Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

There you have it ladies - don't blow off birth control if you don't want a baby in your 40s!

Oh, please. The data and science still shows likelihood of pregnancy is exceptionally low at 40. Whether she is telling the truth or not, I have no idea. Can women that are 42 get pregnant? Absolutely. Is it common? Absolutely not.
I get that women don't like aging and, for some, fertility is interwoven with desirability/self worth. This thread seems to be in denial about age and fertility realities but we really need to let this go. It is ok to recognize that aging and being in your 40s means certain changes. Fertility is in decline and pregnancies are less likely. The fact that a celebrity is pregnant at 43 does not negate that fact.

No one in this thread, or anywhere, has claimed it’s easy for most women to get pregnant in their 40s. No one advises young women to postpone kids until their 40s. No one!

You are angry about a thing that doesn’t exist.

You need to relax, lady. No one is angry. I am pointing out that this board is perpetually misleading and often misstates facts re fertility. There are dozens of anecdotal PPs above sharing how easy pregnancy is in 40s, which is purposefully misleading and doesn't reference context. My statements are on point.
I think this issue usually gets PPs upset because DC metro swings older pregnancy. I don't think that I've been any place that had as many advanced maternal age mothers as this area, which is why everyone is so defensive - and wrongly insisting that pregnancy in 40s is FINE.

Is his brunch granny? Someone upthread posted a stat that said the chance of a 40 year old getting pregnant in one cycle is 5%. Versus 25% for someone in their 20s. So yes it’s definitely harder. But it’s absolutely insane to leave that to chance with a 5% chance of getting pregnant in a single month. If someone said — roll these dice, you have a 1/20 chance of losing $100,000, would you do it? No way. And it’s also ridiculous to accuse every women of getting pregnant in her 40s of using IVF. There are millions of women in their 40s. A bunch aren’t consistently using birth control. So every year, a bunch of them will get pregnant. That’s just math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

There you have it ladies - don't blow off birth control if you don't want a baby in your 40s!

Oh, please. The data and science still shows likelihood of pregnancy is exceptionally low at 40. Whether she is telling the truth or not, I have no idea. Can women that are 42 get pregnant? Absolutely. Is it common? Absolutely not.
I get that women don't like aging and, for some, fertility is interwoven with desirability/self worth. This thread seems to be in denial about age and fertility realities but we really need to let this go. It is ok to recognize that aging and being in your 40s means certain changes. Fertility is in decline and pregnancies are less likely. The fact that a celebrity is pregnant at 43 does not negate that fact.

No one in this thread, or anywhere, has claimed it’s easy for most women to get pregnant in their 40s. No one advises young women to postpone kids until their 40s. No one!

You are angry about a thing that doesn’t exist.

You need to relax, lady. No one is angry. I am pointing out that this board is perpetually misleading and often misstates facts re fertility. There are dozens of anecdotal PPs above sharing how easy pregnancy is in 40s, which is purposefully misleading and doesn't reference context. My statements are on point.
I think this issue usually gets PPs upset because DC metro swings older pregnancy. I don't think that I've been any place that had as many advanced maternal age mothers as this area, which is why everyone is so defensive - and wrongly insisting that pregnancy in 40s is FINE.

You've never been to any other major city?

Pregnancy in the 40s is totally fine. WTAF?

My grandmother was born when her mother was 46 (in 1920) and my brother was born when my mother was 44 and he was an oops baby. It can happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

There you have it ladies - don't blow off birth control if you don't want a baby in your 40s!

Oh, please. The data and science still shows likelihood of pregnancy is exceptionally low at 40. Whether she is telling the truth or not, I have no idea. Can women that are 42 get pregnant? Absolutely. Is it common? Absolutely not.
I get that women don't like aging and, for some, fertility is interwoven with desirability/self worth. This thread seems to be in denial about age and fertility realities but we really need to let this go. It is ok to recognize that aging and being in your 40s means certain changes. Fertility is in decline and pregnancies are less likely. The fact that a celebrity is pregnant at 43 does not negate that fact.

