight.

Not PP, but I WILL circle back to my original question. Did the science change that said having children over 35 is riskier, or are people just ignoring the risks?

No, there are higher risks. Didn’t see any post saying there was not. Higher risks for fat people too, and all kinds of them having kids all about. Some risks are unavoidable if you want to have kids, age is one.

Abundant amount of posts saying it’s not a risk and age is not a factor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This debate is so silly. I have numerous friends in their 40s born to moms over 35 because many many women had their final baby at 43 back then. I have many friends now that had kids over 35. Most, in fact. People don’t look at the “research” when they decide to have children. It’s based on where they are in their lives. The risks discussed in this thread like increased risk of generic abnormalities are known and so tested for. Most children with Down syndrome for example are born to younger mothers. Older ones are more aggressively screened. The judgment on here needs to tone way, way down. If a woman over 40 is having a child and is financially good and in a stable relationship, let’s worry about her less than the woman in her early 30s who is broke with no support system. It is all relative. Risk is a relative concept and personal assessments of it will vary.

Here is one where it doesn’t apply to her, she is exempt.

Yes, but she then says that older mothers are more aggressively screened. But argues that it’s relative. What?!

What are you not getting? How is anyone arguing they’re exempt? You’re having a total straw man argument with yourself. Yes, the risk goes up relatively for age for things like chromosome issues. Nobody debates that. Older women get extra screening. Women as sentient beings are capable of weighing this risk against other factors like financial status, time, career, relationship. Their calculus may be different than yours. Why does that chap you so?

Ask yourself why are you so chapped?

DP. I had my last child at 42. Unexpected, though very much welcome pregnancy. She’s healthy, I’m healthy. I followed all the guidelines given by my providers, since I was AMA.
What, would you have preferred I had scheduled an abortion as soon as I found out, all because I was over 40?
What is your goal here, exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand....
I had children in the early 00s and it was GENERALLY and widely accepted that there was a danger zone past 35 because of scientifically established risks associated with getting pregnant over 35. All of my peers had children in late 20s and early 30s. Very few AMA moms, and yes, I was living in an urban area and we were all "well educated."

Did they come out with new research? Or are people just ignoring it?

20 years have passed since you had kids during which time prices have increased and wages have not, people have to work longer and save. Look at those studies.

...so they are ignoring the scientific research of risks. It's a calculated risk taken because they can't afford a kid earlier?

Has it occurred to you that some people don't find their spouses until their 30s?

No issue with 30’s, it’s these 40 something year old moms who are pushing it. Desperation.

Wow. What is wrong with you? Why are you so triggered by people having children later than you chose to? It’s really odd. And your silly no it’s not you are responses are not shedding any insight.

Not PP, but I WILL circle back to my original question. Did the science change that said having children over 35 is riskier, or are people just ignoring the risks?

They will not answer the question because it contradicts what they say which is not in their favor.

DP who actually DID answer this question earlier. Science hasn’t changed. Yes, there are increased risks for being AMA. There are also recommendations to go along with those increased risks. Most of us who get pregnant follow the guidelines and recommendations of our OBs and midwives.