A Fitness & exercise forum. FitnessBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » FitnessBanter.com forum » Fitness & Exercise » Weights
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT- Pregnancy after 40



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 30th 04, 10:23 PM
Lee Michaels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40


"David Cohen" wrote

Same huge percentage that require her to use a translator to get a
history from the parents?


You are right. two more sub population in the neonatal unit. Folks who don't
speak English and have no clue (culturally or medically) what is happening.

And the druggies.

Which makes any nurse who speaks a second language or two very valuable.

And very intolerant of moms who use drugs during pregnancy.


  #12  
Old July 30th 04, 10:32 PM
Dally
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

Lee Michaels wrote:
"Dally" wrote


Your last sentence makes my case.

"Waiting to have kids until everything is perfect is a fool's notion."

That is the whole point. NOT to wait till you are 40. If you are going to
have kids. Have them when you are young and healthy.


And if you happen to be 40 and didn't get around to it and badly want
children? What then?

Lyle is right, having a child is an incredibly selfish thing to do. You
need to want the kid more than you care about the impact on the
environment, more than you care about your job, more than you care about
the impact on the current family dynamics, more than just about
anything else. My opinion is that you ought not to have a kid unless
you're so absolutely gaga over having one that you're willing to make
all these selfish moves.

That, by the way, is a new concept. My three children were all planned,
timed, and wanted by two parents who were married to each other. I
happen to think this was the best way to do it. But the vast span of
humankind hasn't gotten kids this way. They just happen. Some are
wanted, some are not. Sex happens.

I'm baffled by the concept running through this thread that it is bad to
allow a child to come into a world where suffering exists. First of
all, you know that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. We need
adverse conditions to thrive. (In other words, a little bit of pain
never hurt anyone.) I also believe in having "adventures". That's what
I call the unplanned, often unwanted detours we make in life. Think
about the time you missed an airplane in Paris or a bus broke down in
Arizona. Life takes unexpected turns, but that turns out to be an
important part of being alive. A premature baby isn't necessarily a
tragedy, it might just be an adventure. I can name three two-pound
babies off the top of my head that are just fine. (I can also name one
that had a cerebral bleed and died horribly at about 45 days. Ask the
mother today if it was worth it and I bet she'd say yes.)

Being alive is worth suffering for. Having to live in the Ronald
McDonald House to be near the neonatal clinic for three months is
unpleasant, and I don't discount the suffering the child would
experience, but I think it's worth it. It's a personal choice and I
don't really think you're equipped to judge it.

And while we are talking about genetic responsibility, what about deaf
mothers who refuse sperm from a hearing donor. Choosing instead to have a
deaf father. So there kids may be more accepted into the deaf community?

Where do you weigh in on that one?


I'm mostly not in favor of maiming children. I understand that people
make judgments based on their lifestyle and choices that I wouldn't make
from where I stand. For example, I wouldn't insist that my daughter
wear a hejeb and not go to school, although that is a realistic choice
for a girl in the Arabian penninsula. (I'm doing my reading on the
subject.)

I also allowed - encouraged - my sons to be circumsized, a maiming that
isn't defensible to Lucas Buck in any way but made sense to me from my
cultural vantage point and my understanding of the costs versus the
benefits.

So I'm going to have to get all lily-livered with regard to pronouncing
judgments on other people and say that I can't decide for them how to
rear their children. They'll have to do the best they can just like any
one else. The kid will be deaf, but maybe will get something else in
return - a stonger community, maybe, I dunno.

My feelings should be quite obvious.


The plaintive cries of "but what about the children!" and "there oughta
be a law" are easy to fall back on when you're looking at it from the
outside. Living the life always makes it look different.

My best friend from high school just turned 40 last week. She's
actively hunting an inseminator. She left it too long, but still wants
a shot at motherhood. I don't care to judge. In fact, I have a certain
amount of faith in God/The Universal Consciousness that this will work
out as it's supposed to without my intervention.

