Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Here's the thing about older parents. Autism is linked to older fathers, so your childbearing issues are not limited to just older women that can't conceive. It's that your child may have developmental differences, be on the Autism spectrum, or worse. Surprised no one has chimed in from the SN forum on this.

I'll jump in. My last dc was born when I was 43. Her dad was 42 (our other kids were born when we were in our 20's and early 30's). She is dx with autism and also giftedness (she is considered 2E). She's truly the light of our whole family's lives! We are so glad she's here. I think it's good to be aware of the possibility but I would not let it stop you having a dc-I know plenty of other families with kids with differing abilities that were born to 20's and 30's parents.

Your older kids will be stuck with her care when you die. Will she be the light of their lives?

Anonymous wrote:Brunch granny has definitely struck a nerve. The only other (non-Politics) threads that display such rampant defensiveness involve the exhausting SAHM v. WOHM debate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Basically every mother I know who gave birth after age 36 had complications; either with the pregnancy, delivery and/or the child is on the spectrum or has food allergies that could kill them. You folks live in delusional la la land if you think every woman can be on birth control for decades and booze through their 20s and early 30s, maybe even an abortion along the way, and then pop out healthy babies. Trust the science.

That’s bizarre and not supported by statistics whatsoever. Doubt it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Basically every mother I know who gave birth after age 36 had complications; either with the pregnancy, delivery and/or the child is on the spectrum or has food allergies that could kill them. You folks live in delusional la la land if you think every woman can be on birth control for decades and booze through their 20s and early 30s, maybe even an abortion along the way, and then pop out healthy babies. Trust the science.

I had mine in my 40s, easy delivery, no complications, healthy as horses (never even had an abx in their entire life), both over 6'2 ft tall, one in med school at Ivy, the other at MIT, both great athletes. Not on the spectrum. What about yours, grandma?

Anonymous wrote:Brunch granny has definitely struck a nerve. The only other (non-Politics) threads that display such rampant defensiveness involve the exhausting SAHM v. WOHM debate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha! Now brunch granny is wishing an early death upon the mimosa slurping sluts!
This thread doesn’t disappoint!

If you have ivf babies at 40, you're going to be at least 62 when they graduate from college, and around 70 before your husband can walk them down the aisle, and at least 71 before they have their first child (your grandchild). Nobody is wishing death on anyone, just fascinating to see the anti-science delusions being trafficked in these threads. In addition to having low-energy and being the "old" parents, I hope all of the bellinis were worth the very high likelihood you or your husband pass away or are in a diminished state for all of those milestones. Nobody I know who waited to have children admits they are glad they waited; it's unanimous that they wish they had them earlier, and wish they had the fertility for another one or two, which is why I suspect these threads are full of spinsters in denial.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Basically every mother I know who gave birth after age 36 had complications; either with the pregnancy, delivery and/or the child is on the spectrum or has food allergies that could kill them. You folks live in delusional la la land if you think every woman can be on birth control for decades and booze through their 20s and early 30s, maybe even an abortion along the way, and then pop out healthy babies. Trust the science.

Anonymous wrote:What does having an abortion have to do with it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Here's the thing about older parents. Autism is linked to older fathers, so your childbearing issues are not limited to just older women that can't conceive. It's that your child may have developmental differences, be on the Autism spectrum, or worse. Surprised no one has chimed in from the SN forum on this.

I'll jump in. My last dc was born when I was 43. Her dad was 42 (our other kids were born when we were in our 20's and early 30's). She is dx with autism and also giftedness (she is considered 2E). She's truly the light of our whole family's lives! We are so glad she's here. I think it's good to be aware of the possibility but I would not let it stop you having a dc-I know plenty of other families with kids with differing abilities that were born to 20's and 30's parents.

Anonymous wrote:Brunch granny has definitely struck a nerve. The only other (non-Politics) threads that display such rampant defensiveness involve the exhausting SAHM v. WOHM debate.

Anonymous wrote:It's shocking how many allegedly grown and college-educated parents don't comprehend what a mortality table is. Do you think you and your husband have a 100% chance of living to the age 78 average life expectancy? Or even 58 or 68? Do you think you both have a 100% of being of sound mind and body at 78? Or even 58 or 68?