Claire Danes expecting baby #3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:43 is too damned old to have a baby. Period.

For you. Not for those of us with desire, means and ample fertility.

Lol. There is NO woman in her 40s with “ample” fertility. You might beat the odds and get pregnant at 42 but fertility is not ample. We’d all love to believe that we have the fertility of a 22 year old but fertility declines with age. Basic facts

Whether you like it or not women do have successful natural pregnancies in their 40’s. It’s not something unheard of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some women get pregnant naturally and easily at 43.
Other women are completely infertile at that age.
Most are in between.

There are about 400K IVF cycles each year in the US and about 10% or 40K are donor egg.
Most people tell no-one about donor egg--not their mother, sister, best friend, etc.

I'm an IVF nurse.
For all the people saying "so and so conceived this way, at that time":
Unless you were in the room when it happened you really have no idea regardless of what the couple is (or isn't) saying.
Couples lie all.the.time for their own protection.

This.

No, not this. Sure IVF is common and a lot of middle class folks can afford it with insurance coverage. Not so donor eggs - most folks aren't going to go down that road because of cost.

I don't know why there is a contingent of women on DCUM who can't fathom that some women are fertile. My friend had 2 boys easily in her late 30s. At 42 they wanted to go for a third and yes they were hoping for a girl. After a few months of trying they did do IVF and she had her girl at 44.

No donor eggs, couldn't afford them and couldn't justify it for a 3rd baby, but because of her history of fertility she was a good candidate for IVF in her 40s. It doesn't work for everyone but if you are fertile it can work.

Okay. Let’s take your one anecdote over an IVF nurse’s experience…you aren’t adding to the conversation.

The IVF nurse is implying a lot of women are lying about donor eggs. Celebs maybe, but let's not act as every woman has access to the resources for donor eggs. Implying that is ridiculous.

The part that flew right over your head is that the nurse was saying that lots of women *who are definitely using donor eggs* do not disclose that fact to anyone. She wasn’t implying that practically every 40-something woman who gets pregnant used donor eggs. She specifically said that only 10% of IVF cycles involve donor eggs.

She was trying to discount people's stories of women in their family and friends circles who got pregnant late by saying women who use donor eggs don't tell.

I'm sure that is true, but not everyone uses donor eggs.

+1
My 75-year old aunt was born when my grandmother was 46, the last of her seven children. I’m reasonably certain IVF and donor eggs were not a thing back then.

Same time period, my mother was born when my grandmother was 45. She was the second child, my uncle was born (first pregnancy) when she was 43.

+1. Birth control was a game changer. It meant that women who didn't want babies in their 40s, didn't have to have them. I'm gen X. My mom is 75, so my grandmas are not alive but they were the generation cranking out babies well into their 40s because they didn't have a way to stop it.

Now, a lot of women have had their babies by 40 and take precautions not to have any more. Or have not had kids and have decided they don't want them. That doesn't mean no women in their 40s can have babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:43 is old for a new baby. I know this because I’m 43 and I’m too old for a baby. But I’m just a regular person.

This. I'm 43 and don't bother with BC because it is so unlikely to naturally get pregnant. I am happy for Danes but the likelihood of natural pregnancies at 43+ is nil. These types of stories without mentioning repro asst are misleading to general public.

Please don't do this. I used to think the same way until I got pregnant, naturally, at almost 47.

Same, girl same.

[Anonymous]

Donor eggs is not your baby and a doctor putting that inside of you doesn't mean your old barren fanny "got pregnant". You people sound crazyyyy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:43 is too damned old to have a baby. Period.

For you. Not for those of us with desire, means and ample fertility.

Lol. There is NO woman in her 40s with “ample” fertility. You might beat the odds and get pregnant at 42 but fertility is not ample. We’d all love to believe that we have the fertility of a 22 year old but fertility declines with age. Basic facts

Cool. Basic fact, I got pregnant easily in my 20s, 30s and 40s. First try every time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Donor eggs is not your baby and a doctor putting that inside of you doesn't mean your old barren fanny "got pregnant". You people sound crazyyyy

yes, they sound crazy

[Anonymous]

Really?

I know several families with a surprise #3 or #4 in their 40’s. I can guarantee that these families who were often conflicted and stressed about the late in life baby were not working with fertility doctors.

While I definitely wouldn’t wait until my 40’s to have children if that was important to me, the way some people pretend it’s this rare impossible feat is just bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Donor eggs is not your baby and a doctor putting that inside of you doesn't mean your old barren fanny "got pregnant". You people sound crazyyyy

Why is this triggering you so much?

[Anonymous]

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. I stand by what I said. She is incredibly selfish.

[Anonymous]

I’ve been on DCUM for years and agree this forum struggles with understanding, or accepting, that women can be fertile after 40, and also WANT to have kids. Those who are in this area and understand the sacrifices working women make in the younger years to build their career also understand that couples wait to start a family and are happy with this decision. FWIW, I had my last child at 43.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. I stand by what I said. She is incredibly selfish.

I’m sure Claire Danes cares tremendously about your opinion.

[Anonymous]

Another challenge in the stats is that most women over 40 are not trying to get pregnant. So fertility is even harder to gauge.

I have a 60-something colleague who was born when her mom was 50. It happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been on DCUM for years and agree this forum struggles with understanding, or accepting, that women can be fertile after 40, and also WANT to have kids. Those who are in this area and understand the sacrifices working women make in the younger years to build their career also understand that couples wait to start a family and are happy with this decision. FWIW, I had my last child at 43.

Okay, here's your medal. You win life. Stop being such a sanctimonious cow.

[Anonymous]

I can name more than a handful of my high school classmates mothers who had accidental - and even one very intentional- pregnancies in their early to late forties, when their oldest kids were anywhere from 15-20. Interestingly, all of the babies I can think of were girls, which would make sense with aging as I think there’s some science about female embryos being stronger.

There are some seriously nasty and triggered people on this thread. She’s 43, not 60. 40 somethings have babies all the time these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. I stand by what I said. She is incredibly selfish.

I’m sure Claire Danes cares tremendously about your opinion.

As much as she cares about anyone from DCUMs opinion.