At what age is it risky to bear children?

[joel99]

I don't know what the church's stance on in vitro fertilization, but if cost is no issue, you could pursue that route and have genetic tests done on the embryos and implant the healthy ones.... or you could just try the normal way and see what happens. The odds are still on your side that if you conceive a child, it'll be normal and healthy.

The church is fine with this when we looked into doing it. I know a few people who have done this as well.

BCGuy - this is done in Vancouver and if you are interested in this route PM me and I can pass along some contacts (it's not covered by MSP though but can claimed as a medical expense in your taxes).

j.

[Wingnut]

And, even if you and your wife did have a child with problems, would you do anything different?

Yes, I would. I would spend the rest of my pregnancy researching the problem that was detected, so that I could be better prepared and equipped to work with it when the child was born.

[Snow]

At what age is it risky to bear children?

I heard that the stone age was pretty rough - what with all those sabre-toothed tigers and no health care coverage.

[Dravin]

I heard that the stone age was pretty rough - what with all those sabre-toothed tigers and no health care coverage.

I was thinking about 12,500 years ago was pretty bad for Arctodus Simus children.

[Snow]

I was thinking about 12,500 years ago was pretty bad for Arctodus Simus children.

http://fr.academic.ru/pictures/frwiki/65/ArctodusSimusReconstruct.jpg

Tough neighborhood no doubt

[Elgama]

see my consultant will be the last to perform a C Section or medical intervention when not needed and the first when it is needed find a Doctor that works like that and your sorted lol We have mostly a midwife system in the UK and you only see a consultant once, twice if you are over your due date unless there is a problem. We have enough checks that an over 40 pregnant will get extra tests rather than a C Section. I get monitored more because of my pre-eclampsia with my first, but I have managed to avoid C-Sections because my Consultant doesn't do them unless life of Mother and Baby are at risk (and even then in the case of my first he didn't lol), And in the UK a woman gets the choice between a VBAC or C Section if she has had one. However being under the NHS if you want an unnecessary one you need to pay for it

[personne]

hello, my mother took my little sister at the age of 43 years, it is true that it was risky. But it was a beautiful baby. It is true that there are risks, but now with advances in medicine, women may have more later. I would say from 40 years .. We in France with my family we have children later, as graduation is finally later. Interstates thirty years for a first child I think it's best, settle in life, having a stable job. This is only my point of view... the sea separates us.

[talisyn]

http://fr.academic.ru/pictures/frwiki/65/ArctodusSimusReconstruct.jpg

Tough neighborhood no doubt

Pam, we really need a 'Groan' button

[applepansy]

My SIL has a healthy baby at age 42. My sister's last baby was born when she was 39...Healthy. The doctors told my sister her 3rd baby was Down's, but he was perfect when he was born.

Remember that our Heavenly Father is in charge of all this.

[HEthePrimate]

Having kids is risky (for the woman) at ANY age! If you ask me, they're brave for going through with it.

[Wingnut]

High risk doesn't mean that something will automatically be wrong with the baby. Plenty of (perhaps even most) women who choose to have a baby over the age of 35 will be fine, as will the babies. However, there is a greater risk of something going wrong, which is why women over 35 (in the USA at least) tend to be monitored more closely during their pregnancies, or even referred to a high-risk specialist...just in case.