Anonymous wrote:HE is NOT having a baby. Has never birthed any children.
That Adonis Belt prohibits you from any and all pregnancies. The belly button is another clue. Unless the baby is a test tube baby no natural birth will happen.

Mr. Danes

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/08/04/21/61079673-11082105-Fit_physique_Claire_Danes_43_displayed_her_fit_physique_in_a_tro-a-98_1659644191586.jpg

This is not a man’s bum you fool. Those hips have given birth twice. Good for her she’s stayed in shape!

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/08/04/21/61079689-11082105-Sun_The_Golden_Globe_winner_appeared_to_get_quite_a_bit_of_sun_o-a-101_1659644191593.jpg

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1. Absolutely insane not to use BC at 43 if you don't want to become pregnant. My obgyn was very clear on this - the demo she sees a lot is moms of 2 who don't take precautions and end up in her office having baby 3 or terminating.

My grandmothers both had babies at 42 and 43, in the 1950s after 5 and 6 kids they weren't using IVF LOL. My one grandmother got pregnant again at 46 and miscarried.

That is always in my head - at 47 I know it's unlikely I would get pregnant and not miscarry but I don't want to deal with a miscarriage! My mirena is staying in.

The bottom line: women at 43 should not assume they will get pregnant, we know it's not common, but you certainly shouldn't assume you can't get pregnant.

I'm the PP. At 43 she should absolutely use BC. I'll be 50 in a few months and I'll probably stop BC then as it will begin to strain credulity. But at 43 I would 100% stay vigilant. I learned the hard way I couldn't relax at 46!!

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.

+1. Absolutely insane not to use BC at 43 if you don't want to become pregnant. My obgyn was very clear on this - the demo she sees a lot is moms of 2 who don't take precautions and end up in her office having baby 3 or terminating.

My grandmothers both had babies at 42 and 43, in the 1950s after 5 and 6 kids they weren't using IVF LOL. My one grandmother got pregnant again at 46 and miscarried.

That is always in my head - at 47 I know it's unlikely I would get pregnant and not miscarry but I don't want to deal with a miscarriage! My mirena is staying in.

The bottom line: women at 43 should not assume they will get pregnant, we know it's not common, but you certainly shouldn't assume you can't get pregnant.

HE is NOT having a baby. Has never birthed any children.
That Adonis Belt prohibits you from any and all pregnancies. The belly button is another clue. Unless the baby is a test tube baby no natural birth will happen.

Mr. Danes

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/08/04/21/61079673-11082105-Fit_physique_Claire_Danes_43_displayed_her_fit_physique_in_a_tro-a-98_1659644191586.jpg

Anonymous wrote:My mom had me at 43 as an accident. My sibling got pregnant at 41 as an accident. I had my tubes tied at 40 after an accidental pregnancy (one single time without BC!) at 39. Ladies, please do not rely on statistics as BC. Lots and lots of women still getting pregnant in their 40s.

My friend got married at 40 and had her kids naturally at 42 and 44, getting pregnant within three months of trying (we were having a very deep conversation, so I asked, it was fine).

My mom had kids at 43 & 47 completely naturally. My grandpa’s mom was 43 when he was born. Pre birth control, women gave birth in their early 40s all the time. This is not rare or “impossible.”

My mom had me at 43 as an accident. My sibling got pregnant at 41 as an accident. I had my tubes tied at 40 after an accidental pregnancy (one single time without BC!) at 39. Ladies, please do not rely on statistics as BC. Lots and lots of women still getting pregnant in their 40s.

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.

So much misinformation in this post. My son’s first grade class had 3 moms turn 50 that year. All “normal” pregnancies (and all the third & last child in the family).

Yeah, that post is crazy. A good friend of mine just had her second baby, a "surprise" at 43. I turn 43 in a few months and my DH and I are looking into vasectomy because at my last check up my gynecologist was like "if you are done having kids you need to keep taking birth control seriously -- your periods are still normal and regular and there are no signs of menopause, I've seen lots of women you age in my practice get pregnant at this age because they thought it couldn't happen."

I also know people who struggle to conceive in their late 30s and early 40s. But I ALSO know people who struggled to conceive in their 20s.

There is no one experience with fertility. Everyone is different and this has always been true. My grandmothers had 11 and 8 kids, respectively, and one was late 30s for the last one, the other early 40s. There's every indication that if I wanted to get pregnant now and have a baby at 43, I could do so without fertility treatments. I definitely "bother" with birth control because that's not what I want.

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.

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.

True, she's incredibly fit and will have all the nanny support etc. she needs. I did it at age 41 with no problems, can only imagine how much better it will be for her.

How do you know that she is incredibly fit?

DP, but I have eyes in my head.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is an RE's bread and butter and what they get paid big bucks to do (initiating pregnancy with DE or frozen).

Why would they get upset? Makes no sense. I don't believe your RE said this.

Got upset that they weren't truthful about their pregnancies thus making regular women believe that they can put off having kids until their 40s which for most women will not work.

She..already has two kids.

Good Lord.

Congratulations Claire Danes!

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.

So much misinformation in this post. My son’s first grade class had 3 moms turn 50 that year. All “normal” pregnancies (and all the third & last child in the family).

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.

I got pregnant at 41 naturally, and was normal pregnancy. I did miscarry 3 years earlier, but most folks don’t talk about that (have to give props to PZ for her openness). I think when have already had kids it’s easier to get pregnant (which I know is hard to hear for late marriages, sorry).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is an RE's bread and butter and what they get paid big bucks to do (initiating pregnancy with DE or frozen).

Why would they get upset? Makes no sense. I don't believe your RE said this.

Got upset that they weren't truthful about their pregnancies thus making regular women believe that they can put off having kids until their 40s which for most women will not work.

Give women some credit. What 30 year old sees a People headline about Danes being pregnant at 43 and thinks, cool, I was going to go off BC and start trying but I guess I'll wait 10 years.

No one.

Also, this is her 3rd. She has a history of probably easy conceptions....so she's not the general population - she has shown she is fertile later on given she has a 4 year old. it's not a heavy lift to think this might be natural, and it's not a heavy lift to think they did IVF. Either way, no one is basing their own fertility decisions on this news.

Conceiving for the first time at 43 and having your 3rd successful conception at 43 are two very different things.