No one in this thread, or anywhere, has claimed it’s easy for most women to get pregnant in their 40s. No one advises young women to postpone kids until their 40s. No one!

You are angry about a thing that doesn’t exist.

You need to relax, lady. No one is angry. I am pointing out that this board is perpetually misleading and often misstates facts re fertility. There are dozens of anecdotal PPs above sharing how easy pregnancy is in 40s, which is purposefully misleading and doesn't reference context. My statements are on point.
I think this issue usually gets PPs upset because DC metro swings older pregnancy. I don't think that I've been any place that had as many advanced maternal age mothers as this area, which is why everyone is so defensive - and wrongly insisting that pregnancy in 40s is FINE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

There you have it ladies - don't blow off birth control if you don't want a baby in your 40s!

Oh, please. The data and science still shows likelihood of pregnancy is exceptionally low at 40. Whether she is telling the truth or not, I have no idea. Can women that are 42 get pregnant? Absolutely. Is it common? Absolutely not.
I get that women don't like aging and, for some, fertility is interwoven with desirability/self worth. This thread seems to be in denial about age and fertility realities but we really need to let this go. It is ok to recognize that aging and being in your 40s means certain changes. Fertility is in decline and pregnancies are less likely. The fact that a celebrity is pregnant at 43 does not negate that fact.

No one in this thread, or anywhere, has claimed it’s easy for most women to get pregnant in their 40s. No one advises young women to postpone kids until their 40s. No one!

You are angry about a thing that doesn’t exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

There you have it ladies - don't blow off birth control if you don't want a baby in your 40s!

Oh, please. The data and science still shows likelihood of pregnancy is exceptionally low at 40. Whether she is telling the truth or not, I have no idea. Can women that are 42 get pregnant? Absolutely. Is it common? Absolutely not.
I get that women don't like aging and, for some, fertility is interwoven with desirability/self worth. This thread seems to be in denial about age and fertility realities but we really need to let this go. It is ok to recognize that aging and being in your 40s means certain changes. Fertility is in decline and pregnancies are less likely. The fact that a celebrity is pregnant at 43 does not negate that fact.

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

There you have it ladies - don't blow off birth control if you don't want a baby in your 40s!

So what?

Some of you are ridiculous.


There are women who need IVF at 22 and there are women who are able to crank out babies with no interventions until they are 50 years old. It varies from woman to woman. Some people's fertility drops off after 35, some after 45 and some at 52.

Yes, I'm aware of statistics, but statistics mean absolutely nothing when you are newly married at 22 and struggling to conceive. Likewise, statistics mean nothing when you are pre menopausal and still ovulate every 3-6 months.. yes, pregnancy is possible.

It's all relative (and most pregnancy announcements don't come with a disclaimer on HOW exactly the child was conceived) so how about we stop speculating on random women's fertility???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

Forget the pregnancy. That dress is hideous.

I much prefer her dress from the recent premier of Fleishman -- in retrospect she obviously picked something that would conceal the baby bump easily since they probably weren't ready to share, but I think the neckline is pretty and the low back is dramatic. The Golden Globes dress is too way too fussy and busy for me and I don't get it as maternity wear -- it hugs her belly awkwardly and is a weird length, plus it's super twee and she is... not. She looks good in something more simple with more architectural details.

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.

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

Cue all the haters saying she must be lying even though this happens to women not infrequently when they hit their 40s and get lax with birth control. Anyway, they are rich and have help and are obviously both in good health -- unless she didn't want to go through with another pregnancy (I'm 42, this would be a factor for me as my pregnancy at 37 was exhausting) or they had strong feelings about keeping to two kids, it makes sense that they'd go with it. They seem happy, too, and I'm always pleased to see a new baby in a happy family. We need as much of that as we can get in the world.

Both of my grandmothers got pregnant in their early 40s - with baby 3 and 4. Its really not that uncommon

Anonymous wrote:She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/

Forget the pregnancy. That dress is hideous.

She has now straight-out said it's an 'oops' baby.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/pictures/golden-globes-2023-claire-danes-says-pregnancy-was-not-intentional/