Thursday, August 02, 2007

Pregnancy in late 30s and early 40s

It's time to stir up some controversy!

A few days ago this article showed up in the Globe and Mail: 40 is the new 35 when it comes high-risk pregnancy

The article is mainly tackling the scientific studies that looked at risks of amnio for pregnancies that are considered high-risk. Nothing really shocked me about the facts, since my colleagues (successful, educated women) got married in their 30s and by the time they were ready to have kids, they were past the 35 years of age. How did their kids turn out? Very normal.

I am 28, still tempted to go back to school for a change or enhancement of my career. but how do I know that I won't have children well into my 30s? Well, there is no sign of a husband (man! Finding one of those is hard!).

Many of us have asked ourselves whether or not women can have it all: education, career, loving husband and a child or two. More and more I look around and the answer I find is YES, THEY CAN. So, what if they have children later in life?

However, some people think it is unnatural and inconvenient that women are putting career/education first. Just read these comments.

What is exactly the problem, according to the critics?
- Optimal age of reproduction (physiologically speaking) is 20-30
- Later pregnancies might lead to an unsatisfactory sex-life
- Parents are not as energetic as they would be 10 years younger
- why do women think career is more important than having a family?

Well, to start, the first 2 facts have never been really proven!

About fact #3, I'd have to say an older parent may not be as energetic, but might be a lot happier, since it probably was a sure decision to have a family and parents are well professionally (and financially) established.

On fact #4, well I am biased. If men believe that their confidence depends on their career advancement, why do they think women are any different? Also, looking at divorce statistics (50%) don't we all believe that single mother should be able to provide, just in case?

More and more men are choosing to get married in their late 30s. Does that mean for the sole purpose of procreation they need to marry women at least 10 years younger?

It is true that many people don't have a choice when it comes to the timing of their pregnancy, because they hadn't found a partner or simply couldn't get pregnant earlier. But please, give today's woman a little more credit (i.e. choice if you like).

Women have every right to a well-established career if they desire. They have a right to financial stability (by themselves) if they deem necessary and they have a right to have children when they are ready.

Many ask "is a late pregnancy worth the risks because the woman chose her career first?" I am not fully qualified to answer this question. I'd like to ask moms (who had kids well in their 30s and 40s) to answer that for us.


At 6:19 p.m., Blogger Maryam said...

I have seen the benefits of having a young mom. But I also have seen the same mom in her 40's, when the children were gone, thinking "Now what?!"

I agree with you on this. I believe women should have children when they want and feel that they are ready for it, emotionally, professionally, economically,... .

Worse than having an old mom is having a mom that blames you for her failures!!

(I can't say anything about the medical aspects!)

At 6:59 p.m., Blogger Her Bad Mother said...

Totally worth it for me to wait - I'm in my mid-thirties, and considering a second child. I just was not mature enough, had not done enough that I wanted to do, in my twenties. I'm so happy that I waited.

(And? Makes for bad sex? Pshaw.)

At 9:14 a.m., Blogger The City Gal said...

Many thanks for your inputs ladies! (gives me hope!)


At 5:42 p.m., Blogger Leili said...

Arkansas couple welcome their 17th child


Post a Comment

<< Home