Claire Danes expecting baby #3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read menopause threads, it hits at a wide range of ages. I am almost 48 and still have periods like clockwork and no signs of perimenopause. I recently had my hormone levels tested and while that isn't anything definitive, they were still the same as they were fifteen years ago. While I have no idea if a pregnancy would be viable at this point, I have no doubt I am still fertile.

43 is young!

43 is young for many things, but not birthing babies. Come on, now.

43 is iffy for a first time baby, but if you are able to have children just before 43 (her next oldest is 4 years old), 43 is not impossible. Or maybe she used minor intervention. That's just as possible at that age as having major intervention.

We're not talking about possibilities. The fact is that it's not YOUNG. On the spectrum of age of childbearing its at the far end. Just as much as 16 as the other end. Which would be young.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read menopause threads, it hits at a wide range of ages. I am almost 48 and still have periods like clockwork and no signs of perimenopause. I recently had my hormone levels tested and while that isn't anything definitive, they were still the same as they were fifteen years ago. While I have no idea if a pregnancy would be viable at this point, I have no doubt I am still fertile.

43 is young!

43 is young for many things, but not birthing babies. Come on, now.

+1. Getting pregnant at this age is less than 5% per cycle. It might work for some women but the "oh, it happened to so and so" is just ridiculous. I know that women want to hear that they can have kids whenever they want, but it's just not true. We're doing ourselves a disservice by continuing this lie. The truth should be - If you wait until you are 40+, you will most likely not reproductive assistance. It will be difficult to get pregnant for most women. There is a slight chance that you get pregnant naturally but you shouldn't bank on it.

Is that so hard?

Claire Danes didn't wait until 40+ - it's her third child. That matters.

[Anonymous]

Dang, she's only 43? Skinny white women age faster.

[Anonymous]

My MIL was an "oops change of life baby" 70 year ago - her Mom was 44 when she was born. My MIL had two siblings, 18 and 15 years older than her. So yes, it happens and has happened for many years.

[Anonymous]

If 43 is too old to have a baby, I’m curious what IS the oldest acceptable age according to this harsh crowd?

Also, maybe it was an accident and she decided to keep it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If 43 is too old to have a baby, I’m curious what IS the oldest acceptable age according to this harsh crowd?

Also, maybe it was an accident and she decided to keep it.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read menopause threads, it hits at a wide range of ages. I am almost 48 and still have periods like clockwork and no signs of perimenopause. I recently had my hormone levels tested and while that isn't anything definitive, they were still the same as they were fifteen years ago. While I have no idea if a pregnancy would be viable at this point, I have no doubt I am still fertile.

43 is young!

43 is young for many things, but not birthing babies. Come on, now.

+1. Getting pregnant at this age is less than 5% per cycle. It might work for some women but the "oh, it happened to so and so" is just ridiculous. I know that women want to hear that they can have kids whenever they want, but it's just not true. We're doing ourselves a disservice by continuing this lie. The truth should be - If you wait until you are 40+, you will most likely not reproductive assistance. It will be difficult to get pregnant for most women. There is a slight chance that you get pregnant naturally but you shouldn't bank on it.

Is that so hard?

Most women aren't "banking on it." But implying that women can't get pregnant in their 40s, especially for those of us who have a history of established fertility in 30s/especially late 30s is also doing just a big a disservice. Unplanned pregnancies are not fun. Most women in their 40s, including mid and late, unless you have a history of infertility should be taking precautions unless they are okay with getting pregnant.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My RE used to get so upset about this type of thing. Said they either use donor eggs or have frozen embryos from when they were younger.

your RE has lost her marbles. she only sees people who struggle to conceive and started to believe that's all that happens. my grandmother had her last child at 46 and I had my third at 45. no, it was not IVF. don't gamble and wait till your 40s to start having children, but don't assume every 42+ mom used donor eggs, either.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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