Dally

  #13  
Old July 30th 04, 10:55 PM
The Queen of Cans and Jars
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

Dally wrote:

Lee Michaels wrote:
"Ben D" wrote in message


Yeah, I've read as much. However, much of that seems to depend on the
health of the mother, correct? I'd be interested to hear your wife's
opinion on this. No interest in fertility treatments I don't think, nor
I do I think they would be necessary.


I think you're fooling yourself to think being 10 years from menopause
is no problem with regards to fertility. She's already over 40. Those
are old eggs.

We all know women who are over 40 with kids, but they aren't as easily
come by as you'd think.

She has indicated that it didn't seem to matter that much. In some cases,
yes, it was a factor. But for most, it was a roll of the dice. Not good
enough odds for me.


You get a CHILD out of it. An entire human being. The payoff is
enormous. Life altering always, body ruining often. This kid will cost
you in terms of lost wages, lost lifestyle flexibility and lost skin
tone. But you get something for this cost and the "something" is the
most important thing in the entire world.


maybe it's the most important thing in the world to you. other people
feel differently.
  #14  
Old July 30th 04, 10:55 PM
The Queen of Cans and Jars
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

Ben D wrote:

I've been doing some research on this and I was just curious what the
health experts here think about the risks of a woman in good health
getting pregnant after 40. At what point are the risks so great it's not
a good idea?

Figure she's about 10-15 years from menopause given her family history
and has never had any problems with her menstrual cycle or health
problems or surgeries in the pelvic area, all of which are risk factors
for late pregnancies.

From what I gather Down's Syndrome is the greatest risk, but how much
is that effected by the health of the woman?

Thanks for your thoughts.


my thought is http://www.vhemt.org

  #15  
Old July 30th 04, 10:55 PM
The Queen of Cans and Jars
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

Dally wrote:

Lee Michaels wrote:
"Dally" wrote


Your last sentence makes my case.

"Waiting to have kids until everything is perfect is a fool's notion."

That is the whole point. NOT to wait till you are 40. If you are going to
have kids. Have them when you are young and healthy.


And if you happen to be 40 and didn't get around to it and badly want
children? What then?


adopt.

  #16  
Old July 30th 04, 11:40 PM
Dally
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

The Queen of Cans and Jars wrote:

Dally wrote:


Lee Michaels wrote:

"Dally" wrote


Your last sentence makes my case.

"Waiting to have kids until everything is perfect is a fool's notion."

That is the whole point. NOT to wait till you are 40. If you are going to
have kids. Have them when you are young and healthy.


And if you happen to be 40 and didn't get around to it and badly want
children? What then?



adopt.


Fine, go ahead. Or stay child-free, your choice. We'd all appreciate
it if you wouldn't procreate. I'm totally into people choosing not to
have kids. Makes me feel better about choosing to have four.

Dally, a selfish bitch (who only wound up with three)

  #17  
Old July 31st 04, 01:33 AM
Ben D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

Dally wrote:
The Queen of Cans and Jars wrote:

Dally wrote:


Lee Michaels wrote:

"Dally" wrote


Your last sentence makes my case.

"Waiting to have kids until everything is perfect is a fool's notion."

That is the whole point. NOT to wait till you are 40. If you are
going to
have kids. Have them when you are young and healthy.


And if you happen to be 40 and didn't get around to it and badly want
children? What then?




adopt.



[piggybacking because, for some strange reason, I didn't get Queenie's post]

Certainly an option that has been considered, and one that I respect.
However, there is something *different* about ones one child that must
be considered when considering the people involved.

I should point out that the child's health is concern number one here,
not the woman's.

I understand all the arguments to *not* have a child, but to tell
someone not to is to go against millions of years of evolution that
drives people to procreate. Someone's got to have children and if
everyone didn't because of possible consequences we'd be in dire straights.

Which is why I'm asking about the risks, so a better decision can be
made if the risks are *too* great. Frankly, I think that the debate
ought to be about what risks are *too* great as well, but then we need
to determine what the risks are.

Ben
  #18  
Old July 31st 04, 01:44 AM
Ben D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

Ben D wrote:

I've been doing some research on this and I was just curious what the
health experts here think about the risks of a woman in good health
getting pregnant after 40. At what point are the risks so great it's not
a good idea?

Figure she's about 10-15 years from menopause given her family history
and has never had any problems with her menstrual cycle or health
problems or surgeries in the pelvic area, all of which are risk factors
for late pregnancies.

From what I gather Down's Syndrome is the greatest risk, but how much
is that effected by the health of the woman?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Ben


Indeed I am interested in the part of this thread that deals with the
moral question at hand here, however I would also like to know about the
genetic and health question. I should note that the child's welfare is
the primary concern here.
Some pertinant info about the mother

-39
-good health
-physically fit, exercises daily, runs marathons
-slightly hyperthyroid
-never smoked
-doesn't eat red meat
-drinks rarely, would certainly give up drinking if pregnant
-native English speaker
-middle class income
-secure job
-owns her own home
-has always had her periods like clockwork
-never had children
-no pelvic injuries or surgeries
-good family history of children
-sees the doctor at least twice yearly
-doesn't watch sports, but plays them
-Likes the Marshall Tucker band and Jethro Tull (but *not* Auqalung) for
the powerflutes
-mediocre cook
-thinks JFK was killed by two gunmen
-a good girl
-crazy about Elvis
-loves horses
-and her boyfriend too

That should cover the subject and any OT discussions as well. I've done
a fair bit of reading already, but I should have included all of this
before, in true MFW fashion.
Thanks.

Ben

  #19  
Old July 31st 04, 01:50 AM
Ben D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40

Ben D wrote:
Ben D wrote:

I've been doing some research on this and I was just curious what the
health experts here think about the risks of a woman in good health
getting pregnant after 40. At what point are the risks so great it's
not a good idea?

Figure she's about 10-15 years from menopause given her family history
and has never had any problems with her menstrual cycle or health
problems or surgeries in the pelvic area, all of which are risk
factors for late pregnancies.

From what I gather Down's Syndrome is the greatest risk, but how much
is that effected by the health of the woman?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Ben



Indeed I am interested in the part of this thread that deals with the
moral question at hand here, however I would also like to know about the
genetic and health question. I should note that the child's welfare is
the primary concern here.
Some pertinant info about the mother

-39
-good health
-physically fit, exercises daily, runs marathons
-slightly hyperthyroid
-never smoked
-doesn't eat red meat
-drinks rarely, would certainly give up drinking if pregnant
-native English speaker
-middle class income
-secure job
-owns her own home
-has always had her periods like clockwork
-never had children
-no pelvic injuries or surgeries
-good family history of children
-sees the doctor at least twice yearly
-doesn't watch sports, but plays them
-Likes the Marshall Tucker band and Jethro Tull (but *not* Auqalung) for
the powerflutes
-mediocre cook
-thinks JFK was killed by two gunmen
-a good girl
-crazy about Elvis
-loves horses
-and her boyfriend too

That should cover the subject and any OT discussions as well. I've done
a fair bit of reading already, but I should have included all of this
before, in true MFW fashion.
Thanks.

Ben


Also forgot intelligent and college education, a professional engineer.
No passing on stupid genes.

Ben
  #20  
Old July 31st 04, 01:57 AM
Jim Ranieri
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT- Pregnancy after 40


"Ben D" wrote in message

Which is why I'm asking about the risks, so a better decision can be
made if the risks are *too* great. Frankly, I think that the debate
ought to be about what risks are *too* great as well, but then we need
to determine what the risks are.


Logic seems to say it's not a great idea. But if she really wants a baby,
logic will have precious little to do with it.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
rec.running FAQ, part 1 of 8 Ozzie Gontang Running 7 April 11th 04 01:09 PM
rec.running FAQ, part 1 of 8 Ozzie Gontang Running 7 March 13th 04 10:34 AM
rec.running FAQ, part 1 of 8 Ozzie Gontang Running 7 December 31st 03 02:35 AM
rec.running FAQ, part 1 of 8 Ozzie Gontang Running 6 December 16th 03 12:59 PM
rec.running FAQ, part 1 of 8 Ozzie Gontang Running 5 December 2nd 03 12:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 FitnessBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.