Reply to I'm 43 with no kids, but want 1.

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "I'm 43 with no kids, but want 1."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Obviously, DCUM falls into two very clearly divided groups:

1) people who have kids in their 40s;
2) people who stridently disapprove -- with charts!

Here's my question: would #2 people disapprove if OP adopted kids in her 40s like my SIL did?

Is fostering O.K. to you?

If so, why or why not?

OP, you can guess that I'm in Camp #1; my advice to you is never to run your life by consensus. You're the only person who gets to live it.
[/quote]

I didn't read posts after that as I couldn't not respond to this. I am a NP and you have the wrong 2 groups, I don't think most people here who commented on age thought there was anything "wrong" with having children past 40. It is great, IF YOU CAN. Facts are painful and I say it as someone who had to endure fertility treatments and now the data in and out. A first biological child at age 43 is really not a given.

It doesn't mean OP shouldn't go for it, on the contrary she should rush. But I suggest she looks at the series from Amy Klein in NYtimes mother lode blog. Or goes discussing it in the fertility forum. She needs to understand what is at stake, and think quickly about what she would regarding fertility treatment + donor egg option. The bad scenario? OP takes a year to reach a decision, at 44 she starts, she loses 1 year trying with no success, takes her time considering donor eggs and at 46-47 ends up having trouble staying pregnant even with donor eggs...

OP I wish you well, go for it but open your eyes and start planning [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics